Big Business strikes back against Senator Collins' law on Sudan divestment
Senator Jacqueline Collins has championed a law (SB 23, here) that requires all public pensions to divest from any investments in Sudan. Technically, it prohibits the Treasurer from depositing any funds or contracting with any financial institution that does business in Sudan. Sudan is one of the saddest places in the world, where a genocidal campaign is waging.
To try to stop the horror, the State of Illinois is trying to avoid profiting from the misery of others. The state law requires all public pension funds to get a certification from private equity firms that they are not investing in Sudan (until the genocide ends). This has caused some administrative problems for investors and private companies, as they can no longer profit in the Sudan and today they fought back.
In federal district court in Chicago, they have sued the State, claiming that the state law is not permitted by the federal Constitution, because it resembles foreign policy and that's implicitly prohibited. (I don't recall that debate in Philadelphia....)
Keep in mind, no American companies are permitted to invest in Sudan, pursuant to a federal law passed in 2002. So only non-American companies are impacted by the Illinois law. And these non-American companies are getting together to use the resources of our country (the federal judiciary) to ensure that our pension funds can finance their operations in Sudan.
The main plaintiff in the case is the National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org), a big money organization out of D.C. that always seems to be advocating for lower wages and higher profits (funny how that works out). They managed to recruit eight Illinois pension funds to join the case.
Senator Collins released a statement arguing that state pension funds have no standing to sue the state, and that divestment is not foreign policy -- it's just disassociation with a genocidal country. Governor Blagojevich defended the law as well. This bill, by the way, was co-sponsored by Peter Roskam and Ed Petka and passed out of the Senate unanimously. It also earned 89 votes in the House and was supported by both Governor Blagojevich and Treasurer Topinka. But where there's money to be made.....
Here's an article from the federal government. (Yes, that's our government propaganda press at work. But, a good article nonetheless).
I hope those conservative judicial activists don't infringe on the authority of Illinois to decide where and with whom to invest our billions in pension funds. I really can't imagine the Founding Fathers, each of whom believed passionately in states' rights, would have taken the view that a state could not direct their own funds away from a particular foreign nation. Part of me hopes this case goes to the Supreme Court, as I'd find the debate interesting, particularly to see what Justice Scalia, Mr. Original Intent, would say.
Anyway, it seems a little sad that a bipartisan initiative that will likely help end an ongoing genocide is the subject of a lawsuit because profits are apparently more important that helping to stop a genocide.
5 comments:
I'll never understand why Illinois feels the need to invest pension money in genocidal regimes. A financial boycott worked for South African, I don't see why we can't do the same thing here.
People first. Profits last.
Underfunded teacher pension funds probably have a chip on their shoulders over the people undefunding them telling them where to invest what they do have.
There is probably a solution here somewhere.... these divestment campaigns have little direct impact and there greatest effect is really mobilizing opinion.
Hey -- Dan's back!
Welcome back, Dan!
Dan, you have misstated the factual basis of SB 23, its impact on Illinois pensiion funds, and the details of the lawsuit, among other matters. Do your homework before you post instead of throwing up a piece of crap with an insulting, inflammatory closer.
For the record, NO Illinois State supported pension funds are parties to this lawsuit.
It is despicable that someone
PUSHED police & firefighters
into being used to advance
their own agenda and that of
foriegn interests. Legislative
remedy should have been sought
first. The proposed bill was
published well in advance,
perhaps SOMEONE just wanted
to be a part of a lawsuit
in order to become involved
with those foreign interests.
Post a Comment