Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Florida Law Bans Investment In Iran, Sudan  
User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1392 times:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/4874642.html

I have seen quite a few articles similiar to this in recent weeks about cities divesting from Iran as a method of increasing financial pressure on the regime...

BOCA RATON, Fla. — Florida became the first state in the nation Friday to have a law that its pension fund dollars cannot be invested in any companies doing business with Iran's energy sector and Sudan.

Several others states have divested pension funds with companies doing business in Sudan and some states have general policies against such investments. But none have yet put the action into law that divests funds from both countries.

"It's not just what's right for Florida. This is what's right for America, it's right for the world," Gov. Charlie Crist said after signing the bill. "It says that Iran, the world's leading sponsor of terror, we will not stand idly by anymore. And to Sudan and the genocide that is occurring there, we will not stand idly by and let that happen anymore, not Florida."

About $1 billion of Florida state money is currently invested with companies that do business with Sudan and Iran's energy sector, said state Sen. Ted Deutch, D-Boca Raton, the bill's sponsor.

While the state has about $134 billion in its pension account, the fourth largest in the country, the measure also covers an additional $16 billion in state money that Florida invests in various markets.

Under the new law, companies will first be given an opportunity to stop doing business with the two countries before state funds are pulled. Deutch said the state should be fully divested within a year.

"Tens of billions of dollars nationwide are invested in companies that are making it easier for the Iranian government to develop nuclear weapons and to make it easier for Iran to produce weapons that are being used against our troops," Deutch said.

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTZ757300 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2873 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1379 times:

This is a very good idea, but do you really think that one state not investing in a country would do much harm?


LETS GO MOUNTAINEERS!
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1360 times:

Quoting TZ757300 (Reply 1):
This is a very good idea, but do you really think that one state not investing in a country would do much harm?

Look at the numbers.

Quoting RJpieces (Thread starter):
While the state has about $134 billion in its pension account, the fourth largest in the country, the measure also covers an additional $16 billion in state money that Florida invests in various markets.

Compared to Sudan's GDP, which is $25 billion. Florida has 5 times that in their state pension fund.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21791 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1344 times:

While this is a good idea, I thought that states couldn't regulate international commerce, which is what this seems like.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1340 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 3):
While this is a good idea, I thought that states couldn't regulate international commerce, which is what this seems like.

They are not regulating anything. They are simply puting in place a policy whereby monies controled by the state shall not be invested in a certain place. It is no different from a mutual fund deciding that they will not buy tobacco stocks. They are not telling other investors that they cannot do something.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21791 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1334 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 4):
They are not regulating anything. They are simply puting in place a policy whereby monies controled by the state shall not be invested in a certain place. It is no different from a mutual fund deciding that they will not buy tobacco stocks. They are not telling other investors that they cannot do something.

As I understand it, enacting a law is different from making a policy decision. If they wanted to stop investing in companies that do business with Iran or Sudan, would they really need a law to do that?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1334 times:

Quoting TZ757300 (Reply 1):
This is a very good idea, but do you really think that one state not investing in a country would do much harm?

-
A peculiar aspect is that they, at least up to the law, also cannot invest in companies doing business with Sudan, which means that they cannot do investments in most big NON-USA companies like BP (British Petroleum), Royal Dutch Shell (British-Dutch), Total (French), Unilever (British-Dutch), Renault, Peugeot-Citroen, FIAT, Daimler-Benz, BMW, VW, UBS, CreditSuisse, HoffRoche, Novartis, Nestle, Credit Lyonnais, Rhone-Poulenc, Bayer-Leverkusen, HSBC, etc .
-


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1332 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 5):
As I understand it, enacting a law is different from making a policy decision. If they wanted to stop investing in companies that do business with Iran or Sudan, would they really need a law to do that?

Whereas in a company, all you might need is a decision at the board, in government, the technicality might be a law, the same way a budget earmark is a law, even though it does not operate even close to what we normally understand a law to be, such as a traffic law.


User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1307 times:

Quoting TZ757300 (Reply 1):
This is a very good idea, but do you really think that one state not investing in a country would do much harm?

Yes. As Cfalk pointed out, it is a lot of money. And if enough cities and states follow Florida's lead, then the Mullahs in Iran might just feel their pockets being emptied and change their policies...


User currently offlineTZ757300 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2873 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1303 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 2):



Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 6):



Quoting RJpieces (Reply 8):

Wow, thanks for bringing some detail to it. I had no idea that is was that big.



LETS GO MOUNTAINEERS!
User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1289 times:

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 8):
And if enough cities and states follow Florida's lead, then the Mullahs in Iran might just feel their pockets being emptied and change their policies...

-
you may speak about lots of money, but the partners of the Iranians in Europe do NOT depend on that money, as most of that money is invested inside the USA anyway. So that those in Tehran do NOT feel anything.
-


User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1284 times:

I still don't understand why this needs to be a law. Surely a government policy would be just as effective. When circumstances change, a policy can be changed fairly quickly to reflect the changed circumstances. Laws have to be amended or repealed, and that's much more difficult. I wonder, too, about the Constitutionality of a state legislating in an area of international commerce. Isn't that Congress's turf?

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 8):
And if enough cities and states follow Florida's lead, then the Mullahs in Iran might just feel their pockets being emptied and change their policies...

Don't hold your breath. There will be a rush to fill that investment vaccuum by those who have no qualms about Iran's nuclear ambitions, but are keen to make a buck. It might succeed in getting some of those companies to rethink their investment strategies, but the mullahs won't be swayed. In my opinion, the chances of keeping Iran in line are much better with engagement than they are with blackballing them.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21791 posts, RR: 55
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1245 times:

Quoting Arrow (Reply 11):
I still don't understand why this needs to be a law. Surely a government policy would be just as effective. When circumstances change, a policy can be changed fairly quickly to reflect the changed circumstances. Laws have to be amended or repealed, and that's much more difficult. I wonder, too, about the Constitutionality of a state legislating in an area of international commerce. Isn't that Congress's turf?

That's what I wonder as well. I understand Cfalk's comparison to earmarks, but I can't help thinking that it's still a law (and thus is legislating), and I wonder if it would stand were it to be challenged.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is The USA Being Unfair In Iran Talks? posted Thu Jun 1 2006 20:06:39 by Dc10s4ever
Weapons-grade Uranium Found In Iran posted Fri May 12 2006 21:04:19 by 11Bravo
Why Are Law Enforcement Dressed In Blue? posted Tue May 2 2006 16:21:45 by UTA_flyinghigh
Latest Developments In Iran: What Now? posted Tue Apr 11 2006 19:27:07 by Aleksandar
Usaf F16 Wing Deployed For Possible Action In Iran posted Fri Jan 13 2006 17:38:30 by RJpieces
Music Banned In Iran posted Mon Dec 19 2005 20:56:59 by AGM100
Two Gay Teens Executed In Iran posted Fri Jul 22 2005 03:43:41 by KC135R
Sean Penn In Iran. posted Sat Jun 11 2005 20:41:58 by Aa777jr
5 Dead In Iran Soccer Stampede posted Sat Mar 26 2005 22:18:56 by LHMARK
Halliburton In Iran Despite Sanctions? posted Thu Mar 10 2005 18:55:38 by DIJKKIJK