Darfur Divestment Bill [Passed]

[Sam Spade]

Darfur Divestment Bill

1. All companies operating in Atlasia shall divest all funds that are invested in Sudan by August 1, 2007.
2. Any company that does not divest from Sudan by the above date shall face a fine of $1,000 fine for every employee each day that it is still invested in Sudan.
3. Sections 1 and 2 of this bill will expire on February 1, 2008.

(Sponsor: Ebowed)

[Sam Spade]

I have a simple question (and it may be the only question I ask):

What companies presently have funds in Sudan?

thanks.

[Keystone Phil]

I have a simple question (and it may be the only question I ask):

What companies presently have funds in Sudan?

thanks.

If none, I ask that the sponsor withdraw this bill. It's not worth the time.

[King]

If you want to help Darfur, you can always transfer the billions of dollars used in these old bills toward a humanitarian effort.

F.L. 3-5: Missile Defense Initiative Act*
F.L. 4-1: F-22 Act**
F.L. 5-1: Pacific Defense and Taiwanese Protection Act***

*Approx. $2.75 billion spent, $1 billion a year continued spending
**Approx. $11.25 billion spent, $33.75 billion to be spent over the next seven and a half years
***$1.86 billion spent, $60 million a month continued spending

[MasterJedi]

If you want to help Darfur, you can always transfer the billions of dollars used in these old bills toward a humanitarian effort.

F.L. 3-5: Missile Defense Initiative Act*
F.L. 4-1: F-22 Act**
F.L. 5-1: Pacific Defense and Taiwanese Protection Act***

*Approx. $2.75 billion spent, $1 billion a year continued spending
**Approx. $11.25 billion spent, $33.75 billion to be spent over the next seven and a half years
***$1.86 billion spent, $60 million a month continued spending

How can money stop a genocide? Money is fine but first the problem actually needs to be solved.

[King]

If you want to help Darfur, you can always transfer the billions of dollars used in these old bills toward a humanitarian effort.

F.L. 3-5: Missile Defense Initiative Act*
F.L. 4-1: F-22 Act**
F.L. 5-1: Pacific Defense and Taiwanese Protection Act***

*Approx. $2.75 billion spent, $1 billion a year continued spending
**Approx. $11.25 billion spent, $33.75 billion to be spent over the next seven and a half years
***$1.86 billion spent, $60 million a month continued spending

How can money stop a genocide? Money is fine but first the problem actually needs to be solved.

By using them toward a humanitarian effort or, to paraphrase Joe Biden, build an international war effort and have the Sudanese government taken out overnight.


Money still solves everything.

[Sam Spade]

bumping for answers

[DownWithTheLeft]

The bill is an infringement on free markets, therefore I oppose it

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Presumably some organisation or other has a list?

[DownWithTheLeft]

After carefully reading the bill, it says all funds must be divested by August 1, 2007, which is about a week away, with no guarantee the bill will even be voted on by then.  Therefore I propose two amendments:

The phrase "August 1, 2007" in Section 1 shall now read "August 1, 2008"
The phrase "Febrary 1, 2008" in Section 3 shall now read "February 1, 2010"

[Sam Spade]

Al, I'm sure there is some section that says so, but I've been on my slow (=56k) connection since the bill was introduced, and simply want some help.

If not, I'll wait until tomorrow when I'm on a fast connection again.

[Sam Spade]

After carefully reading the bill, it says all funds must be divested by August 1, 2007, which is about a week away, with no guarantee the bill will even be voted on by then.  Therefore I propose two amendments:

The phrase "August 1, 2007" in Section 1 shall now read "August 1, 2008"
The phrase "Febrary 1, 2008" in Section 3 shall now read "February 1, 2010"

I understand your concern, but can't it just be moved up a month.  I doubt anyone would have any objections to that.

[DownWithTheLeft]

After carefully reading the bill, it says all funds must be divested by August 1, 2007, which is about a week away, with no guarantee the bill will even be voted on by then.  Therefore I propose two amendments:

The phrase "August 1, 2007" in Section 1 shall now read "August 1, 2008"
The phrase "Febrary 1, 2008" in Section 3 shall now read "February 1, 2010"

I understand your concern, but can't it just be moved up a month.  I doubt anyone would have any objections to that.

But the bill states this nowhere and I think it is important that we set a new definitive date otherwise the bill is unreasonable.  Say the bill is passed on August 4th, does that mean businesses can be fined for August 3rd even though the law did not exist?  The reason for this date is because Ebowed simply did a copy/paste of the Northeast's recently passed law.  I think the date needs to adjusted accordingly.

[Sam Spade]

Ok.

[King]

Why would the fact that funds in this bill would have to be divested in a little over week require the dates be moved back an entire year?  Also, the fine does not take into account companies who could own a share of a Sudanese company and not have any official employees.

How about something like this (although the resolution needs work)?


Darfur Divestment Bill

Section 1. Resolution
The Republic of Atlasia hereby finds the Sudanese government in the Darfur region of the Republic of Sudan guilty of genocide and other crimes against humanity.  Thus, we find the Sudan unsuitable for any alliances and place an embargo restricting all commerce and trade between Atlasia and the Sudan.

Section 2. Embargo
(a). All non-charitable/non-profit organizations operating in Atlasia will have 30 days, upon the passage of this act, to divest all funds currently invested in or with the Republic of the Sudan.
(b). Applicable organizations that does not divest from the Sudan within this time period shall face a fine of $1,000 per dollar invested for every day of noncompliance.

Section 3. Expiration
(a). It shall be the responsibility of the Department of External Affairs (DEA) to monitor the progress Sudanese situation in regards to Section 1 of this legislation.
(b). Should the DEA at any time conclude the findings of Section 1 to no longer be valid claims, the Executive shall be given the ability to suspend all restrictions enacted by this legislation.

[Sam Spade]

Alright - US companies have been forbidden from doing business in Sudan since 1997 - however, what this bill appears to be going after are investments in mutual funds and pension funds that invest in Sudan or have a business presence there.

[Ebowed]

After carefully reading the bill, it says all funds must be divested by August 1, 2007, which is about a week away, with no guarantee the bill will even be voted on by then.  Therefore I propose two amendments:

The phrase "August 1, 2007" in Section 1 shall now read "August 1, 2008"
The phrase "Febrary 1, 2008" in Section 3 shall now read "February 1, 2010"

How about November 2007 instead of August 2008?

[DownWithTheLeft]

After carefully reading the bill, it says all funds must be divested by August 1, 2007, which is about a week away, with no guarantee the bill will even be voted on by then.  Therefore I propose two amendments:

The phrase "August 1, 2007" in Section 1 shall now read "August 1, 2008"
The phrase "Febrary 1, 2008" in Section 3 shall now read "February 1, 2010"

How about November 2007 instead of August 2008?

Would you be willing to accept a compromise of January 1, 2008?  That way it starts with a new year

[Sam Spade]

Gentlemen, just let me know when you've ironed out your differences on the amendment. 

My own personal suggestion is to have the divestment period start on January 1, 2008 and end on January 1, 2009.  This would be a greater amount of time than the original bill and would allow for the Senate to take up the issue a year from now and see if the situation had changed.

Otherwise, I have no qualms with the bill and will likely support it.

[Ebowed]

January 08 to January 09 sounds good to me.

[DownWithTheLeft]

January 08 to January 09 sounds good to me.

A fine compromise, I concur

[Ebowed]

In that case, I can accept that as a friendly amendment.

[Sam Spade]

Ok, the following two amendments has been proposed as a friendly amendments:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Senators have 24 hours to object to the adoption of the two friendly amendments.

[Sam Spade]

These two amendments have been adopted as friendly amendments.

If there is no more debate, I will start voting on final passage in 24 hours.

[Sam Spade]

We are now voting on the following legislation.

Darfur Divestment Bill
1. All companies operating in Atlasia shall divest all funds that are invested in Sudan by January 1, 2008.
2. Any company that does not divest from Sudan by the above date shall face a fine of $1,000 fine for every employee each day that it is still invested in Sudan.
3. Sections 1 and 2 of this bill will expire on January 1, 2009.

Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.


Aye.