Lee Bill Will Stop Millions in Federal Contracts from Going to Companies that Support Darfur Genocide Measure Protects States’ Ability to Divest Public Pension Funds
(Washington, DC) – More than $600 million in federal contracts has gone to international companies whose business in Sudan may directly or indirectly support the Sudanese government’s campaign of genocide in Darfur, according to members of Congress who want to put an end to the practice.
Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) and other members of Congress held a press conference on Capitol Hill today to announce the introduction of legislation that would bar international companies whose business in Sudan directly or indirectly supports the genocide in Darfur from receiving tax payer funded federal contracts at a press conference on Capitol Hill today.
“No one should have to worry that their tax dollars are supporting genocide,” said Lee. “This bill is designed to wash the blood off of our federal contracts, protect the rights of states to divest their own public pension funds from companies doing business in Sudan and increase the financial pressure on Khartoum to end the genocide in Darfur.”
Based on information from the GSA Procurement Data System, companies like Seimens AG, Alstom Power Inc., ABB Inc., Schlumberger Technology Corp. and Kuwait Petroleum Corp. who do business in Sudan received more than $600 million in federal contracts during fiscal years 2004-2006 (the period during which the genocide has taken place). There is no comprehensive list of companies whose business in Sudan is supporting the genocide, or which of them are receiving or have received federal contracts, a situation this legislation seeks to remedy.
Lee’s Bill, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act, which has 48 original co-sponsors, including Democratic Leader, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA); Ranking Member of the House International Relations Committee, Tom Lantos (D-CA); and Ranking Member of the Africa Subcommittee, Don Payne (D-NJ), requires the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to compile and publish a list of all companies listing securities on United States capital markets whose business is judged directly or indirectly support the genocide in Darfur and bans federal contracts for such companies.
The bill also protects the right of states to divest public pension funds from such companies, a provision that was included in the House version of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, passed in April. The Senate has delayed passage of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act due to pressure from the financial services industry to remove the provision protecting states rights to divest, and Senator Lugar has just introduced his own version of the bill, stripping out the provision.
The bill also requires The Government Accountability Office (GAO) to report on all Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board investments in such companies. The Federal Thrift Savings Program holds approximately $186 billion in assets for more than 3.6 million current and former government employees.
Lee is the most senior Democratic woman on the House International Relations committee, where she serves on the Africa Subcommittee, and has been a leading voice in the growing divestment movement. She has traveled twice to Darfur, first with Congressional colleagues and academy award nominated actor Don Cheadle in January, 2005 and most recently on a delegation led by Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi in February, 2006.
###
Fact Sheet
Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2006
What does the Darfur and Accountability Divestment Act Do?
Establishes a list of companies whose business in Sudan is deemed to directly or indirectly support the genocide
Bans federal contracts with such companies
Requires the Government Accountability Office GAO to investigate the existence and extent of Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board investments in such companies
Stipulates that no part of this Act or any other provision of law shall be construed to preempt any State law that prohibits investment of State funds, including State pension funds, in or relating to Sudan.
What are the criteria for determining whether a companies business supports the genocide?
The nature of the business relationship is with the national, regional, and local government of Sudan;
The business is with the Government of Sudan or government-controlled entities (ex. Janjaweed);
Their business operations are relating to the sale of military equipment or inherently “dual-use” technology, such as civilian radar systems;
The business operations relate to natural resource extraction, including oil-related activities and mining of minerals; and
The business lacks safeguards to ensure business operations do not become indirectly involved in the terrorist-sponsoring or genocidal policies of the Government of Sudan.
What states have divested because of the genocide in Darfur?
Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon, and Maine have passed legislation mandating divestment of State funds from companies conducting business operations in Sudan.
California, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, North Carolina, Kansas, Wisconsin, Indiana, Georgia, Maryland, New York, Iowa, Texas, and several other states are developing/awaiting Governor’s signature on divestment legislation of state funds from companies conducting business operations.
By divesting are states getting involved in foreign policy?
In passing state-by-state divestment legislation, state governments are not violating any constitutional mandate, treaty, executive agreement or Federal statutes—technically, states are sending a message consistent with that of the Federal government and the White House, “that the Darfur genocide is unacceptable and no blood will be on the hands of those investing in state pension plans.”
Quoting from the debate on South African apartheid, “The bottom line is that local authorities already have a clear legal right (and moral obligation) to exercise discretion in how they invest THEIR OWN money.”-Gerald Warburg, aide to California Senator Alan Cranston, LA Times, Sept. 12, 1986
Who are the companies?
Part of the problem this bill seeks to address is the lack of comprehensive information about companies and their business activities in Sudan.
Below is a partial list of companies that have been identified as having business operations in Sudan and received U.S. federal contracts totaling more than $600 million during the period when the genocide has taken place:
Fiscal Year 2006
Company U.S. Contract obligated
Seimens AG (Seimens ADB in Sudan) $2,400,279
Alstom Power Inc $5,159,951
ABB Inc.(ABB SAE in Sudan) $3,755,908
Schlumberger Technology Corp. (oil production comp.)$327,965
Fiscal Year 2005
Company U.S. Contract obligated
Seimens AG (Seimens ADB in Sudan) $4,894,890
Alstom Power Inc $2,269,253
ABB Inc.(ABB SAE in Sudan) $4,519,376
Schlumberger Technology Corp. $501,255
Kuwait Petroleum Corp. $329,999,835
Fiscal Year 2004
Company U.S. Contract obligated
Seimens AG (Seimens ADB in Sudan) $3,551,458
Alstom Power Inc $21,988,092
ABB Inc.(ABB SAE in Sudan) $12,764,373
Schlumberger Technology Corp. $2,095,209
Kuwait Petroleum Corp. $211,510,433
***All the information by fiscal year prepared in this document was found in the Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation (FPDS-NG) which is provided by the U.S. General Services Administration. FPDS-NG is the most comprehensive source of information on the federal procurement actions although not all agencies are required to participate, such as the Transportation Security Agency, NASA a