Legislation News & Report (TM) 

TheWeekInCongress.com (TM)

U.S. & the World

TheWeekInCongress.com (TM)

Week Ending August 3, 2007

H.R.180 To require the identification of companies that conduct business operations in Sudan, to prohibit United States Government contracts with such companies, and for other purposes.

<< Click flag of map and country data, Sudan

In response to the Government of Sudan’s unwillingness to implement any policy change to stop the genocide in Darfur or increase humanitarian aid to the victims, this bill, concluding that economic pressure is the only thing Sudan will respond to, increases sanctions on those who would invest in Sudan.

The bill recognizes and supports the US states, cities and educational institutions that have divested any investment in companies that do business with Sudan and now requires that the Securities and Exchange Commission requires all registered companies trading in securities which directly or through a subsidiary conduct business operations in Sudan to disclose the nature of the business including that with governments, sale of military equipment or dual-use technologies, and natural resource extraction, oil and natural gas in particular.

The US comptroller General is directed to investigate on Federal retirement funds to make sure no prohibited investment are in those portfolios. The Government of the US is also prohibited in the bill from entering into or renewing a contract for procurement of goods or services with any company doing business with or in Sudan with some exceptions. The exceptions are those companies or entities doing business relating to southern Sudan, southern Kordofan/Nubia Mountain State, Blue Nile State or Abyei in Sudan, the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement of 2006, the provision of military equipment to be used by nongovernmental organizations in the Darfur region, the African Union Mission or the UN or those who provide humanitarian assistance that is of immediate and substantial benefit to the majority of people in Darfur, eastern Sudan including the Red Sea, Kassala and Gedaref State.

The President may waive the prohibition on a case-by-case basis if he determines and certifies in writing to Congress that it is important to the national security interests of the US.

Business operations' means maintaining, selling, or leasing equipment, facilities, personnel, or any other apparatus of business or commerce, including the ownership or possession of real or personal property.

Company means a sole proprietorship, organization, association, corporation, partnership, venture, or other entity, its subsidiary or affiliate that exists for profit-making purposes or to otherwise secure economic advantage; and includes a company owned or controlled, either directly or indirectly, by the government of a foreign country, that is established or organized under the laws of, or has its principal place of business in, such foreign country.

Investment' means the purchase, ownership, or control of stock of a company, association, or corporation, the capital stock of a mutual water company or corporation, bonds issued by the government or a political subdivision of a foreign country, corporate bonds or other debt instruments issued by a company, or the commitment of funds or other assets to a company, including a loan or extension of credit to that company.

Oil-related activities' includes the export of oil, extracting or producing oil, exploration for oil, or the construction or maintenance of a pipeline, refinery, or other oil field infrastructure

Sponsor:  Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA-9^th)

Vote: Passed House 418 to 1 RC 764 July 31, 2007

Cost to the taxpayers:

## All Rights Reserved. © 2007 TheWeekInCongress.com(TM)

No reproduction, language translation or distribution without written permission from TheWeekInCongress.com.(TM)

MORE INFORMATION

Congress finds the following:

(1) In the 108th Congress, the House of Representatives adopted House Concurrent Resolution 467 on July 22, 2004, by a unanimous vote of 422-0, which--

(A) declares that the atrocities unfolding in the Darfur region of Sudan, are genocide;

(B) declares that the Government of Sudan has violated the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;

(C) urges the Administration to seriously consider multilateral intervention to stop genocide in Darfur should the United Nations Security Council fail to act; and

(D) calls on the Administration to impose targeted sanctions, including visa bans and the freezing of assets of the Sudanese National Congress and affiliated business and individuals directly responsible for the atrocities in Darfur.

(2) In the 109th Congress, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3127, the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act of 2006, on April 5, 2006, by a vote of 416-3, which--

(A) appeals to the international community, including the United Nations, the European Union, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), to immediately mobilize sufficient political, military, and financial resources to support and expand the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS);

(B) blocks assets and restricts travel of any individual the President determines is responsible for acts of genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity in the Darfur region of Sudan; and

(C) offers United States support for the International Criminal Court's efforts to prosecute those responsible for acts of genocide in Darfur.

(3) On September 9, 2004, former Secretary of State Colin Powell stated before the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate that genocide was being committed in the Darfur region of Sudan and that the Government of Sudan and the government-supported Janjaweed militias bear responsibility for the genocide.

(4) On September 21, 2004, President George W. Bush affirmed the Secretary of State's finding in an address before the United Nations General Assembly, stating that the world is witnessing terrible suffering and horrible crimes in the Darfur region of Sudan, crimes the Government of the United States has concluded are genocide.

(5) Although the Government of the United States currently bans United States companies from conducting business operations in Sudan, millions of Americans are inadvertently supporting the Government of Sudan by investing in foreign companies that conduct business operations in Sudan that disproportionately benefit the Sudanese regime in Khartoum.

(6) Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon, and Maine have passed legislation mandating divestment of State funds from companies that conduct business operations in Sudan. California, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, North Carolina, Kansas, Wisconsin, Indiana, Georgia, Maryland, New York, Iowa, and Texas have considered or are considering legislation to divest State funds from companies that conduct business operations in Sudan. Connecticut, Ohio, and Vermont have passed non-binding divestment legislation with respect to Sudan. Arizona, Louisiana, Missouri, and Pennsylvania have adopted screening processes for investments in companies that conduct business operations in countries that are sponsors of terrorism, including Sudan.

(7) Providence, Rhode Island and New Haven, Connecticut have passed legislation mandating divestment of city funds from companies that conduct business operations in Sudan.

(8) Amherst, Boston University, Brandeis, Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth, Harvard, Middlebury, Oberlin, Princeton, the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Samford, Simmons, Smith, Stanford, Trinity, the University of California, the University of Maryland, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, the University of Vermont, the University of Washington, Williams, and Yale have divested their funds from, or placed restrictions on investment of their funds in, certain companies that conduct business operations in Sudan.

(9) No American should have to worry that his or her investments or pension money was earned in support of genocide.

(10) Divestment has proven effective in similar situations, as in 1986, when State pension funds and university endowments were divested from companies that conducted business operations in South Africa, which was critical to ending apartheid in that country, and by 1994, when the first free elections in South Africa took place, a substantial number of States, counties, cities, universities and colleges in the United States had adopted partial or total divestment policies.

(11) The only type of pressure shown to be effective against Sudan is economic pressure against the Government of Sudan, such as the imposition of sanctions and divestment. Sudan has cooperated with the United States on counterterrorism efforts due to United States sanctions imposed on Sudan in 1997 and Sudan agreed to negotiations with the Sudan People's Liberation Army of South Sudan that resulted in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005 due in part to a successful divestment campaign against Talisman Energy, Incorporated of Canada.

(12) Congress acknowledges that divestment should be used sparingly and under extraordinary circumstances. This Act is based on unique circumstances, specifically, the reprehensible and abhorrent genocide occurring in Sudan.

(13) The business operations of companies in countries that perpetrate grave abuses of human rights, especially the uniquely monstrous crime of genocide, are of material financial concern to United States investors even when these operations represent a small fraction of a company's total business.

(14) State and city pension funds have routinely but unsuccessfully sought to acquire and utilize data from the Federal Government on companies for investment decisions.

(15) The deteriorating security situation in the Darfur region of Sudan indicates that the people of Darfur cannot wait long for security to be reestablished.

## All Rights Reserved. © 2007 TheWeekInCongress.com.(TM)

No reproduction, language translation or distribution without written permission from TheWeekInCongress.com.(TM)