Cu7ifi of Courtt SUI^Reiyi E COURT OF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFF1tEY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

v. ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, et aL,

Respondents.

RESPONDENT SHANNON JONES' SUBMISSION OF EVIDENCE

AARON M. GLASGOW (0075466) MARC DANN 145 E. Rich Street Attorney General of Ohio Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 228-4546 SHARON A. JENNINGS (0055501) Facsimile: (614) 228-1472 Counsel ofRecord PEGGY W. CORN (0042197) Counselfor Relator Assistant Attorneys General Constitutional Offices Section 30 East Broad Street, 16"' Floor Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 466-2872 Facsimile: (614) 728-7592 [email protected] [email protected]

Counselfor Respondents

CU7ifi Of COUrtT SUI^REiYi "w`°---^-°--_e^_E COURT OF OHIO IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFFREY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, et al.,

Respondents.

RESPONDENT SHANNON JONES' SUBMISSION OF EVIDENCE

Pursuant to S. Ct. Prac, R. X, Section 7, Respondent Shannon Jones respectfully submits the following as evidence in this case, in addition to the separately filed Joint

Stipulation of Evidence:

I. Exhibit 1, the Affidavit of Representative Shannon Jones.

2. Exhibit 2, the Affidavit of Walt Lowe.Exhibit 2.

3. Exhibit 3, the Affidavit of Dusten Kohlhorst, plus attachments.

Respeetfully submitted,

MARC DANN Attorney General of Ohio ^ ^

SITARON A. JENNI^OGS(005551 Counsel ofRecord PEGGY W. CORN (0042197) Assistant Attorneys General Constitutional Offices Section 30 East Broad Street, 16th Floor Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 466-2872 Facsimile: (614) 728-7592 Counsel for Respondent CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Respondents' Submission of

Eviderice was served by regular U.S. mail, postage prepaid, this 22id dayof January,

2008 upon:

Aaron M. Glasgow 145 E. Rich Street Columbus, OH 43215

Counselfor Relator

Sharon A. Jennin Assistant Attomey General

2 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFFREY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

v. ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, et aL,

Respondents.

AFFIDAVIT OF REPRESENTATIVE SHANNON JONES

AARON M. GLASGOW (0075466) MARC DANN 145 E. Rich Street Attorney General of Ohio Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 228-4546 SHARON A. JENNINGS (0055501) Facsimile: (614) 228-1472 Counsel of'Record PEGGY W. CORN (0042197) Counsel.for Relator Assistant Attorneys General Constitutional Offices Section 30 East Broad Street, 160' Floor Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 466-2872 Facsimile: (614) 728-7592 si enningsgae. state. oh. us [email protected]

Counsel for Respondents

EXHIBIT

I ii IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFFREY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

v. ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, et al.,

Respondents.

AFFIDAVIT OF REPRESENTATIVE SHANNON JONES

I, Shannon Jones, being over 18 years of age and under no disability, testify from personal knowledge as follows:

1) I currently hold the elected position of Representative to the Ohio House of Representatives from the 67h District, which consists of parts of Warren County, Ohio. My term began on January 1, 2007.

2) Prior to being elected to this position, I was a staff person for Senator Mike Dewine. I was also previously a staff person for Representative Steve Chabot. Those offices are expressly exempt from the requirements of FOIA, the federal Freedom of Information Act.

3) As a Representative, I act as the representative for the citizens of my district in the Ohio House of Representatives. In order to carry out my obligations as a representative, I consider and vote upon and sponsor legislation, and communicate with other legislators and legislative staff regarding pending legislation. In addition, I cotnmunicate with my constituents on matters of concern to them. I also communicate with other citizens who may have an interest in pending legislation.

4) As a Representative, the Ohio House of Representatives provides me with an office in the Riffe Center in Columbus. The expenses of that office, including the cost of the space, phone service, computers, office supplies, furnishings, etc., are paid by the Ohio House of Representatives. When I am in Columbus, I use this office to carry out the functions of my position. However, I also work on legislative matters while I am at home in my

1 district or out of the office. Even when not in my office in Columbus, I may be reading materials related to my position as legislator or communicating with other legislators, constituents, or concerned citizens. As a Representative I am never off-the-clock, and am responsible for carrying out my duties at any time, and on any day of the week.

As a representative I have the ability to hire a legislative aide. From January 1, 2007 until July 15, 2007; my legislative aide was Walt Lowe. During this time period, Walt was the only full-time employee in my office. Walt was a full-time employee paid by the Ohio House of Representatives who worked at least 40 hours a week in my office in Columbus. As a legislative aide, his job duties included assisting me with a variety of tasks related to my duties as Representative. His job duties included assisting me with responding to constituent requests, answering the phone, assisting me with responses and communications with other legislators and public offices, scheduling, and maintaining office files. From January 1, 2007, until July 15, 2007, Walt Lowe was my only staff member.

6) In general, from January 1, until July 15, 2007, my office files were maintained by subject matter or Bill number. Responses to constituents were organized by either the name of the constituent or, if related to pending legislation, in folders organized by bill number. During this time period, my office did not maintain a chronological correspondence file.

7) From January 1, 2007 until July 15, 2007, I had an official e-mail account, shannon:[email protected], which is published on interoffice directories and is available in the Ohio House of Representative's network address book. I also have access to a second account, [email protected], which is an account that is linked to the official Ohio House of Representatives' website, and to which anyone may post any matter that they wish to bring to my attention. This account is used for posting only, and responses, if any, would be sent from a different account.

8) My e-mails have been maintained in the following manner. On occasion, certain e-mails may have been printed and a hard copy filed in either a bill file or a constituent file. Other e-mails may have been deleted as transient or personal in nature prior to the filing of this action. To the best of my knowledge, all e-mails and correspondence from January 1, 2007 until June 14, 2007 have been retained since the date we received Mr. Glasgow's public records request.

9) I am aware that personal use of state computers or state e-mail accounts is generally improper, except for occasional inciderital use, such as making lunch arrangements. This is especially true regarding political or

2 campaign activities. Any use of state resources for political or campaign activities would be not only improper, but illegal or unethical.

10) I also have a personal e-mail account from AOL, which I opened approximately nine years ago. I use this account for a variety of personal reasons, such as to correspond with my friends and family members, for my political activities, and to communicate when I am out of the office. I established this account for my own personal use and convenience, and no one else has access to this account. One of the reasons that I use this account is to avoid using my official accounts for personal or improper purposes. I do not use this account to attempt to avoid my obligation to maintain public records. If I receive an attachment to an e-mail to my personal account that should be maintained as a public record, I print the document and maintain it in my office files. If I forward an e-mail from this account to either my official account or to my legislative aide, that e- mail is maintained in those accounts. If I carbon copy my legislative aide on an e-mail sent on this account, that e-mail is maintained in the aide's official account.

11) I have a personal cellphone. I purchased this cellphone with personal funds, and pay for my cellphone service with personal funds. I am not reirnbursed by the Ohio House of Representatives for any portion of these costs. I purchased this cellphone for my own personal use and convenience, and no one else uses or has access to my cellphone. I use my cellphone to communicate with friends and family members, for my political activities, and to communicate when I am out of the office. My cellphone has texting capabilities. Due to the limitations inherent in the use of this medium, my text messages are informal and conversational in nature.

12) I have a Blackberry, which I've had since approximately the summer of 2005. At that time, I paid for the device and related services with personal funds. I am currently reimbursed by campaign funds for the costs of maintaining this service. I have never been reimbursed by the Ohio House of Representatives for any portion of these costs. My device is linked to my personal AOL account and my personal cellphone number, and not to my office e-mail account. This device is used for my own personal use and convenience, and no one else has access to the use of this device.

13) My legislative aide brought Mr. Glasgow's public records request to my attention when he received it. This request was the first public records request that I received, and to date has been the only public records request that I have received. My legislative aide and I discussed the public records request, and sought and received legal counsel from counsel to the majority caucus regarding how to respond to the public records request.

3 14) The public records request included a request for three different types of records; e-mails, correspondence, and text messages. In each instance, we interpreted the request as applying only to records related to HB 151 or the general subject of divestiture of investments in Iran or Sudan.

15) My legislative aide prepared the response to the public records request. In response to the public records request, my office provided Mr. Glasgow with a copy of all of the office's hard copy files related to H.B. 151 and the divestiture of investrnents in Iran or Sudan. Thus, the response included copies of correspondence, memos, drafts of versions of the bill, and any other records located in those files. No records were withheld from these files on the basis of any privilege.

16) The public records request was addressed to Rep. Shannon Jones and sought "all e-mails sent or received by you as a State Representative." Accordingly, it did not occur to me to include e-mails from my legislative aide's account in responding to this public records request.

17) I did not provide e-mails from my private e-mail account in response to this public records request because I had no understanding that those records were public records at the time of my response.

18) In response to the public records request, I produced no text messages because to the best of my knowledge I had no text messages that are public record because generally my text messages do not document the policies or functions of my office. I am also not aware of any mechanism that would allow me to download selected text messages to another medium even if the text messages were temporarily saved to my phone.

19) My response to the public records request included all correspondence related to HB 151 or the topic of the divestment of investments in Iran or Sudan, to the best of my knowledge. My legislative aide copied all of our hard copy files related to this topic, which should have included all written correspondence to or from me. We withheld no documents from these files on the basis of any privilege.

20) A request for all e-mails sent to or received by me would necessarily include e-mails that may be subject to privilege or some other exception to the public records act. To the extent that any privileges or exceptions may be applicable to specific records, I reserve the right to assert these privileges or exceptions before producing any additional records.

4 FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

Sworn to and subscribed in my presence this ^T" day of ar \^ , 2008, in the County ^eAN, City of O

p^` EttEpYL M. BEGK udw pptiis, 5tu6s aH Ohta Ny OmntMssim 6Vins 84-200! IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFFREY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

v. ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, et al.,

Respondents.

AFFIDAVIT OF WALTER LOWE

AARON M. GLASGOW (0075466) MARC DANN 145 E. Rich Street Attorney General of Ohio Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 228-4546 SHARON A. JENNINGS ( 0055501) Facsimile: (614) 228-1472 Counsel of Record PEGGY W. CORN (0042197) Counsel for Relator Assistant Attorneys General Constitutional Offices Section 30 East Broad Street, 16th Floor Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 466-2872 Facsimile: (614) 728-7592

[email protected]

Counsel for Respondents I IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFFREY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

V. ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, : et al.,

Respondents.

AFFIDAVIT OF WALTER LOWE

I, Walter Stephen Lowe, being over 18 years of age and under no disability, testify from personal knowledge as follows:

1) I formerly served as a legislative aide to Representative Shannon Jones, Ohio House of Representatives, from the date her term began in January 2007 until July 15, 2007.

2) 1 am currently on a military leave of absence from my duties as legislative aide, and am scheduled to deploy to Iraq in January 2008.

3) Prior to serving as a legislative aide to Representative Shannon Jones, I was a legislative intern while I completed my education at the Ohio State University. I received a Bachelor of Science in Political Science from the Ohio State University in March 2007.

4) As a legislative aide, I assisted Representative Jones with a variety of tasks related to her duties as Representative. My job duties included assisting her with responding to constituent requests, answering the phone, assisting her with responses and communications with other legislators and public offices, and scheduling. During the time that I served as legislative aide, I was Representative Jones' only staff member.

As legislative aide, part of my job duties included maintaining files for our office. In general, I kept files by subject matter or Bill number. Specifically, I did not keep a hard copy file of e-mails. If I printed an e- mail, I filed it based on subject matter or Bill number. Similarly,

1 correspondence was filed in folders depending on subject matter; for example, responses to constituents could be organized by either the name of the constituent or, if related to the topic of pending legislation, in folders organized by bill number.

As legislative aide, I assisted Representative Jones with responding to Jeff Glasgow's public records request, which was the only request that the office received while I was legislative aide. In responding to that request, our office copied all of our hard copy files related to House Bill 151, and produced them to Mr. Glasgow. We withheld none of the documents from that bill file. In addition, I printed out an e-mail subfolder that contained e-mails posted to the website, that concerned House Bill 151, and produced those e-mails.

7) As Representative Jones' legislative aide, I was familiar with her practices regarding communications. I do not remember ever receiving text messages from her other than quick questions regarding her schedule or requests to order lunch or to bring her a file or a soda, for example. I did not save text messages from her in any format.

8) As a legislative aide to Representative Jones, I sent and received any e- mails related to my duties as legislative aide from my account at the Ohio House of Representatives, [email protected]. Any e-mails that Representative Jones sent to me or copied me on would have been posted to this account. The only other e-mail account that I have is an e-mail account issued to me by the U.S. Army, which I have never used to fulfill my duties as legislative aide.

FU)•,Z<:...... 's. :. t^FFIANT, SAYETH NAUGHT. o: , LINDA COPELAND Notary Public.StateofOhio ^ My Cnrnmission Expires July 24, 2011 Walt Lowe

Sworn to and subscribed in my presence this J. f-t- day of ,_ tiut<< r , 2008, in the County of D. l< e^a City of State of Ohio.

NOTARY PUBLI IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFFREY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, et at,

Respondents.

AFFIDAVIT OF DUSTEN KOHLHORST

AARON M. GLASGOW (0075466) MARC DANN 145 E. Rich Street Attorney General of Ohio Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 228-4546 SHARON A. JENNINGS (0055501) Facsimile: (614) 228-1472 Counsel ofRecord PEGGY W. CORN (0042197) Counsel for Relator Assistant Attomeys General Constitutional Offices Section 30 East Broad Street, 16'h Floor Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 466-2872 Facsiniile: (614) 728•7592 sjennin s a ag.state.oh.us [email protected]

Counselfor Respondents

EXHIBIT

I IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL. JEFFREY L. GLASGOW CASE NO. 07-1411 Relator,

ORIGINAL ACTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS REPRESENTATIVE JOSH MANDEL, et al.,

Respondents.

AFFIDAVIT OF DUSTEN KOHLHORST

I, Dusten Kohlhorst, being over 18 years of age and under no disability, testify from personal knowledge as follows:

1) I currently hold the position of Chief Information Officer for the Ohio House of Representatives. I have been employed in that position since June 2003.

2) Before being hired for the position of Chief Information Officer, I spent 3 years at the Network Administrator and Network Technology and Security Officer. During that time, I was iesponsible for all technology security, including firewalls, webfiltes, server security, anti-virus/spyware/trogan protection, and network infrastructure security. I also created the IT disaster recovery and contingency processes, including backups, offsite data storage, and 24/7 on call support for critical House functions. Before that, I worked help desk support for 7 years. During that time, I responded to staff issues and questions relating to their daily responsibilities. This includes the creation and deleting of staff log-on and email account, assignment of network shares, and coordinating of computer staff education.

3) My job duties as Chief Information Officer include:

a. Establish and purse a technology vision for the Ohio House of Representatives b. Serve as Chief Project Manager for all technology activities for the Ohio House

1 c. Recruit and manage IT staff including: i. Assigning tasks ii. Individual performance monitoring and goal setting iii. Annual reviews d. Develop and maintain annual IT budget in coordination with the Ohio House Fiscat Officer e. Advice the Speaker and his delegates on technology issues

4) Representative Shannon Jones has an official e-mail account, [email protected], which is published on interoffice directories and is available in the Ohio House of Representative's network address book. She also has access to a second account, district67nae ohr.state.oh.us; which is an account that is linked to the official Ohio House of Representatives' website, and to which anyone may post. This account is used for posting only, and responses, if any, would be sent from a different account.

5) With Representative Jones' permission, I have searched [email protected] for the time period of January 1, 2007 to June 14, 2007 to identify all e-mails with the subject matter of Substitute House Bill 151 of the 127'" General Assembly. I searched the inbox, sent items, deleted items, and all subfolders if any, using the following terms: 151, Sudan, Iran, and divest. Attached are true and accurate copies of all e-mails, including attachments, that were identified by the above listed search. I sorted out e-mails that obviously didn't relate to HB 151, and removed duplicate emails.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

2f/ Dusten Kohlhorst

Sworn to and subscribed in my presence this 2 2- day of J a n w m rl1 ,2008, in the County of F^unkI.n ,CityofOal"^s ,StateofOhio. ^^e 3k 6111^ NOTARY PUBLIC

110L-9^-« Îdx3 aoâsûmo0 +SW ; nxrnnOMc'OIKMAeloN u"'NMOeeH `3q^ rgfol^ti_ x; o yo° Heather N, Mann Nolary public, Slate of Ohio My Commisalon Exqres 11-16-2011 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Jones, Shannon Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:51 PM To: Jones, Shannon Subject: Update on H.B. 151- Iran Divestment Bill Attachments: Debra Budingame Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf; Adam Sheer Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf; Chris Holton Testimony- Apri1 19 2007.pdf

As you know, Representative Josh Mpndel and I provided testimony last week to the Financial Institutions, Real Eastate and Securities Corrimittee regarding our Iran Divestment Bill (I-IB 151). In addition, we dropped off to each office a fulsome 84-page briefing paper in advance of the hearing on the bill. As always, we are happy to answer any questions you may have.

Attached is the very compelling testimony from last week's hearing including:

1. Debra Burlingame -- Ms. Burlingame is the sister of Chic Burlingame, the pilot of the highjacked airliner that crashed into the Penatgon on 9/11. Her testimony was impactful to say the least. Personally I was encouraged by her strength and commitment to protect us from those who wish to destroy us and our way of life.

2. Adam Sheer -- Mr. Sheer is President of Roosevelt Investment Group and was instrumental in the developmentof the first "terror free" index fund (The Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund). His testimony focused on how Wall Street has responded to the demand for terror-free products and services and dispelled the myth that investing terror-free will lead to lessened returns. Mr. Sheer also spoke about Missouri's use of the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap fund and Nationwide's recent decision to offer it on their 401-k platform.

3. Christopher Holton -- Mr. Holton is vice president at the Center for Security Policy and his testimony focused on the moral considerations surrounding investments in foreign companies with active business ties in Iran. While our bill is primarily focused on the new catagory of risk, defined by the Securities & Exchange Commission as "Global Security Risk," we appreciated his analysis on how this practice is dangerous and morally reprehensible.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to share this with you. Both Representative Mandel and I look forward to working with you to ensure passage of this important measure. Investing in foreign companies who do business in Iran is risky to taxpayers and pension owners and it is wrong. It must be stopped.

Warm personal regards,

Shannon Jones Kohihorst, Dusten

From: Jones, Shannon Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:54 PM To: AIIMembers; AIIStaff Subject: Update on H.B. 151- Iran Divestment Bill Attachments: Debra Burlingame Testimony- April 19 2007:pdf; Adam Sheer Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf; Chris Holton Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf

As you know, Repregentative Josh Mandel and I provided testimony last week to the Financial Institutions, Real Eastate and Securities Comtnittee regarding our Iran Divestment Bill (HB151). In addition, we dropped off to each office a fulsome 84-page briefing paper in advance of the hearing on the bill. As always, we are happy to answer any questions you may have.

Attached is the very compelling testimony from last week's hearing including:

1. Debra Burlingame -- Ms. Burlingame is the sister of Chic Burlingame, the pilot of the highjacked airliner that crashed into the Penatgon on 9/I 1. Her testimony was impactful to say the least. Personally I was encouraged by her strength and commitment to protect us from those who wish to destroy us and our way of life.

2. Adam Sheer -- Mr. Sheer is President of Roosevelt Investment Group and was instrumental in the development of the first "terror free" index fund (The Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund). His testimony focused on how Wall Street has responded to the demand for terror-free products and services and dispelled the myth that investing terror-free will lead to lessened returns. Mr. Sheer also spoke about Missouri's use of the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap fund and Nationwide's recent decision to offer it on their 401-k platform.

Warm personal regards,

Shannon Jones Prepared Statement of Debra Burlingame Co-founder, 911 Families for a Safe & Strong America hefore the Ohio House of Representatives Committee on Financial Institutions, Real );state and Securities Re [ran Divestment Bill April 19,206

Chairman Widener, Ranking member Budish, and distinguished cotnmittee members:

I am honored to appear before you today to discuss the Iran Divestment Bill. I am grateful to Representatives Josh Mandel and Shannon Jones for inviting me here to offer my views on this matter which is of great importance to me and my family, to the citizens of Ohio, and to all Ameiicans.

I come here with the perspective of an ordinary citizen whose family has experienced the large-scale destruction of terrorism on a personal level. On the morning of September 11, 2001, when my brother was suddenly and brutally taken from us, I was asked over and over by family, friends, co-workers and complete strangers, "What can I do?" People were not content to sit and watch the horror unfold in front of them on their television screens. They wanted to take action. And they did. In those first terrible days, weeks and months after 19 terrorists crashed four commercial airliners into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, PA, we heard the question, "What can I do?" asked and answered by millions of Americans all over the country.

The day after the attacks, a volunteer at Ground Zero frantically called her husband, a lawyer who worked in Midtown Manhattan, telling him to get ice for rescue workers. Their eyes were swelling shut from exposure to pulverized glass and conct-ete. Ile did, supplying 20 tons a day for 9 weeks, as well as raising the money to pay for it. When news got out that hot steel was melting the soles of rescue workers' boots, massive shipments of boots appeared like magic at the site. On their own initiative, citizens assessed the needs, pooled their resources and did what they could, supplying water, food, first aide, around the clock for several weeks. Ironworkers, told to go home on 9/11 came back the next day and stayed for 9 mos. A large village of relief workers sprang up ovemight at the piers on the west side. Another appeared at the Pentagon. The same round-the-clock vigil of search and rescue was going on there.

Ohioans can be proud of their response to the crisis. The Ohio Task Force I Urban Search and Rescue unit, a 74-person team of volunteer firefighters, police officers, engineers, and doctors mobilized in Columbus on the morning of 9/l. They anived at Ground Zero within 24 hours with two tractor trailers full of gear and four canines.

In Athens, Ohio a college student named Bryan Randolph called his mom and told her he wanted to dropped classes to help in New York. She told him, "I think you should go." Bryan made four trips to Ground Zero over a period of several months, eventually starting the group, Olrio Students United for New York. In Akron, a certified counselor named Karen Soyka immediately understood the severe trauma that victims, survivors and rescue workers would be experiencing. After trying and failing to get through to authorities, she finally just got in her car and drove to New York on her own initiative, connecting with Red Cross workers in Brooklyn. Rescue teams at Ground Zero were working around the dock in dangerous conditions amidst unspeakable human carnage. Ms. Soyka counseled 2,000 of them in her first week at the site.

Those who didn't get in their cars opened their wallets, donating unprecedented amounts of money to the relief effort. Others sewed quilts and sent teddy bears to comfort the families of the victims. As a 9/11 family member who received one of those quilts, I can tell you that it made a difference. Citizens made a difference. Ground Zero was cleared of 1.8 million tons of concrete and steel in 9 months. At the Pentagon, the equivalent of four buildings were destroyed. Construction workers and tradesmen eame from all over the United States, suspending industry rules to work around the clock, seven days a week. A four yearjob was completed in one year. That was how those individuals answered the question, "What can we do?"

After five and a half years, the country has learned much from the shock of that long September morning. We have awakened to the reality of an unstable world beyond our borders. Americans continue to ask, "What can we do?" The Iran Divestment Bill is not only something they can do, we now know that it is something they want to do.

I believe that the Ohio firefighters and police who put their lives on hold to rush to the aid of their fellow human beings on 9/11 would be horrified to know that hundreds of millions of dollars in their retirement pension funds is invested in foreign companies that do business with Iran. As our govemment, the United Nations, the Intemational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the world community are urgently stepping up pressure to contain President Ahmadinejad's stated nnclear ambitions, the hard-earned money of Ohio's law enforcement community is undermining economic efforts to leverage Iran into ceasing its nuclear program.

I believe the teachers of this state would be shocked to leam that, according to the analysis of the independent Conflict Securities Advisory Group (CSAG), they own shares in 124 foreign companies that are taking advantage of a loophole in the law which prohibits U.S. firms from doing business with Iran. I think they would be deeply disturbed to know that a whopping $3.8 billion dollars of the Ohio State Teachers Retirement System is invested in foreign companies which arc enabling Ahmadenijad's support of the terrorist Hamas and Hezbollah

I wonder how many of Ohio's public employees whose sons and daughters in the U.S. military are deployed in the Middle East know that their pension fund has invested $3.9 billion dollars in foreign companies that are propping up the very government that is working to destabilize that region of the world. Until its nuclear program was disclosed in 2003, Iran worked on it in secret for 18 years. According to a recent report in the New York Times, intelligence agencies and nuclear experts here and abroad estimate that Iran is 2 to 10 years away froni having the means to make a uranium-based bomb, and this has touched off a new arms race in the region.

I believe that Ohio's firefighters, police, teachers and public employees, like all of us, want to know, "What can we do to stop this?"

With fifty percent of the world's capital invested in American capital markets or owned by American investors, we can use our dollars to negotiate with Iran from a position of strength. America's voices--as investors--count for something. In the last few months, three major multi-national companies that were doing business in Iran have pulled out: UBS, Credit Suisse and Daimler-Chrysler. This is proof that these companies do have to choose and that they don't want to be on the wrong side of this issue.

I sincerely hope that Ohio will join Missouri and Illinois and pass this bill with all deliberate speed. We know that 81% of the respondents in the Luntz-Maslansky poll said that public pension funds "definitely should not" invest in companies that do business with countries that sponsor terrorism. In addition to popular support for this common sense bill, Ohio's fund managers have a fiduciary duty to eliminate the global security risk that these investments represent. The bill's sponsors have shown that pensions systems have simply overlooked this issue. They are now on notice, but bureaucracies are notoriously slow-moving. This bill will create the legal authority ordeting them to reduce this risk.

It is significant to ine that the first successful Divest Terror program was initiatcd in the state of Missouri, that Illinois followed suit and that legislators here in Ohio have sponsored this strong divestment bill. These states represent the heartland of our country. It was the heartland that saved us from despair on 9/11 when we in New York and Washington were on our knees. It is the heartland whose sons and daughters are doing most of the heavy lifting in our military. It is not surprising at all to me that the heartland is leading the way with divestment, giving our government and the international community the clout they need to send Iran's leaders a clear, unequivocal message. Applying economic pressure is something we, as citizens frustrated and concetned for our children in an increasingly dangerous world, can do without firing a shot, or shedding a drop of blood. For this reason, I believe that once institutional investors demand that the market create terrorism-free indexes, private investors will also opt to divest.

Finally, I'd like to close with a personal story. On the morning of 4/11, shortly after seeing those two planes hit the twin towers, I learned that iny brother's plane had also been hijacked and that he and his passengers and crew had suffered the same fate. I really didn't know what to do. I couldn't help my brother. I was miles away from home. Like everyone else, I was in shock, desperate to know, "What can I do?" As you may recall, the stock market never opened that morning. It retnained closed for the rest of the week. It was clearly evident on that Tuesday morning, that Bin Laden and his murdering crew had deliberately targeted the World Trade Center because it was a symbol of America's economic power. They rejoiced at bringing down those buildings, but what they were really aiming to do was to bring down the American economy. As we know, the financial markets and certain industries--aviation, tourism, insurance--did take an economic hit, but eventually rebounded.

But on that day, there was great concetn that the market would collapse along with those towers, or drop so precipitously that it might create a cascade of business failures. People were fearful of what would liappen when the market opened on the following Ivlonday. Would it hold? And so, with my dear brothec gone, my city in ruins, the Pentagon burning and a commercial airliner reduced to small pieces in a Pennsylvania field, I did the only thing I could think of to help my country. I called a broker and told him to put every penny I had in the market when it opened on Monday morning. Everybody understood what was at stake. In an act rich in symbolism, it was police and firefighters, who had lost 406 of their brother firefighters and officers, who rang the opening bell, including an officer whose search and rescue dog had been crushed to death when the south tower fell. The market did drop, but most people did not bail. Americans held on.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is a moral imperative here. This is who were are. We are Americans. We are people who ask, "What can we do?" And then we do it. T'hank you. Testimony from Adam Sheer, President of The Roosevelt Investmcnt Group Dated 4-19-07

Mr: Chairman and ladies and gentleman of the committee, I am honored to be with you today. My name is Adam Sheer and I am the president of The Roosevelt Investment Group, an investment advisory company based in New York City. The firm was founded in 1971 by a descendant of President Theodore. Roosevelt and currently manages $1.2 billion for private clients and institutions. We invest portfolios in domestic equities and global fixed income securities. Our firm currently manages the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund (the Fund) which to our knowledge is the only fund available to retail investors that actively avoids companies that have ongoing relationships with countries that our State Department deems as terrorist sponsoring.

In 2001, our firm decided to stan a mutual fund which would primarily mirror our equity approach. Our intention was not to market a mutual fund to the world, but to offer to advisory clients our portfolio management should they have smaller accounts that were not big enough to meet our minimums. This way we could service them in a cost effective way for the firm.

In late 2004, one of the shareholders asked me if we invested in companies that had ongoing relationships with countries that our State Department claimed were terrorist sponsoring nations. I had not heard of "terror-free" investing and he referred me to www.divestten•or.ore and to www.conflictsecurities.com. I began a dialogue with the COO of Conflict Securities (CSAG), Adam Pener, which resulted in our firm hiring CSAG to review the portfolio and in April of '05 CSAG certified that the portfolio was "terror-free".

While we did not back test the portfolio, we reviewed the list of violators and felt that it would not affect performance in an adverse way. In fact, we only needed to sell 2 securities that composed less than 3% of the portfolio. Since then, we have purchased 145 securities in our separately managed accounts (not "terror-free") and only 10 stocks could not be purchased in the mutual fund due to our screen. Please note, the Fund attempts to avoid any company that has ongoing business relationships with Iran, Sudan, Syria and North Korea unless the companies are engaged exclusively in humanitarian causes. Also, the list we avoid includes US based companies with foreign subsidiaries. This is clearly much more resdictive then your proposed bill.

As business people, we strongly believed that as long as Americans did not have to sacrifice returns, many would opt to only invest in companies that do not provide revenue to countries that our State Department deems as sponsors of terrorism.

The initial implementation was seamless as the people at CSAG are easy to work with. They reviewed the portfolio and pointed out which companies violated our criteria. It was then up to us as the investment advisors to decide whether to sell. Thereafter, we would check the Monitor (CSAG's product) before making any purchases. CSAG sends us updates to the Monitor and we check whether any of the companies in the portfolio have been found to be violators. If so, we make a decision to sell. The process has been easy and no additional cost has accrued to our shareholders as our advisory firm compensates CSAG.

Performance was outstanding before we purged the portfolio and has remained strong. From inception through March of '05, the Fund performed 14.4% per year. The S&P 500 returned 2.6%over the same period. Since April of '05, when the portfolio became "terror free" through March of '07, the Fund had an annualized return of 13.43% vs. the S&P which was 11.79%.

As you may be aware, Treasurer Steelman of Missouri is a champion of "terror free" investing and has traveled across the country extolling its virtues. In late '06, Missouri asked UPromise, the firm that manages their 529 Plan, to conduct due diligence on the Fund. In December of '06, the State of Missouri elected to add the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund to its adviser sold 529 Plan. We are told that the Fund will go live in June of '07. It is my understanding that Missouri is currently seeking to add a "terror free" international option. Our firm has teamed up with an intemational manager in an attempt to win the mandate.

Also in 2006, a stock broker from Smith Bamey in York, PA decided that his clients should have the choice to invest "terror free". He was in the top 10% of Smith Barney brokers who sell 401(k) plans and he used his clout to convince Nationwide Financial here in Columbus to add the Fund on an exception basis which they did in November of '06. Since then, an influential Third Party Administrator of 401(k) plans in Harrisburg introduced us to senior people at Nationwide and convinced them to make the Fund available to all participants who utilize their plans. This went live on April 2nd of this year. Nationwide is extremely excited to offer a"terror free" option and they believe it truly differentiates them from their competition. We believe this will be a great channel of distribution for the Fund. Nationwide has asked for a suite of products and styles that are "terror free" to include target maturity funds. It is our intention to create them as we see demand rising. At this time we have not decided whether to build them "in-house" or to outsource.

The Fund is still small, but growing nicely. Today it sits with $17 million in assets. In April of '05 when the Fund became certified, the Fund had $6 million. In other words, the growth has been over 180% in two years. While we have spent very little marketing this concept and nothing on public relations, we have received press from the New York Times, Barron's, the Wall St. Journal and others. If you would like copies of the articles, please let me know. Additionally, we are now available to be purchased at over seven brokerage houses to include Charles Schwab, TD Ameritrade, Pershing, Scottrade, E- Trade and LPL.

This is other anecdotal evidence that there is great interest among American citizens. We set up a web site at www.anti-terrorfund.com in June of '06 and last month we had 890 unique visitors. Again, without any marketing, people are becoming aware of the concept and are investigating how they can ensure that their personal investments are "terror-free".

While I ain hopeful that our Fund continues to grow and to bring value to its shareholders, I am convinced that there is a market for "terror free" investing. In my experience, most people that I meet are not awaze that they have inve.sted in companies dealing with our enemies. Once they understand this, they are relieved to know there is a way to invest "terror-free" without sacrificing returns.

Roosevelt is an investment advisory firm that has extensive experience in maintaining a "terror-free" overlay that is more stringent that that proposed by the Iran Divestment Bill. Despite this more stringent screen, we have seen no discemable impact on performance related to "terror-free" cenification. DIVEST TERROR TESTIMONY BEFORE THE OHIO GENERAL ASSEMBLY

19 APRIL 2007

Christopher Holton

Mr. Chaitrman; members of the Comnuttee, over the last severai years since the

terrorist attacks of September l io', 2001, your friends and neighbors, sons and

daughters, brothers and sisters, and fathers and mothers from Ohio have played a

large role in defending America in the global war on terrorism. Citizen-soldiers of

your state National Guard have served gallantly in units such as the 37`" Infantry

Brigade Combat Team, the 6120' Engineering Battalion, the 121" Air Refueling

Wing, the 123'd Air Control Squadron, the 178th Fighter Wing, in deployments to

Afghanistan, Iraq, and other theaters of operation as part of the war effort.

Strangely enough, at the same time, according to the most recent publicly available

research, the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System was invested in 102 foreign

compaaies doing business in Iran-a country on the U.S_ State Department's list of

terrorist sponsoring nations. In fact, Iran has been described by our State

Department as "the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorisni " The Ohio State

Teachers Retirement System was invested in 121 companies doing business in Iran.

The Ohio Police and Fire Pension Fund was invested in 63 companies doing business

in Iran. Finally, the School Employees Retirement System of Ohio was invested in

48 companies doing business in Iran.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am a Vice President with the

Center for Security Policy, a non-profit organization whose mission Is to promote peace through strength. The Center launched the Divest Terror campaign to

empower Aniericans to play a significant financial role in the war on terrorism.

Many Americans have wondered what they can do to support the war on terrorism.

We can all do more than just wait passively for another attack-perhaps against

people we love or even in one of our communities, or those of other Americans.

The state of Ohio, starting with you, the members of the General Assembly, can

make a difference and possibly even diminish our enemies' ability to conduct

terrorist attacks.

America's leading public pension funds, including those right here in Ohio, are invested in publicly traded companies that do business with terrorist-sponsoring regimes-providing those regimes with vital resources. Cutting off such business could hurt our enemies in material ways. The Top 100 U.S. public pensions hold in portfolio stock of such companies worth roughly $200 billion. This helps those companies-the vast majority of which are foreign-owned-to do upwards of $73 billion of projects in countries like Iran, Sudan, Syria and North Korea.

I am not suggesting that the trustees, managers, advisers or participants in any of our public pension systems are intentionally supporting terrorism, or the nations that our State department says sponsor terrorism, but the Center does mean to call attention to the fact that millions of American investors are unwittingly and unintentionally indirectly supporting terrorist-sponsoring regimes in Iran, Syria,

North Korea and Sudan by sending state employees' hard-earned investment dollars to companies that do business with them. Typically, these companies end up helping state sponsors of terror in as many as four ways:

1. First of all, doing business with terrorist regimes gives them moral cover. It

sends the signal that they are open for business.

2. Secondly, companies help terrorist regimes through the oil and gas business,

providing a windfall for terrorist nations. For instance, as reported by the

Canadian-based Middle East Newsline, Iran projects to garner $35 billion in

oil revenue in the current year. According to our Department of Energy,

some 40% to 50% of Iran's overall budget is paid for from oil and gas

revenne. Much of this revenue may be spent for'7egitimate" purposes. But at

least some of it is diverted to enabling terrorism, as well as building up

military forces. There is a reason that the State Departnient calls Iran the

world's largest and most active state sponsor of terrorism.

3. Third, companies are giving terrorist sponsors high technology. Even

technoiogy that is supposed to be used for civilian purposes can have

dangerous military applications. For instance a device called a lithotripter Is

used medically to smash kidney stones, but they are also an important

component in triggers for nuclear weapons. One area of particular concern

are vast telecommunications projects: Fiber-optic cables help countries

communicate better. But those same cables provide hardened command and

control systems to military forces. In September 2001 the Washington Post

reported that fiber-optic cable obtained for communications purposes by

Saddani Hussein had been used by Iraq to upgrade its anti-aircraft systeni- at a time when U.S. pilots were patrolling the no-fly zones over Iraq and

getting shot at on a routine basis.

4. Finally, Banks and other companies also assist terror-sponsoring regimes by

making loans or underwriting business activities. Money is the niost fungible

of commodities. Once inside notoriousty secretive and brutal regimes, it can

be diverted to what ever purpose the regime may wish.

Could these countries' governments continue to provide safe haven, arms, training,

intelligence and financial assistance to terrorist organizations absent the

wherewithal provided by these business partners? Who knows?

We do know, however, two things:

(1) Twenty years ago, a U.S.-led campaign of shareholder activism denied South

Africa's apartheid regime the West's corporate life support upon which its economy heavily depeuded. When public pension funds, college and university enclowments and other institutional and private investors divested companies that did business in

South Africa, change occurred there-resulting first in the disniantling of officially sanctioned racist policies and then in the fall of the government itself.

(2) Up to now, Iran and other rogue nations who sponsor terror, have not had to choose between supporting terror and garnering billions from Western companies and their investors. All other things being equal, they can expect to continue to benefit from the latter, even as the proceeds help them enable terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and Hezbollah, who have combined to murder thousands of U.S.

citizens.

Therehasnever been a moie appropriate time to apply to the terrorist sponsors the

divestment campaign techniques that proved so effective in South Africa-and, for

that matter, with respect to bringing about change on such issues as cigarette

smoking, global warming and so-called "sin" stocks.

Terrorist organizations cannot exist without nation-states to provide them with safe

haven, training, weaponry, food, water and logistical support. Since 1979 our State

Department has identit7ed those countries that sponsor terrorism. Among the

countries on that list: Iran, Syria, Sudan and North Korea.

Iran is the most blatant example. Oil-rich Iran is called by our State Department in

its report "Patterns of Global Terrorism" the most active state sponsor of terrorism

in the world. Iran is the main sponsor of Hezbollah, the Jihadistgrotip that killed

the241 Marines in Beirut back in 1983. The 9-11 Commission reported that Iran

also has extensive ties to Al Qaeda. In sworn testiinony our Defense Secretary and

CIA Director both said that Iran is largely behind the insurgency in Iraq.

Meanwhile, Iran has an active ballistic ntissile program and a well-documented nuclear weapons program.

Perhaps some of you niay be wondering why you are being asked to address what appears to be a foreign policy issue, or at least one in which the federal government should have jurisdiction. This is not actually the case. Federal authorities have deemed it inappropriate for them to take action in this niatter. When asked to create a federal list of prohibited investments based on U.S. national security concerns, Securities and Exchange Coinmission Deputy Director Shelly Parratt

stated, "It would be inappropriate for us to publish a list of companies whose

securities might be deemed to involve terrorism•related investment risk without

publishing corresponding lists for every other possible type of financial risk:" The

companies-most of whom are foreign-owned and operated-are able to do

business legally in countries that sponsor terrorism. Accordingly, state investments

in these companies are also legal. That does not mean, however, that such

investments are ethically-sound. Legality also does not denote that these investments

are in the financial interests of your state's employees and taxpayers.

For these reasons, the Federal government has correctly taken the position that the

responsibility for choosing to hold such companies' stock lies solely with the

investors, the states and their public pension systems. Perhaps the federal

government's position was best explained in a letter written by the then state

treasurer of Arizona, David Peterson, to the state treasurers of the otlier 49 statesc

"To understand the government's position, it is important to clarify what global security risk is and is not. Global security risk is not, as some pension system administrators have suggested, related to companies that are directly aicling and abetting terrorists. Such coinpanies have been identified and made public by the

U.S. government and it is already illegal for U.S. investors to own their shares.

Global security risk is related to those companies that are legally doing business in and with terrorist-sponsoring states-not terrorist organizations. Due to the legality of these corporate operations, the federal government's position of not providing a list of such global security risk-exposed companies has been clear. I point to the

comments of Treasury Department spokesman Griffen Taylor, who stated that

global security risk is not a. question of regulation, but of policy, and we would leave

that for the states to decide.. In making this observation, Mr. Taylor underscores

that it would be inappropriate for the U.S. government to single out U.S. and

foreign couipanies based solely on the fact that their legal, commercial activities

may put their stock values at risk. To summarize the federal government's position:

(i) The SEC has ruled that legal activities in countries that sponsor terrorism can be

material to the investor; (ii) It has further determined that, like other risk factors, it

is the responsibility of the investor, pension funds and nianagers to identify and

assess companies that may be at risk, as long as those companies are not directly

supporting terrorism; (iii) In those cases when a company has broken the law or

directly supported terrorism, the government would alert the entire investment

community that investments in such a contpany would be illegal."

The federal government's position places the onus squarely on the shoulders of our

state pension systems and their asset managers, which leaves elected officials such as

yourselves as the means by which we can require that managers identify companies

that do business in and with state sponsors of terrorism and then stop this repugnant practice.

This is a policy issue for the states to decide. And virtually every state pension plan has investment policies. Some have what are referred to as "socially responsible" investment policies, whereby they do not invest in companies that are in the tobacco business, for instance. There are proposals in at least one state to divest companies that contribute to global warming. One state divested the stock of a military

contractor because its personnel worked at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The state

of Montana divested French companies after that nation did not support the U.S. in

the U.N. with regard to Iraq.

But the most successful and famous divestment campaign involved South Africa in

the 1980s. A sense of investor responsibility, that started with public pensions and

university endowments, gave rise to an extraordinary cainpaign that helped end the

racist South African policy of apartheid. At the time, companies that did business in

South Africa were doing so legally; pension system investments in such companies

broke no federal or state laws. Despite the legality of such investments, state ofticials

began to demand that their state public pension systems and university endowments

divest from companies that had business activities in or with South Africa. In the

end, 24 states and 71 cities adopted legislation-over the strenuous objections of

many public pension systems-that banned partially or completely investmcnts by

such systems and public universities in companies doing business with the apartheid

regime. Despite the best efforts of stridently opposed public pension funds, the legal

authority for states to legislate such investment restrictions was subsequently upheld

by the Congress and in a nuniber of cases by state and federal courts. Moreover, the

South Africa divestment campaign showed that using state investments to advance an ethically-sound position can be managed without undermining the tiduciary responsibility of pension funds to protect and grow employees' assets.

a country on the State Department's terrorism list does not mean that it is in some

way aiding and abetting our enemies. In other words, that it is a faulty premise that

doing business in these countries contributes to the coffers of terrorists.

Oh really? Let us take the case of Iran. According to the State Department and the

CIA, Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the world.

It has long been recognized that discouraging business activities in Iran could

diminish the Ayatollahs' ability to sponsor terrorism and fund expensive nuclear

and missile programs. Way back in 1996, Clinton administration Undersecretary of

State Peter Tarnoff stated it clearly when he said: "A straight line links Iran's oil

income and its ability to sponsor terrorism, build weapons of mass destruction and acquire sophisticated arniaments. Any governnient or private company that helps

Iran expand its oil must accept that it is contributing to this menace."

Moreover, the issue is not simply whether a conipany held in portfolio is directly enabling terror. Even in cases where such a causal link cannot be established from publicly available sources, I believe that public pension beneGciaries and investors may not wish to have their funds utilized by companies who do business with odious terrorist-sponsoring reginies like those of Iran, Syria, Sudan and North Korea. In order to enable investors to make such a deterniination, however, fund managers should be expected to disclose these sorts of business dealings on the part of portfolio companies.

There is an old saying that "money makes the world go around." That is largely true. Nloney also makes terrorism possible-in some cases relatively little money, which is why it is so vital that we all do our part to deny economic transfusions to

terrorist sponsoring nations. It has been estimated that the costs to Al Qaeda of the

September ll:th attacks was only about $500,000. When a company does business in

a terrorist•sponsoring nation, they provide that nation with capital. At the very

least, that capital could potentially free up other resources for attacks on our

servicemen and women in Iraq or terrorist attacks on Americans around the world,

including in our own country.

If our state and local pension systems follow the South Africa niodel, they can

induce these firms to choose between their standing in the U.S. financial conimunity

and their partnerships with governments that threaten our national security aud

our lives. To be clear, the reason for taking such steps is not because the companies in question are doing anything illegal. Rather, it's because what they are doing is wrong. If past experience is any guide, most companies will choose to be with us and not with the terrorist sponsors. Divestment, or the threat of divestment, is the single most effective memls of persuading companies to abandon corporate activities that contribute signiticantly to the economic well being of the world's most dangerous regimes. In short, there are many reasons to divest terror. Knowing that doing so can help win the war on terror, who will fail to take this step?

The war isn't about balance sheets and income statements or expense ratios, dividend yields or total return. The war is about our survival. It's about the survival of our troops in the field and it's about the survival of our country.

When we give money to Iran tlirough foreign companies spending bitlions of dollars there, make no niistake about it: we're helping the eneniy. We're giving him the money he needs to build and buy weapons and train and arm terrorists. The same terrorists that are shooting at our friends and neighbors, hrothers and sisters, sons and daughters and mothers and fathers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Today, you have an opportunity to make history. You have an opportunity to lead this legislature, this state and, yes, this entire nation In waging a finnncial war on our terrorist eneniies. I implore you to do what is right and support this legislation. Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: System Administrator To: Announcements Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:56 PM SubJect: Undeliverable: Update on H.B. 151- Iran Divestment Bill

Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.

Subject: Update bn H.B. 151- Iran Divestment Bill Sent: 4/24/2007 5:54 PM

The following recipient(s) cannot be reached:

Announcements on 4/24/2007 5:56 PM The message reached the recipient's e-mail system, but delivery was refused. Attempt to resend the message. If it still fails, contact your system administrator.

53 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Lowe, Walt Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:12 PM To: Jones, Shannon Subject: H.B. 151 E-mail for Tonight

As you know, Representative Josh Mandel and I provided testimony last week to the Financial Institufions, Real Eastate and Securities Committee regarding our Iran Divestment Bill (I-IB 151). In addition, we dropped off to each office a fulsome 84-page briefing paper in advance of the hearing on the bill. As always; we are happy to answer any questions you may have.

Attached is the very compelling testimony from last week's hearing including:

2. Adam Sheer -- Mr. Sheer is President of Roosevelt Investment Group and was instrumental in the development of the first "terror free" index fund (The Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund). His testimony focused on how Wall Street has responded to the demand for terror-free products and services and dispelled the myth that investing terror-free will lead to lessoned returns. Mr. Sheer also spoke about Missouri's use of the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap fund and Nationwide's recent decision to offer it on their 401-k platform.

3. Christopher Holton -- Mr. Holton is vice president at the Center for Security Policy and his testimony focused on the moral considerations surrounding investments in foreign companies with active business ties in Iran. While our bill is primarily focused on the new catagory of risk defined by the Securities & Exchange Commission as "Global Security Risk," we appreciated his analysis on how this practice is dangerous and morally reprehensible.

Warm personal regards,

Shannon Jones

57 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Jones, Shannon Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:54 PM To: AIIMembers; AIIStaff Subject: Update on H.B. 151- Iran Divestment Bill Attachments: Debra Burlingame Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf; Adam Sheer Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf; Chris Nolton Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf

As you know, Representative Josh Mandel and I provided testimony last week to the Financial Institutions, Real Eastate and Securities Committee regarding our Iran Divestment Bill (HB 151). In addition, we dropped off to each office a fulsome 84-page briefmg paper in advance of the hearing on the bill. As always, we are happy to answer any questions you may have.

Attached is the very compelling testimony from last week's hearing including:

2. Adam Sheer -- Mr. Sheer is President of Roosevelt Investment Group and was instrumental in the development of the first "terror free" index fund (The Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund). His testimony focused on how Wall Street has responded to the demand for terror-free products and services and dispelled the myth that investing terror-free will lead to lessened retums. Mr. Sheer also spoke about Missouri's use of the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap fund and Nationwide's recent decision to offer it on their 401-k platform.

3. Christopher Holton -- Mr. Holton is vice president at the Center for Security Policy and his testimony focused on the moral considerations surrounding investments in foreign companies with active business ties in Iran. While our bill is primarily focused on the new catagory of risk, defined by the Securities & Exchange Conunission as "Global Security Risk," we appreciated his analysis on how this practice is dangerous and morally reprehensible.

Warm personal regards,

Shannon Jones

54 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Jones, Shannon Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:51 PM To: Jones, Shannon Subject: Update on H.B. 151-Iran Divestment Bill Attachments: Debra Burlingame Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf; Adam Sheer Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf; Chris Holton Testimony- April 19 2007.pdf

As you know, Representative Josh Mandel and I provided testimony last week to the Financial Institutions, Real Eastate and Securities Cornrnittee regarding our Iran Divestment Bill (HB151). In addition, we dropped off to each office a fulsome 84-page briefing paper in advance of the hearing on the bill. As always, we are happy to answer any questions you may have.

Attached is the very compelling testimony from last week's hearing including:

2. Adam Sheer -- Mr. Sheer is President of Roosevelt Investment Group and was instrumentai in the development of the first "terror free" index fund (The Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund). His testimony focused on how Wall Street has responded to the demand for terror-free products and services and dispelled the myth that investing terror-free will lead to lessened rethmis. Mr. Sheer also spoke about Missouri's use of the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap fund and Nationwide's recent decision to offer it on their 401-k platform.

Again, thank you for the opportunityto share this with you. Both Representative Mandel and I look forward to working with you to ensure passage of this important measure. Investing in foreign companies who do business in Iran is risky to taxpayers and pension owners and it is wrong. It rnust be stopped.

Warm personal regards,

Shannon Jones

55 Kohihorst, Dusten

From: Lowe, Walt Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:17 PM To: Jones,Shannort Subject: H.B. 151 E-mail for Tonight Attachments: Debra Burlingame Testimony- April 19, 2007.pdf; Adam Sheer Testimony- April 19, 2007.pdf; Chris Holton Testimony- April 19, 2007.pdf

As you know, Representative Josh Mandel and I provided testimony last week to the Financial Institutions, Real Eastate and Securities Committee regardingpur Iran Divestment Bill (14B151). In addition; we dropped off to each office a fulsome 84-page briefing paper in advance of the hearing on the bill. As always, we are happy to answer any questions you may have.

Attached is the very compelling testimony from last week's hearing including:

2. Adam Sheer -- Mr. Sheer is President of Roosevelt Investment Group and was instrumental in the development of the first "terror free" index fund (The Roosevelt Anfi-Terror Multi-Cap Fund). His testimony focused on how Wall Street has responded to the demand for terror-free products and services and dispelled the myth that investing terror-free will lead to lessoned retums. W. Sheer also spoke about Missouri's use of the Roosevelt Anti-Tenor Multi-Cap fund and Nationwide's recent decision to offer it on their 401-k platform.

3. Christopher Holton -- Mr. Holton is vice president at the Center for Security Policy and his testimony focused on the moral considerations surrounding investments in foreign companies with active business ties in Iran. While our bill is primarily focused on the new catagory of risk defined by the Securities & Exchange Comniission as "Global Security Risk," we appreciated his analysis on how this practice is dangerous and morally reprehensible.

Warm personal regards,

Shannon Jones

56 Prepared Statement of Debra Burlingame Co•founder, 911 Families for a Safe & Strong America before the Ohio House of Representatives Committee on Ftinancial Iinstitutions, Real Estate and Securities Re Iran DivesttnenYBill April.19, 2007

Chairinan Widener, Ranking member Budish, and distinguished cotnmittee members:

I come here with the perspective of an ordinary citizen whose family has experienced the large-scale destruction of terrorism on a personal level. On the morning of September 11, 2001, when my brother was suddenly and brutally taken from us, I was asked over and over by family, fiiends, co-workers and complete strangers, "What can I do?" People were not content to sit and watch the horror unfold in front of them on their television screens. They wanted to take action. And they did. In those fust terrible days, weeks and months after 19 terrorists crashed four commercial airliners into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, PA, we heard the question, "What can I do?" asked and answered by millions of Americans all over the country.

The day after the attacks, a volunteer at Ground Zero frantically called her husband, a lawyer who worked in Midtown Manhattan, telling him to get ice for rescue workers. Their eyes were swelling shut from exposure to pulverized glass and concrete. He did, supplying 20 tons a day for 9 weeks, as well as raising the money to pay for it. When news got out that hot steel was melting the soles of rescue workers' boots, niassive shipments of boots appeared like magic at the site. On their own initiative, citizens assessed the needs, pooled their resources and did what they could, supplying water, food, first aide, around the clock for several weeks. Ironworkers, told to go home on 9/11 came back the next day and stayed for 9 mos. A large village of relief workers sprang up overnight at the piers on the west side. Another appeared at the Pentagon. The same round-the-clock vigil of search and rescue was going on there.

Ohioans can be proud of their response to the crisis. The Ohio Task Force I Urban Search and Rescue unit, a 74-person team of volunteer firefighters, police officers, engineers, and doctors mobilized in Columbus on the morning of 9/1. They anived at Ground Zero within 24 hours with two tractor trailers full of gear and four canines.

In Athens, Ohio a college student named Bryan Randolph called his mom and told her he wanted to dropped classes to help in New York. She told him, "I think you should go," Bryan made four trips to Ground Zero over a period of several months, eventually starting the group, Ohio Students United for New York. In Akron, a certified counselor named Karen Soyka immediately understood the severe trauma thiit victims, survivors and resctie workers would be experiencing. After trying and failing to get through to authorities, she finally just got in her car and drove to New York on her own initiative, connecting with Red Cross workers in Brooklyn;Rescue tearns at Ground Zero were working around the clock in dangerous conditions amidst unspeikable human camage. Ms. Soyka counseled 2,000 of thern in her first week at the site.

Those who didn't get in their cars opened their wallets, donating unprecedented amounts of money to the relief effort. Others sewed quilts and sent teddy bears to comfort the families of the victims. As a 9/11 family member who received one of those quilts, I can tell you that it made a difference. Citizens made a difference. Ground Zero was cleared of 1.8 million tons of concrete and steel in 9 months. At the Pentagon, the equivalent of four buildings were destroyed. Construction workers and tradesmen came from all over the United States, suspending industry rules to work around the clock, seven days a week. A four yearjob was completed in one vear. That was how those individuals answered the question, "What can we do?"

I believe that the Ohio firefighters and police who put their lives on hold to rush to the aid of their fellow human beings on 9/11 would be horrified to know that hundreds of millions of dollars in their retirement pension funds is invested in foreign companies that do business with Iran. As our government, the United Nations, the Intemational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the world community are urgently stepping up pressure to contain President Ahmadinejad's stated nuclear ambitions, the hard-earned money of Ohio's law enforcement community is undermining economic efforts to leverage Iran into ceasing its nuclear program.

I believe the teachers of this state would be shocked to learrt tliat, according to the analysis of the independent Conflict Securities Advisoiy Group (CSAG), they own shares in 124 foreign companies that are taking advantage of a loophole in the law which prohibits U.S. lirms from doing business with Iran. I think they would be deeply disturbed to know that a whopping $3.8 billion dollars of the Ohio State Teachers Retirement System is invested in foreign companies which are enabling Attrnadenijad's support of the terrorist Hamas and Hezbollah

I wonder how manv of Ohio's public employees whose sons and daughters in the U.S. military are deployed in the Middle East know that their pension fund has invested $3.9 billion dollars in foreign companies that are propping up the very govemtnent that is working to destabilize that region of the world. Until its nuclear program was disclosed in 2003, Iran worked on it in secret for 18 years. According to a recent report in the New York'rimes, intelligence agencies and nuclear experts here and abroad estimate that Iran is 2 to 10 years away frorrt having the means to make a uranium-based bomb, and this has touched off a new arms race in the region.

I believe that Ohio's fiTefighters, police, taachers and public employees, like all of us, want to know; "What can we do to stop this?"

With fifty percent of the world's capital invested in American capital markets or owned byAmeriean investors, we can use our dollars to negotiate with Iran from a position of strength. America's voices--as investors--count for something. In the last few months, three major multi-national companies that were doing business in Iran have pulled out: UBS, Credit Suisse and Daimler-Chrysler. This is proof that these companies do have to choose and that they don't want to be on the wrong side of this issue.

I sincerely hope that Ohio will join Missouri and Illinois and pass this bill with all deliberate speed. We know that 81% of the respondents in the Luntz-Maslansky poll said that pttblic pension funds "definitely should not" invest in companies that do business with countries that sponsor terrorism. In addition to popular support for this comnion sense bill, Ohio's fund managers have a fiduciary duty to eliminate the global secndty risk that thcse investments represent. The bill's sponsors have shown that pensions systems have simply overlooked this issue. They are now oo notice, but bureaucracies are notoriously slow-moving. This bill will create the legal authority ordering them to reduce this risk.

It is significant to tne that the first successful Divest Tetror program was initiated in the state of Missouri, that Illinois followed suit and that legislators here in Ohio have sponsored this strong divestment bill. These states represent the heartland of our country. It was the heartland that saved us from despair on 9/11 when we in New York and Washington were on our knees. It is the heartland whose sons and daughters are doing most of the heavy lifting in our military. It is not surprising at all to me that the heartland is leading the way with divestment, giving our government and the intemational community the clout they need to send Iran's leaders a clear, unequivocal message. Applying economic pressure is something we, as citizens frustrated and concerned for our children in an increasingly dangerous world, can do without firing a shot, or shedding a drop of blood. For this reason, I believe that once institutional investots demand that the market create terrorism-free indexes, private investors will also opt to divest.

Finally, I'd like to close with a personal story. On the morning of 9/11, shortly after seeing those two planes hit the twin towers, I leamed that my brother's plane had also been hijacked and that he and his passengers and crew had suffered the same fate. I really didn't know what to do. I couldn't help my brother. I was miles away from home. Like everyone else, I was in shock, desperate to know, "What can I do?" As you may recall, the stock market never opened that morning. It remained closed for the rest of the week. It was clearly evident on that Tuesday morning, that Bin Laden and his murdering crew had deliberately targeted the World Trade Center because it was a symbol of America's economic power. They rejoiced at bringing dowti those buildings, but what they were really aiming to do was to bring down the American economy. As we know, the financial markets and certain industries--aviation, tourism, insurance--did take an economic hit, hut eventually rebounded.

But on that day, there was great concem that the market would collapse alopg with those. towei-s, or drop so precipitously that it rnight create a cascade of business failures. People were fearful of what would happen when the mtirket opened on the followiag Monday. Would it hold? And so, with my dear brother gone, my city in ruins, the Pentagon burning and a commercial airliner reduced to small pieces in a Pennsylvania field, I did the only thing I could think of to help my country. t called a broker and told him to put every penny I had in the market when it opened on Monday morning. Everybody understood what was at stake. In an act rich in symbolism, it was police and firefighters, who had lost 406 of their brother firefighters and officers, who rang the opening bell, including an officer whose search and rescue dog had been erushed to death when the south tower fell. The market did drop, but most people did not bail. Americans held on.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is a moral imperative here. This is who were are. We are Americans. We are people who ask, "What can we do?" And then we do it.'I'hank you. Testimony from Adam Sheer, President of The Roosevelt Investment Group Dated 4-19-07

Mr. Chairman and la&es and gentleman of the committee, I am honored to be with you today. My name is Adam Sheer and I am the president of The Roosevelt Investment Group, an investment advisory company based in New York City: The firm was founded in 1971 by a descendant of President Theodore Roosevelt and currently manages $1.2 billion for private clients and institutions. We itivestportfolios in domesdc equities and global fixed income securities. Our firm currently manages the Roosevelt Anti-Terror Multi-Cap Fund (the Fund) which to our knowledge is the only fund available to retail investors that actively avoids companies thathave ongoing relationships with countries that our State Department deems as terrorist sponsoring.

In 2001, our firm decided to start a mutual fund which would primarily mirror our equity approach. Our intention was not to market a mutual fund to the world, but to offer to advisory clients our portfolio management should they have smaller accounts that were not big enough to meet our minimums. This way we could service them in a cost effective way for the firm.

In late 2004, one of the shareholders asked me if we invested in companies that had ongoing relationships with countries that our State Department claimed were terrorist sponsoring nations. I had not heard of "tetror-free" investing and he referred me to www.divesttetror.ore and to www.conflictsecurities.com. I began a dialogue with the COO of Conflict Securities (CSAG), Adam Pener, which resulted in our firm hiring CSAG to review the portfolio and in April of '05 CSAG certified that the portfolio was "terror-free".

The initial implementation was seamless as the people at CSAG are easy to work with. They reviewed the pottfolio and pointed out which companies violated our criteria. It was then up to us as the investment advisors to dccide whether to sell- Thereafter, we would check the Moaitor (CSAG's product) beforc making any purchases. CSAG sends us updates to the Monitor and we check whether any of the companies in the portfolio have been found to be violators. If so, we make a decision to sell. The process has been easy and no additional cost has acctued to our shareholders as our advisory firm compensates CSAG.

Performance was outstanding before we purged the portfolio and has remained strong. From inception thi•ough March of '05, the Fund performed 14.4% per year. The S&P 500 returned 2.6%over the same period. Since April of '05, when the portfolio became "terroz free" through March of '07, the Fund had an annualized return of 13.43% vs. the S&P which was 11.79%.

As you may be aware, Treasurer Steelman of Missouri is a champion of "terror free" investing and has traveled across the country extolling its virtues. In late '06, Missouri asked UPromise, the firm that manages their 529 Plan, to conduct due diligence on the Fund. In December of '06, the State of Missouri elected to add the Roosevelt Anti-Teiror Multi-Cap Ftind to its adviser sold 529 Plan. We are told that the Fund will go live in June of '07. It is my understanding that Missouri is currently seeking to add a "terror free" international option. Our firm has teamed up with an intemational manager in an attempt to win the mandate.

Also in 2006, a stock broker from Smith Barney in York, PA decided that his clients should have the choice to invest "terror free". He was in the top 10% of Smith Barney brokers who sell 401(k) plans and he used his clout to convince Nationwide Financial here in Columbus to add the Fund on an exception basis which they did in November of '06. Since then, an influential Third Party Administrator of 401(k) plans in Harrisburg introduced us to senior people at Nationwide and convinced them to make the Fund available to all participants who utilize their plans. This went live on April 2nd of this year. Nationwide is extremely excited to offer a"terror free" option and they believe it truly differentiates them from their competition. We believe this will be a great channel of distribution for the Fund. Nationwide has asked for a suite of products and styles that are "terror free" to include target maturity funds. It is our intention to create them as we see demand rising. At this time we have not decided whether to build them "in-house" or to outsource.

The Fund is still small, but growing nicely. Today it sits with $17 million in assets. In April of '05 when the Fund became certified, the Fund had $6 million. In other words, the growth. has been over 180% in two years. While we have spent very little marketing this concept and nothing on public relations, we have received press from the New York Times, Barron's, the Wall Sr. Journal and others. If you would like copies of the articles, please let me know. Additionally, we are now available to be purchased at over seven brokerage houses to include Charles Schwab, TD Ameritrade, Pershing, Scottrade, E- Trade and LPL.

While I am hopeful that our Fund continues to grow and to bring value to its shareholders, I am convinced that thereis a market for "terror free" investing. In my experience, most people that I meet are not aware that they have invested in companies dealing with our enemies. Once they understand this, they are relieved to know there is a way to invest "terror-free" without sacrificing returns:

Roosevelt is an investment advisory firm that has extensive experience in maintaining a "terror-free" overlay that is more stringent that that proposed by the Iran Divestment Bill. Despite this more stringent screen, we have seen no discenable impact on performance related to "terror-free" certification. DIVEST TERROR TESTIMONY BEFORE THE OHIO GENERAL ASSEMBLY

19 APRIL 2007

Christopher Holton

Mr. Chairman; members of the Conimittee; over the last several years since the

terrorist attacks of September 11lh, 2001, your friends and neighbors, sons and

daughters, brothers and sisters, and fathers and mothers from Ohio have played a

large role in defending America in the global war on terrorism. Citizen-soldiers of

your state National Guard have served gailantly in units such as the 37`h Infantry

Brigade Combat Team, the 612'n Engineering Battalion, the 1215t Air Refueling

Wing, the 123Id Air Control Squadron, the 178"' Fighter Wing, in deployments to

Afghanistan, Iraq, and other theaters of operation as part of the war effort.

Strangely enough, at the same time, according to the most recent publicly available

research, the Ohio Public Enipioyees Retirement System was invested in 102 foreign

companies doing business in Iran-a country on the U.S. State Department's list of

terrorist sponsoring nations. In fact, Iran has been described by our State

Department as "the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorism. " The Ohio State

Teachers Retirement System was invested in 121 companies doing business in Iran.

The Ohio Police and Fire Pension Fund was invested in 63 companies doing business

in Iran. Finally, the School Employees Retirement System of Ohio was invested in

48 companies doing business in Iran.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am a Vice President with the

Center for Security Policy, a non-profit organization whose mission is to promote peace through strength. The Center launched the Divest Terror campaign to

enipower Americans to play a significant financial role in the war on terrorism.

Many Americans havewondered what they can do to support the war on terrorism.

We can all do more than just wait passively for another attack-perhaps against

people we love or even in one of our communities, or those of other Americans.

The state of Ohio, starting with you, the members of the General Assembly, can

make a difference and possibly even diminish our enemies' ability to conduct

terrorist attacks.

Ainerica's leading public pension funds, including those right here in Ohio, are

invested in publicly traded companies that do business with terrorist-sponsoring

regimes-providing those regimes with vital resources. Cutting off such business

could hurt our enemies in material ways. The Top 100 U.S. public pensions hold in

portfolio stock of such companies worth roughly $200 billion. This helps those

companies-the vast majority of which are foreign-owned-to do upwards of $73

billion of projects in countries like Iran, Sudan, Syria and North Korea.

I am not suggesting that the trustees, managers, advisers or participants in any of

our public pension systems are intentionally supporting terrorism, or the nations

that our State department says sponsor terrorism, but the Center does mean to call

attention to the fact that millions of American investors are unwittingly and

unintentionally indirectly supporting terrorist-sponsoring regimes in Iran, Syria,

North Korea and Sudan by sending state employees' hard-earned investnient dollars to companies that do business with them. 0 Typically, these companies end up helping state sponsors of lerror in as many as four ways:

1. First of all, doing business with terrorist regimes gives them morat cover. It

Sends the signai that they are open for business.

2. Secondly, companies help terrorist regimes through the oil and gas business,

providing a windfall for terrorist nations. For instance, as reported by the

Canadian-based Middle East Newsline, Iran projects to garner $35 billion in

oil revenue in the current year. According to our Department of Energy,

sonie 40% to 50% of Iran's overall budget is paid for from oil and gas

revenue. Much of this revenue may be spent for "legitiinate" purposes. But at

least some of it is diverted to enabling terrorism, as well as building up

military forces. There is a reason that the State Department calls Iran the

world's largest and most active state sponsor of terrorisni.

3. Third, companies are giving terrorist sponsors liigh technology. Even

technology that is supposed to be used for civilian purposes can have

dangerous niilitary applications. For instance a device called a lithotripter is

used medically to sniash kidney stones, but they are also an important

component in triggers for nuclear weapons. One area of particular concern

are vast telecommunications projects. Fiber-optic cables help countries

communicate better. But those same cables provide hardened command and

control systems to military forces. In September 2001 the Washington Post

reported that fiber-optic cable obtained for communications purposes by

Saddam IIussein had been used by Iraq to upgrade its anti-aircraft system- at a time when U.S. pilots were patrolling the no-fly zones over Iraq and

getting shot at on a routine basis.

4. Finally, Banks and other companies also assist terror-sponsoring regimes by

making loansor underwriting business activities. Money is the most fungible

of commodities. Once inside notoriously secretive and brutal regimes, it can

be diverted to what ever purpose the regime may wish.

Could these countries' governments continue to provide safe haven, arms, training,

intelligence and financial assistance to terrorist organizations absent the

wherewithal provided by these business partners? Who knows?

We do know, however, two things:

(1) Twenty years ago, a U.S.-led campaign of shareholder activism denied South

Africa's apartheid regime the West's corporate life support upon which its economy

heavily depended. When public pension funds, college and university endownients

and other institutional and private investors divested companies that did business in

South Africa, change occurred there-resulting first in the dismantling of officially sanctioned racist policies and then in the fall of the government itself.

(2) Up to now, Iran and other rogue nations who sponsor terror, have not had to choose between supporting terror and garnering billions froni Western companies and their investors. All other things being equal, they can expect to continue to benefit froni the latter, even as the proceeds help them enable terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and Hezbollah, who have conibined to murder thousands of U.S.

citizens.

There has never been a more appropriatetime to apply to the terrorist sponsors the

divestment campaign techniques that proved so effective in South Africa-and, for

that matter, with respect to bringing about change on such issues as cigarette

smoking, global warndng and so-called "sin" stocks.

Terrorist organizations cannot exist without nation-states to provide them with safe

haven, training, weaponry, food, water and logistical support. Since 1979 our State

Department has identified those countries that sponsor terrorism. Amoog the

countries on that list: Iran, Syria, Sudan and North Korea.

Iran is the most blatant example. Oil-rich Iran is called by our State Departinent in

its report "Patterns of Global Terrorism" the most active state sponsor of terrorism

in the world. Iran is the main sponsor of Heabollah, the Jihadist group that killed

the 241 Marines in Beirut back in 1983. The 9-11 Commission reported that Iran

also has extensive ties to Al Qaeda. In sworn testimony our Defense Secretary and

CIA Director both said that Iran is largely behind the insurgency in Iraq.

Meanwhile, Iran has an active ballistic niissile program and a well-documented

nuclear weapons program.

Perhaps some of you inay be wondering why you are being asked to address what appears to be a foreign policy issue, or at least one in which the federal government should have jurisdiction. This is not actually the case. Federal authorities have deemed it inappropriate for ihem to take action in this matter. When asked to create a federal list of prohibited investments based on U.S. national security concerns, Securities and Exchange Commission Deputy Director Shelly Parratt

stated, "It would be inappropriate for us to publish a list of companies whose

securities might be deemed to involve terrorism-related investment risk without

publishing correspondinglists for every other possible type of financiai riskP The

coinpanies-most of whom are foreign-owned and operated-are able to do

business legally in countries that sponsor terrorism. Accordingly, state investments

in these companies are also legal. That does not mean, however, that such

investments are ethically-sound. Legality also does not denote that these investments

are in the financial interests of your state's employees and taxpayers.

For these reasons, the Federal government has correctly taken the position that the

responsibility for choosing to hold such companies' stock lies solely with the

investors, the states and their public pension systenis. Perhaps the federal

government's position was best explained in a letter written by the then state treasurer of Arizona, David Peterson, to the state treasurers of the other 49 states:

"To understand the government's position, it is important to clarify what global security risk is and is not. Global security risk is not, as some pension system administrators have suggested, related to companies that are directly aiding and abetting terrorists. Such companies have been identified and made public by the

U.S. government and it is already illegal for U.S. investors to own their shares.

Global security risk is related to those companies that are legally doing business in and with terrorist-sponsoring states-not terrorist organizations. Due to the legality of these corporate operations, the federal governnient's position of not providing a list of such global security risk-exposed companies has been clear. I point to the

comments of Treasury Department spokesman Griffen Taylor, who stated that

globatsecurity risk is not a question of regulation, but of policy, and we would leave

that for the states to decide. In making this observation, Mr. Taylor underscores

that it would be inappropriate for the U.S. governntent to single out U.S. and

foreign companies based solely on the fact that their legal, commercial activities

may put their stock values at risk. To summarize the federal government's position:

(i) The SEC has ruled that legal activities in countries that sponsor terrorism can be

material to the investor; (ii) It has further determined that, like other risk factors, it

is the responsibility of the investor, pension fnnds and nianagers to identify and

assess companies that may be at risk, as long as those companies are not directly

supporting terrorism; ( iii) In those cases when a company has broken the law or

directly supported terrorism, the government would alert the entire investment

community that investments in such a company would be illegal."

The federal government's position places the onus squarely on the shoulders of our

state pension systems and their asset managers, wluch leaves elected officials such as

yourselves as the means by which we can require that nianagers identify companies

that do business in and with state sponsors of terrorism and then stop this

repugnant practice.

This is a policy issue for the states to decide. And virtually every state pension plan

has investinent policies. Some have what are referred to as "socially responsible" investment policies, whereby they do not invest in companies that are in the tobacco business, for instance. There are proposals in at least one state to divest companies that contribute to global warming. One state divested the stock of a military

contractor because its personnel worked at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The state

of Montana divested French companies after that nation did not support the U.S. in

the U.N. with regard to Iraq.

But the most successful and famous divestment campaign involved South Africa in

the 1980s. A sense of investor responsibility, that started with public pensions and university endowments, gave rise to an extraordinary campaign that helped end the racist South African policy of apartheid. At the time, companies that did business in

South Africa were doing so legally; pension systeni investments in such companies broke no federal or state laws. Despite the legality of such investments, state officials began to demand that their state public pension systems and university endowments divest from companies that had business activities In or with South Africa. In the end, 24 states and 71 cities adopted legislation-over the strenuous objections of many public pension systems-that banned partially or completely investments by such systems and public universities in companies doing business with the apartheid regime. Despite the best efforts of stridently opposed public pension funds, the legal authority for states to legislate such investment restrictions was subsequently upheld by the Congress and in a number of cases by state and federal courts. Moreover, the

South Africa divestment campaign showed that using state investments to advance an ethically-sound position can be nianaged without undermining the tiduciary responsibility of pension funds to protect and grow employees' assets.

So, America already has so-called "socially responsible" investing. What we now need is security responsible investing. It has been suggested that just because a company or subsidiary has a business tie to a country on the State Department's terrorism list does not mean that it is in some wayaiding and abetting our enemies. In other words, that it is a faulty premise that doing business in these countries contributes to the coffers of terrorists.

Oh really? Let us take the case of Iran. According to the State Department and the

CIA, Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism In the world.

It has long been recognized that discouraging business activities in Iran could diminish the Ayatollahs' ability to sponsor terrorism and fund expensive nuclear and missile programs. Way back in 1996, Clinton administration Undersecretary of

State Peter Tarnoff stated it clearly when he said: "A straight line links Iran's oil income and its ability to sponsor terrorism, build weapons of mass destruction and acquire sophisticated armaments. Any government or private company that helps

[ran expand its oil must accept that it is contributing to this menace."

Moreover, the issue is not simply whether a conipany held in portfolio is directly enabling terror. Even in cases where such a causal link cannot be established from publicly available sources, I believe that public pension beneficiaries and investors may not wish to have their funds utilized by companies who do business with odious terrorist-sponsoring regimes like those of Iran, Syria, Sudan and North Korea. In order to enable investors to make such a determination, however, fund managers should be expected to disclose these sorts of business dealings on the part of portfolio companies.

There is an old saying that "money makes the world go around." That is largely true. Money also makes terrorism possible-in some cases relatively little money, which is why it is so vital that we all do our part to deny economic transfusions to

terrorist sponsoring nations. It has been estimated that the costs to Al Qaeda of the

September I1th attacks was only about $500;000.'When a company does business in

a terrorist-sponsoring nation, they provide that nation with capital. At the very

least, that capital could potentially free up other resources for attacks on our

servicemen and women in Iraq or terrorist attacks on Americans around the world,

including in our own country.

If our state and local pension systems follow the South Africa niodel, they can

induce these firms to choose between their standing in the U.S. financial conimunity and their partnerships with governments that threaten our national security and our lives. To be clear, the reason for taking such steps is not because the companies in question are doing anything illegal. Rather, it's because what they are doing is wrong. If past experience is any guide, most companies will choose to be with us and not with the terrorist sponsors. Divestment, or the threat of divestment, is the single most effective means of persuading companies to abandon corporate activities that contribute significantly to the economic well being of.the world's most dangerous regimes. In short, there are many reasons to divest terror. Knowing that doing so can help win the war on terror, who will fail to take this step?

When we give money to Iran through foreign companies spending billions of dollars there, make no niistake about it: we're helping the eneniy. We're giving him the money he needs to build and buy weapons and train and arm terrorists. The same terrorists that are shooting at our friends and neighbors; brothers and sisters, sons and dauighters and motheFs and fathers in Iraq. and Afghanistan.

Today, you have an opportunity to make history. You have an opportunityto lead this legislature, this state and, yes, this entire nation in waging a tinancial war on our terrorist enemies. I implore you to do what is right and support this legislation. Koh[horst, Dusten

From: Richard Johnson [deerhunter2 [email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 6:05 PM To: District67 Subject: Oppose Sub. H: B. 1511

Richard Johnson 7276 CountryWalk Dr. Carlisle, OH 45005-7905

June 7, 2007

The Honorable Shannon ]ones Ohio House of Representatives 77 S. High St. Columbus, OH 43215-6111

Dear Representative Jones:

As you know, Sub. H.B. 151 requires the state's five retirement systems, including SERS, to sell selected investments in foreign-based companies that do business in Iran and Sudan.

This legislative mandate could cost SERS millions in the short-term, and even more every year in lost opportunity costs.

With the system spending well over $220 million dollars a year on health care, the losses would impact SERS' ability to pay health care benefits.

I urge you to vote against Sub. H.B. 151 because:

(1) the money in the trust fund belongs to SERS members and retirees - SERS has a fiduciary duty to always act in the best interests of its members and retirees;

(2) there will be significant costs of complying with the mandate, costs borne by the SERS membership and not the public; and

(3) the bill sets a dangerous precedent of using the systems' money to achieve political or social agendas.

We are all concerned about terrorism, but placing the responsibility and financial risk of applying economic pressure to the governments of Iran and Sudan exclusively on the backs of Ohio public employees - and my health care fund - is unfair and an unbalanced approach.

The Ohio retirement system directors have suggested ways to improve the bill, including removing the mandate to divest and replacing it with an annual report on divestment progress. I hope you will consider this more prudent approach.

I hope I can count on you to make the right decision for Ohio's public employee retirees.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

47 Richard Johnson 5134201913

48 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Donna Perry [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 9:35 PM To: District67 Subject: Please Ask Speaker Husted Not to Compromise

Donna Perry 3923 Anthony Ln: Franklin, OH 45005-4507

June 8, 2007

The Honorable Shannon Jones Ohio House of Representatives 77 S. High St. Columbus, OH 43215-6111

Dear Representative Jones:

Every day, American soldiers and innocent civilians are being brutally killed in the war on terror. Their killers should not get the money to pay for their deadly deeds from retired Ohioans.

As a member of the Center for Moral Clarity, a grassroots organization, I am among Ohio's Christian citizens who support House Bill 151, the Sudan-Iran Divestment Act. Unfortunately, a compromise with the pension managers seems to have derailed the legislation.

On 7une 5, voting on the bill was postponed. Apparently, some of Ohio's elected leaders are willing to turn a blind eye to the proliferation of terrorism in exchange for making a profit on state investments. I understand that administrators of the state's five pension plans have a fiduciary obligation. They are charged with protecting the interests of their investors.

According to Scripture, though, compounded interest is not the master. I cannot ignore the moral issue of profiting from murder. Divestment as a way to protect national security and put the squeeze on Iran's nuclear program - which is a significant threat to Israel.

According to the reported compromise with the funds' managers, pension plans would get six months to divest half of their portfolios. However, do we want terrorists to get even a penny from Ohio? Please don't give it to them.

For the sake of national security, and the future of Israel, please urge House Speaker Jon Husted to bring H.B. 151 back to the House floor for a vote.

Sincerely,

Donna Perry

46 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Todd Davis [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 9:51 AM To: District67 Subject: Please Ask Speaker Husted Not to Compromise

Todd Davis 4185 Rose Marie Rd. Franklin, OH 45005-4848

June 9, 2007

The Honorable Shannon Jones Ohio House of Representatives 77 S. High St. Columbus, OH 43215-6111

Dear Representative ]ones:

Every day, American soldiers and innocent civilians are being brutally killed in the war on terror. Their killers should not get the money to pay for their deadly deeds from retired Ohioans.

On June 5, voting on the bill was postponed. Apparently, some of Ohio's elected leaders are willing to turn a blind eye to the proliferation of terrorism in exchange for making a profit on state investments. I understand that administrators of the state's five pension plans have a fiduciary obligation. They are charged with protecting the interests of their investors.

For the sake of national security, and the future of Israel, please urge House Speaker ]on Husted to bring H.B. 151 back to the House floor for a vote.

Sincerely,

Todd Davis

45 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Becky [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:53 AM To: District17; District67; District76 Subject: HB 151

Dear Sirs:

You are Proponents of HB 151 and I as a member of Ohio Public Empolyees System hereby request answers the following:

Have OPERS board members DIRECTLY invested our monies in Iran or Sudan??? If so, what companies, what amount of monies invested?? When???

How can it be legal to gainer control over monies that are private funds not state or federal????

Would any of you feel comfortable knowing your retirement income/health benefits could very well be in jeopardy as a result of HB 151 you sponsor????

I have been informed it will cost a billion dollars to divest----is this true???

Longterm, your Legislative actions will have a profond negative affect on many thousands of Ohio Retirees, is this justice to us???

Somehow, I have the mistaken idea you were voted into office to be GOOD STEWARDS over your respective districts.

Your attention in this matter will be appreciated.

Sincerely, Rebecca S. Craig President, PERI Chapter #39

1 Kohlhorst, Dusten

From: Marjorie Solan [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 1:07AM To: District67 Subject: Re: HB 151

As a medical doctor retiree and recipient of an OPERS pension, I believe HB 151 to be an ill-begotten piece of legislation that will do no good and cause a lot of harm to the pension system:

Historically, sanctions were seldom if ever effeetive. If this were such a good idea why hasn't the Federal government divested its pension funds, arid the State of Ohio stopped doing business with these "secret list" companies? Why hasn't the State of Ohio ordered the closure of any company in the state doing business or holding investments with these same companies? Have the sponsors and co-sponsors of this bill divested their own private holdings in any and all stock or mutual funds containing these companies? hi this global economy all of the above are holding "dirty money", which makes all the entities and individuals above hypocrites. This is dubious patriotism.

As Republicans and members of the Stow Republican Club, my wife and I are ashamed of the bullying and arrogant tactics of House Speaker Husted by insisting on a letter of intent from OPERS in 48 hours. OPERS is not guilty of criminal activity being tried in a court room. OPERS is to be the sacrificial lamb for this "feel good" bill whose real purpose is to accomplish political self aggrandisement.

For twenty some years I worked days, nights, and weekends frequently without much sleep. What right have the proponents of this bill to exploit my hard earned money? It is an outrage! Thousands of other Republicans (and Democratic) voters, in and out of the OPERS will be having the same thoughts.

George M. Solan, MD Marjorie A. Solan