SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
January, 13 2016, 09:15am EDT
Contact:
Greg Williams, Communications Director
greg@jubileeusa.org / (o) (202) 783-3566 x101 (m) (443) 854-1405
Argentina Negotiates Debt Dispute with "Holdout" Hedge Funds
Argentina's new government begins negotiations in New York with groups that sued the country for more than $1 billion after the country defaulted on its debt in 2001. President Mauricio Macri took office in December and announced his intention to reach a settlement. The investor groups are known as "holdouts" because they refused to participate in Argentina's debt restructuring deals that 92 percent of investors accepted. US courts ruled Argentina could not pay the restructured debt holders unless it paid the holdout funds in full. Argentina refused and defaulted again in July 2014.
ARGENTINA
Argentina's new government begins negotiations in New York with groups that sued the country for more than $1 billion after the country defaulted on its debt in 2001. President Mauricio Macri took office in December and announced his intention to reach a settlement. The investor groups are known as "holdouts" because they refused to participate in Argentina's debt restructuring deals that 92 percent of investors accepted. US courts ruled Argentina could not pay the restructured debt holders unless it paid the holdout funds in full. Argentina refused and defaulted again in July 2014.
"Argentina's new government wants to put this dispute behind them so they can better access the markets again," said Eric LeCompte, executive director of the religious debt relief group Jubilee USA, which filed a brief to the US Supreme Court in the debt dispute. "Poor interpretations of US law by US Courts led to this moment."
The meeting includes Argentine Finance Minister Luis Caputo, representatives of the holdouts and court-appointed mediator Daniel Pollack. Pollack previously attempted to negotiate a settlement between the two sides.The holdouts include so-called "vulture funds" that are known to target countries struggling with financial crisis.
After the Supreme Court refused to hear Argentina's case in 2014, several groups promoted various solutions to ensure the precedent in the Argentine debt dispute wouldn't negatively impact other countries. The International Monetary Fund, United Nations, US Treasury and the largest consortium of banks and investors proposed or enacted ways to protect countries when restructuring their debt.
"Argentina is a good example of why we need to improve debt restructuring processes," noted LeCompte, who serves on UN expert groups that devise solutions to the kinds of crises that Argentina experienced. "As countries around the world deal with debt crisis, we need resolution processes that are transparent, fast, fair and orderly."
Jubilee USA Network is an interfaith, non-profit alliance of religious, development and advocacy organizations. We are 75 U.S. institutions and more than 750 faith groups working across the United States and around the globe. We address the structural causes of poverty and inequality in our communities and countries around the world.
(202) 783-3566LATEST NEWS
In 'Win for Reproductive Freedom,' North Dakota Judge Strikes Down Abortion Ban
"I look forward to a new future in North Dakota and hope our lawmakers will finally give up on their crusade to force pregnancy on people against their will," said one advocate.
Sep 12, 2024
Two days after Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump claimed that "every Democrat, every Republican, liberal, conservative" wanted the federal right to abortion care to be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, a North Dakota judge became the latest on Thursday to strike down a state-level abortion ban, saying it violated residents' constitutional rights.
"The North Dakota Constitution guarantees each individual, including women, the fundamental right to make medical judgments affecting his or her bodily integrity, health, and autonomy, in consultation with a chosen healthcare provider free from government interference," wrote Judge Bruce Romanick, a District Court judge. "This section necessarily and more specifically protects a woman's right to procreative autonomy—including to seek and obtain a previability abortion."
The near-total ban on abortion care will be officially blocked in the coming days, in a move that the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) said could ultimately help restore access for people across the Midwest, as abortion care is currently banned in South Dakota and heavily restricted in nearby states including Nebraska and Iowa.
Meetra Mehdizadeh, a staff attorney at CRR, which filed a lawsuit against North Dakota's ban in 2023, said the ruling "is a win for reproductive freedom, and means it is now much safer to be pregnant in North Dakota," but warned that Republican lawmakers who passed the law have already done damage to pregnant people in the state that will take time to reverse.
"The damage that North Dakota's extreme abortion bans have done cannot be repaired overnight," said Mehdizadeh. "There are no abortion clinics left in North Dakota. That means most people seeking an abortion still won't be able to get one, even though it is legal. Clinics are medical facilities that need to acquire doctors, staff, equipment—they can take years to open, like most healthcare centers. The destructive impacts of abortion bans are felt long after they are struck down."
CRR argued in the case that the ban was too vague for medical providers to determine when an exception would be allowed for a pregnant patient whose life or health was at risk.
"This left physicians who provided abortions with the threat of having to defend their decision in court if someone were to question the provider's judgment," said the group. "Violating the ban was considered a class C felony, punishable by a maximum of five years of imprisonment, a fine of $10,000, or both."
Among the plaintiffs represented by CRR was Red River Women's Clinic, which was North Dakota's sole abortion care provider until a prior ban forced it to relocate from Fargo to Moorhead, Minnesota, where abortion has remained legal following the U.S. Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade.
"Today's decision gives me hope. I feel like the court heard us when we raised our voices against a law that not only ran counter to our state constitution, but was too vague for physicians to interpret and which prevented them from providing the high quality care that our communities are entitled to," said Tammi Kromenaker, director of the clinic. "Abortion is lifesaving healthcare; it should not be a crime. I look forward to a new future in North Dakota and hope our lawmakers will finally give up on their crusade to force pregnancy on people against their will."
Since Roe was overturned in 2022, numerous women have shared stories of being denied abortion care after suffering complications—including some that were life-threatening.
Judges in states including Wyoming, Utah, and Montana have blocked abortion bans in recent years, and voters have rejected anti-abortion ballot measures and approved ones that support the right to abortion in states including Kentucky, Kansas, Ohio, and Michigan.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democrats Introduce Federal Bill to Make Climate Polluters Pay
"We all agree on a simple but powerful principle—that polluters should pay to clean up the mess that they have caused, and those that have polluted the most should pay the most," Sen. Chris Van Hollen said.
Sep 12, 2024
United States Sen. Chris Van Hollen and Rep. Jerry Nadler on Thursday announced the introduction of legislation that would require Big Oil firms to pay into a damages fund used to address the climate crisis.
The Polluters Pay Climate Fund Act, which Van Hollen first proposed in 2021, would levy charges on the largest companies that extract and refine fossil fuels in the U.S., based on a Superfund model. It would create a $1 trillion fund to "address harm and damages caused," with a significant proportion of the money spent on environmental justice in affected communities, Van Hollen said.
"We all agree on a simple but powerful principle—that polluters should pay to clean up the mess that they have caused, and those that have polluted the most should pay the most," Van Hollen said at a press conference.
Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media, indicated that the proposal was groundbreaking.
"We're thrilled to be supporting the first ever federal bill that would make polluters pay for climate damages!" Henn wrote on social media.
BIG NEWS: We're thrilled to be supporting the *first ever* federal bill that would #MakePollutersPay for climate damages!!
The Polluters Pay Climate Fund act would raise *$1 TRILLION* from Big Oil to help families & communities deal with climate impacts. https://t.co/wX6lMOTexh
— Jamie Henn (@jamieclimate) September 12, 2024
The new bill targets only the "heaviest hitters," as Van Hollen put it: companies responsible for at least 1 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions in the period between 2000 and 2022. The levies they face would be directly proportional to the amount of oil, gas, and coal extracted or refined, as determined by the U.S. Treasury and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
In addition to Van Hollen and Nadler (D-N.Y.), the bicameral legislation was also introduced by Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.). It has five co-sponsors in the Senate, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and more than a dozen co-sponsors in the House of Representatives, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Many state legislatures have considered "polluters pay" climate bills in recent years, and Vermont passed one in May. Van Hollen said a federal bill "would be a big, big step forward."
The bill has the backing of many dozens of environmental organizations around the country, several of which had representatives at Thursday's press conference.
"The fossil fuel industry has known about climate change for decades," Sara Chieffo, a vice president at the League of Conservation Voters, said at the event. "It's time they face the consequences of their deception and are held responsible for their actions that are destroying both lives and a livable, safe climate."
Phil Radford, Sierra Club's chief strategy officer, added that "for way too long, these companies have poisoned communities, spilled oil, polluted our air, caused all sorts of health problems, and gotten away with it."
"Today is an incredible moment where we are saying: No more," he said.
Advocates indicated that at least 40% of the funds would go toward environmental justice.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Obvious Conflict of Interest': Report Reveals 50+ US Lawmakers Hold Military Stocks
"It's abjectly terrifying that the personal benefit of any member of Congress is factored into decisions about how to wield and fund the largest military in the world," said one critic.
Sep 12, 2024
At least 50 U.S. lawmakers or members of their households are financially invested in companies that make military weapons and equipment—even as these firms "receive hundreds of billions of dollars annually from congressionally-crafted Pentagon appropriations legislation," a report published Thursday revealed.
Sludge's David Moore analyzed 2023 financial disclosures and stock trades disclosed in other reports and found that "the total value of the federal lawmakers' defense contractors stock holdings could be as much as $10.9 million."
According to the report:
The spouse of Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the ranking member of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, holds between $15,000 and $50,000 worth of shares in each of Boeing and RTX, as well as holdings in two other defense manufacturers. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas), another Defense Appropriations subcommittee member, holds up to $50,000 in the stock of Boeing, which received nearly $33 billion in defense contracts last year. On the Democratic side of the aisle, Sen. John Hickenlooper (Colo.) holds up to a quarter of a million dollars' worth of stock in RTX...
The most widely held defense contractor stock among senators and representatives is Honeywell, an American company that makes sensors and guiding devices that are being used by the Israeli military in its airstrikes in Gaza. The second most commonly held defense stock by Congress is RTX, formerly known as Raytheon, the company that makes missiles for Israel's Iron Dome, among other weapons systems.
All 13 senators whose households disclosed military stock holdings voted for the most recent National Defense Authorization Act, which, as Common Dreams reported, allocated a record $886.3 billion for the U.S. military while many lawmakers' constituents struggled to meet their basic needs.
"It is an obvious conflict of interest when a member of Congress owns significant stock investments in a company and then votes to award the same company lucrative federal contracts," Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, told Sludge.
"Whether or not the official action is taken for actual self-enrichment purposes is beside the point. There is at least an appearance of self-enrichment and that appearance is just as damaging to the integrity of Congress," Holman added. "This type of conflict of interest is already banned for executive branch officials and so should be for Congress as well. The ETHICS Act would justly avoid that conflict of interest by prohibiting members of Congress and their spouses from owning stock investments altogether."
Holman was referring to the Ending Trading and Holdings In Congressional Stocks (ETHICS) Act, introduced earlier this year by Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.).
In the House of Representatives—where the 2024 NDAA passed 310-118, with the approval of over two dozen members who own shares in military companies—House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul's (R-Texas) household owns up to $2.6 million in General Electric, Oshkosh Corporation, and Woodward shares. Rep. Dave Joyce (R-Ohio), who sits on the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, owns as much as $100,000 worth of Boeing and General Electric stock.
Other House lawmakers with potential conflicts of interest include Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, who owns Leidos shares worth as much as $248,000; Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), who owns up to $100,000 worth of RTX stock; and Rep. Patrick Fallon (R-Texas), a member of the Armed Services Committee who holds Boeing stock worth between $100,000 and $250,000.
"Every American should take a long, hard look at these holdings to conceptualize the scope of Congress' entanglement with defense contractors," Public Citizen People Over Pentagon advocate Savannah Wooten told Sludge. "It's abjectly terrifying that the personal benefit of any member of Congress is factored into decisions about how to wield and fund the largest military in the world."
"Requiring elected officials to divest from the military-industrial complex before stepping into public service would create a safer and more secure world from the outset," she added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular