Is Jay Ramras Invested in AGIA’s Failure? Audio from the Bob & Mark Show with Comments from Begich; UPDATE: RAM vs. Ramras on Eddie Burke

Rena Delbridge’s article last week in the Fairbanks News-Miner contained this interesting quote from Rep. Jay Ramras (R-Fairbanks, who, by the way, once made a sexist “joke” about Gov. Palin):

Regardless of when the state starts talking with producers, Rep. Jay Ramras, R-Fairbanks, said Gov. Sarah Palin has created a Gordian knot that places her exactly where former Gov. Frank Murkowski was — negotiating tax deals with oil companies.

Worse, he said, is the current alignment. Exxon was the least flexible in negotiating a low tax and is now within the administration through its partnership with TransCanada, Ramras said. Meanwhile the most “elastic” producers, BP and ConocoPhillips, are boxed out.

“We seem to have wandered a million miles away from the open and transparent Governor Palin ran under,” Ramras said.

He advocates a mediator who can gather the producers and the state in one room to hammer out terms. [emphasis added].

Oh, where to begin...

First, you will note that Ramras, who purports to be a Republican, is demanding that the government intervene in a private sector deal. Apparently, in Ramras’ world, allowing the private sector to do what it does best is not “open and transparent.” Is he now demanding that the government invade the board rooms of private corporations?

Second, you’ll notice the absurdity of his statement that “negotiating tax deals with oil companies” somehow means that the state is backtracking. No, negotiating was always part of the timeline. It’s part of the process. It’s as if he’s saying, “our travel plans are totally in limbo because we need to pack our bags.” Packing your bags is part of traveling. Negotiating fiscal certainty on taxes with producers is part of building a pipeline.

Finally, I would like to draw your attention to Ramras’ praise of BP and ConocoPhillips’ rival pipeline project, Denali. The AGIA license, you will recall, is held by TransCanada, which has recently partnered with Exxon Mobil to construct the large-diameter natural gas pipeline to the Lower 48. As Delbridge noted in her article:

The other two major producers, BP and ConocoPhillips, are pursuing a line called Denali — The Alaska Gas Pipeline.

Though Ramras voted in favor of AGIA, he seems keen on praising the rival pipeline. Why would he be undermining AGIA? Is it an honest difference of opinion?

Take a look at page 10 of Ramras’ financial disclosure form.

Ramras purchased 3,000 shares of BP on 8/18/08. They were reported to be worth $172,388.95.

Take a look at Ramras’ campaign donations. He got $1000 each from BP and ConcocoPhillips (and more from individuals associated with both companies -- see the update below).

During the last legislative session, Ramras introduced legislation that was aimed at undermining AGIA. If AGIA tanks, then BP and ConocoPhillips’ Denali pipeline project is the obvious winner for a future natural gas pipeline to the Lower 48.

His legislation appears to be a clear conflict of interest. He has a lot of money in BP. If BP and ConocoPhillips’ Denali pipeline beats the TransCanada Exxon pipeline, Ramras stands to make a lot more money.

BP and ConocoPhillips announced their rival Denali pipeline on April 8, 2008. Though Ramras voted for the AGIA legislation in May 2007, he voted against awarding the AGIA license to TransCanada on July 22, 2008. On August 18, 2008, Ramras purchased his BP stock. I wonder why?

Why isn’t anyone else interested in this? The self-described “ethics crusaders” in Alaska seem more interested in Sarah Palin’s jacket. A natural gas pipeline is the future of Alaska. Sarah Palin’s jacket is nothing.

According to the Legislative Ethics Act [AS 24.60.030 (g)]:

Unless required by the Uniform Rules of the Alaska State Legislature, a legislator may not vote on a question if the legislator has an equity or ownership interest in a business, investment, real property, lease, or other enterprise if the interest is substantial and the effect on that interest of the action to be voted on is greater than the effect on a substantial class of persons to which the legislator belongs as a member of a profession, occupation, industry, or region. [emphasis added]

AS 24.60.990 (b) states:

A person has a substantial interest in legislative, administrative, or political action if the person... will be directly and substantially affected financially by a legislative, administrative, or political action in a way that is greater than the effect on a substantial class of persons to which the person belongs as a member of a profession, occupation, industry, or region; [emphasis added]

By owning such a large value of BP stock, Ramras’ legislative action is arguably “greater” for him personally than any other “class of persons” (other than fellow shareholders) to which he belongs, such as members of a profession, occupation, industry or region. In other words, he can draft legislation which will benefit his home town of Fairbanks as a whole and in the process benefit his own restaurant business. And he can sponsor legislation that would benefit all hotel owners, himself included. However, with his considerable ownership of BP stock, it’s questionable whether he can vote on any oil and gas issue that could impact BP.

AS 24.60.990 (9) defines “legislative action” as:

...conduct relating to the development, drafting, consideration, sponsorship, enactment or defeat, support or opposition to or of a law, amendment, resolution, report, nomination, or other matter affected by legislative action or inaction; [emphasis added]

The introduction of a bill is therefore “legislative action” as defined in the Ethics Act. And, under the Act, the appearance of impropriety or a “conflict of interest” is an ethics issue.

AS 24.60.010 states:

The legislature finds that... a fair and open government requires that legislators and legislative employees conduct the public's business in a manner that preserves the integrity of the legislative process and avoids conflicts of interest or even appearances of conflicts of interest...[emphasis added]

All of this was readily available in the public record. We report, you decide.

UPDATE by RAM: Ramras’ other campaign contributors are:

Paul Laird, former BP spokesperson, current head of the Alliance of all oil and gas producers and their support

James Udelhoven, owner of a gas services company whose biggest clients are ConocoPhilips and BP

Richard Solie, a lobbyist for the Denali pipeline

James Bowles, President of ConocoPhilips

There is an obvious connection to BP or ConocoPhilips in all but one of the donations he received from the oil and gas industry. (The only other donation in this category was from Flint Hills Resources).

Coincidence? You decide.

UPDATE II by RAM: KWHL's Bob & Mark radio show discussed this article with Sen. Begich, and I called in later to discuss it with them. (Note: The first minute of my part was cut off, so the audio in the second clip starts with my explanation of how I came to write the article.) Take a listen:



UPDATE by Daniel: R. A. Mansour was on the Eddie Burke Show earlier this afternoon to discuss this article with Rep. Jay Ramras. Take a listen:



Here is the rest of the audio of Eddie's show today.

Update by JR: So, basically Ramras' argument is this:

1. C4P is "anti-Semitic" and therefore the facts presented above are not accurate. Ramras engages in a classic strawman argument here (and if the contributors to this site were anti-Semitic, why would we support somebody as pro-Israel as Governor Palin?).

2. An "outsider" did the research and reported on the story and therefore the facts presented above are not accurate. This is another strawman by Ramras. What do the facts of the report above have to do with where the writer is located? Do you take de Tocqueville less seriously because he was not American?

3. Ramras is a "citizen legislator" and therefore he does not have to live up to the same ethical standards as those in the executive branch. He fails to realize that there is a Legislative Ethics Act that he must live up to.

4. Ramras purchased the stock as a day trade and held onto the stock because he could not sell it for a profit. Ramras refused to acknowledge that by introducing anti-AGIA legislation and criticizing AGIA publicly, he was, in fact, increasing the chances that AGIA would fail; which would, in turn, increase the chances of the Denali project succeeding. If Denali succeeds, the value of Ramras' stock (BP) would increase.

5. On AGIA: Ramras claimed that AGIA encouraged the attraction of "weak applicants" to construct the pipeline. Ramras then agreed with host Eddie Burke that TransCanada, the winning applicant, is a great pipeline company. Ramras claims that BP and Conoco have been "boxed out," but says that Exxon is the best oil company in the world. Exxon (the best oil company) and TransCanada (the best pipeline company) have joined together on the AGIA project. So, what's the problem again, sir?

6. Ramras' strategy: He believes that if you speak really fast and really loud, you will win a debate.

7. Ramras' child-like behavior: Ramras referred to C4P as "creepy and shadowy." Ramras also referred to Eddie Burke as Governor Palin's "pimp." Through this comment, Ramras basically called Governor Sarah Palin a hooker.

Stay classy, Jay.

UPDATE III by RAM: I am grossly offended by Ramras' suggestion that this website has ever written anything remotely anti-Semitic. He based this ridiculous and offensive slander on an inside joke that had nothing whatsoever to do with Jews or Judaism.

As noted in "C4P: Who We Are and What We Stand For":

Some of you may be wondering what our numerous references to "bagels" are all about.

Our motto "Buy your own damn bagels!" dates back to an Associated Press article from January 30, 2009, in which Rep. David Guttenberg (D-Fairbanks) lamented:

"There were days when she walked around the building with (her daughter) Piper handing out bagels. I think those days are gone," he added with a touch of wistfulness.

"Buy your own damn bagels!" has become our shorthand for: "Man up! Grow up! Stop whining. Stop being an ankle-biter. Stop being a big-spending taxpayer mooch. Sarah Palin is the governor of your state, not your mother."

Ramras is throwing whatever mud he can at us because he can not dispute anything that I wrote. He bought a significant amount of stock, and he held onto it and introduced legislation that would benefit him financially because of the stock he held. He claims that it was no big deal. Well, then why didn't he do the right thing and sell the stock? Sen. Begich did.

He also makes the absurd claim that the Denali pipeline's success would not benefit him. That is utterly ridiculous. If the Denali pipeline succeeds against the AGIA backed pipeline, then BP's stock will certainly go up.

Earlier this month, an article in the Houston Chronicle by Tom Fowler and Kristen Hays noted:

ExxonMobil is in discussions with TransCanada to help it build a massive pipeline to move natural gas from the North Slope of Alaska to U.S. markets, according to a source familiar with the deal. The move could undermine a competing effort by ConocoPhillips and BP. [emphasis added]

Morningstar Stock Analyst Notes stated on June 12, 2009:

The partnership of Exxon and TransCanada is also likely in our eyes to scuttle the competing Denali project of BP and ConocoPhillips. Instead of going forward with Denali, we see BP and ConocoPhillips as more likely to join with Exxon, with whom they are also partnered in Point Thompson, to build a single pipeline that has the backing of the state government. This news does not impact our fair value estimates for any of these companies at this time. The next big hurdle for the Alaska Gas Pipeline won't come until 2014, when the project expects to receive approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. We'll continue to hold off counting possible cash inflows from the project until we're more comfortable that we'll live to see gas flows from the project, though we do include project development costs in our near-term capital expenditure estimates for TransCanada. [emphasis added]

It sure sounds to me as if there are clear winners and losers in which pipeline succeeds.

Ramras essentially admitted that he bought the stock, was hoping for a quick gain, but is holding it until the value goes up. That tells you three things:

1) The purchase was itself significant to him financially because he refused to sell it at a loss.

2) His promotional efforts for BP could in fact and would in fact lift the value of those shares substantially. If the Denali Project is successful, the share prices of the owner companies will increase dramatically.

3) He bought an equity position. This is not one stock out of 1,000 for an index fund. This is an individual equity stake.

The only argument he offered, other than to slander our website, was to shout, "You are not from here!" The FBI and Department of Justice team investigating Alaska politicians were also "not from there." Is Ramras arguing for the days of "anything goes in our legislature"?

I am an American who is interested in energy independence for my country. Alaska's natural gas pipeline to the Lower 48 is a crucial component in achieving that. Jay Ramras' behavior in undermining AGIA affects me just as it affects Alaskans.

UPDATE by VO: Just an offhand observation, but when I hear Jay Ramras complaining that this issue is insignificant, I'm reminded that he was complaining in legislative session that Governor Palin's wear of a jacket with an Arctic Cat logo was "provocative". But he always has been good at hypocrisy regarding the Governor - let's not forget the issue of legislative absences.

UPDATE IV by RAM: I am disgusted by the bias in this article at KTUU. I was interviewed by Jason Moore, but he never allowed me to rebut Ramras' absurd and slanderous accusation that this website is anti-Semitic. The article also fails to mention that Ramras introduced legislation during the last session that was aimed at undermining AGIA.

Is this the kind of "sweep it all under the carpet" reporting we can expect from the Alaskan media?

I did find this part of the KTUU article fascinating:

According to Ramras he currently holds 5,000 shares of BP stock, and says after the story was posted he went out and bought 5,000 shares of TransCanada stock to avoid any appearance of impropriety.

That right there is an admission that there was impropriety in owning so many shares of BP.

UPDATE V by RAM: This is the email I just sent to KTUU anchor, Jason Moore, who interviewed me earlier today:

Mr. Moore,

You did not get a response from me on this absurd allegation from Jay Ramras that my website is "anti-Semitic". You also misstated the purpose of my website.

Your piece in KTUU was absurdly unfair and biased.

I'd like a correction to the article removing Ramras' slanderous accusation that we are anti-Semitic.

His email address is jmoore@ktuu.com. Please email him and ask for a retraction.

This sort of slander should not be allowed to stand. We are being unfairly attacked for simply pointing out facts that are available in the public record.

VO: Better yet, e-mail his boss, KTUU News Director Steve McDonald, at stevem@ktuu.com.

UPDATE VI by RAM: I am hoping that Jason Moore will correct the story for his 10:00 p.m. broadcast. This is the second email I sent him:

It is outrageous that you allowed Jay Ramras to make allegations of anti-Semitism against us without giving us a chance to refute. It is completely ridiculous. We've posted audio of Ramras on the Eddie Burke show, where he states that his anti-semitism claim originates in a joke on our site about bagels.

The joke had nothing to do with Jews and everything to do with this ADN article in which Rep. Guttenberg was whining that Gov. Palin was no longer handing out bagels to legislators. It's an example of childish legislators who seem to think the governor is their Mom, and had nothing to do with anyone's religion or ethnicity.

Your article also failed to note that Ramras introduced legislation during the last legislative session that was aimed at undermining AGIA and it's licensee TransCanada.

Please help us by emailing Jason Moore and his boss, Steve McDonald, and ask that they correct their story.

Please help us defend the integrity of this website. Email Moore and McDonald.