Isakson Issues Statement On Nomination Of Rex Tillerson
Johnny Isakson has issued the following statement on the nomination of Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil, to be U.S. Secretary of State:
“Mr. Tillerson has an impressive background with unique experience and extensive knowledge of working in a global environment. I congratulate Mr. Tillerson on his nomination, and I look forward to meeting with him during the confirmation process to learn more about how he views the world and America’s national interests.”
The press release sent with the statement indicates that his hearings will be in early January. Traditionally, the Secretary of State is one of the first cabinet appointments taken up so that the US Government may have full diplomatic channels in place during a time of transition.
There will be pointed questions asked of Tillerson, many of which will be appropriate. Marco Rubio’s statements on Tillerson have been a bit more suspect. That’s fine. Advice and consent of the Senate should not be based on partisan grounds. It needs to be thorough and complete.
When word of Tillerson’s nomination began to leak over the weekend, I had brief text conversations with a friend of mine. He wasn’t impressed, whereas I was cautiously optimistic. I’ve actually met Tillerson, and had about a 20 minute conversation with him years ago at a wedding reception where he nor I knew many of the attendees.
It was during the post-Katrina oil price spike, when gas prices had crossed the then unthinkable $3/gallon range. At the time I was writing a bit on America’s need to be energy independent, so we had a few things we could talk about. I asked him what it was like to be the national bad guy with talk of “windfall profits” taxes swirling. He seemed to be used to it.
He then told me an anecdote of a high ranking U.S. Senator that demanded that he get gas prices under $2.50/gallon before the election. Tillerson’s reply was to ask him if gas got down to $2/gallon, would the Senator then help him get back up to $2.50?
Exxon didn’t increase drilling during that spike. They knew it was that – a spike. They operate on a fifty year plan. This allows them to not overreact during a crisis, creating an equal and opposite crisis on the other side. I can see this as a skill that is not only transferrable to Washington, but one that is sorely needed. One that may be especially needed in a Trump White House, where every negative report on the morning news is currently responded to via tweet.
What I see in his career is that he has dealt with leaders in almost every country where the U.S. has foreign policy issues. He’s been able to navigate his company successfully on the basis that for him to make a deal, everyone has to win. This IS diplomacy. It is also, again, a skill set sorely needed in U.S. foreign policy at the moment.
It appears concerns will be addressed directly by Senators such as Marco Rubio, and answers will be public for all to view and judge.
As for my friends on the left that are in mode of “But, Oil!” and “OMG, Russia!”, I doubt there’s much here for you. You likely have already quit reading and rushed to the comments, or moved on. That’s fine too. I’m willing to say I want Tillerson fully vetted, and do have concerns that Russia must be held in check.
But if your starting point is you believe that the man who bought oil from the Russians is more dangerous as Secretary of State than the one that sold them 1/5 of our uranium supply, your partisanship is showing. Russia has been a threat for a while. Whether you were mocking it in 2012, or ignoring it until now, I’m glad to have you finally considering that the world is still a dangerous place.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I won’t say I’m optimistic but I look forward to the confirmation hearings. On the plus side, cabinet members are legally prohibited from the kinds of interest conflicts Trump shrugs off, so at least he will be held to a higher standard where that’s concerned.
But who will hold him to it?
Wow, I can’t even come up with a Kevin Bacon linkage to this guy.
I will also patiently await the confirmation hearings, but yes, I think reservations that Exxon/Mobil has billions in contracts at stake in Russia that are currently in limbo because of sanctions is a valid concern. MH17, Syria, the elimination of democracy… Putin has been a bad boy and what with the hacking and such being bandied about the optics are simply not good.
So now you’re down with Clinton Cash and breitbart and the great uranium giveaway. What you believe is your business but you’ll have to excuse me in the meantime if I discount your recent calls for patient non-partisanship.
I would like to learn from Tillerson what he feels has affected his life beyond his career with Mobil. I’d like to know about his previous contacts with diplomatic, intelligence, and military people. Besides his dealings with Putin I’m interested in finding out more about Tillerson’s dealings with the Saudis.
Forbes is reporting that his Exxon stock amounts to $220 million. Which he would have to sell. Tax free.
No blind trust or whatever that means? Having other mind the portfolio? ‘Cause I can tell you he will not sell every share of stock in the only company he’s ever worked for.
Federal law disagrees with you Noway. Only the Pres and vice pres are exempt from divestment since there is conflict of interest verbiage for their offices under the constitution. Their is also some complicated division of property rules for assets owned singularly by a spouse that would apply in some federal cases. Example, the husband of the next Sec of Education may not have to sell off his assets in his families Amway fortune depending on how they are owned.
http://fortune.com/2016/12/14/trump-cabinet-picks-tens-millions-tax-defferal/
Ok. Is a bkind trust an option? Are you saying the Hilly liquidated all of her assets, too, before her time as Secstate? Don’t think so.
Owning Exxon stock would not be ‘blind’. The point is that he should not know what is owned in the trust, therefore there would be no way for him to use his influence to affect his holdings.
The Clinton assets were already in a blind trust; you know that whole 1993-2001 period and as a US senator…, plus The Clinton Foundation has no legal taxable asset for her to personally divest, they collect no money or pay to be personally taxed and it was technically the William J Clinton Foundation until 2013.
What they said.
Though Fortune is also reporting that unlike Goldman Sachs with its incestual government relationships providing for these things with their execs’ contracts, Exxon doesn’t have any provisions in their own for Tillerson. It will get complicated as at least 2/3 of Tillerson’s stock is deferred and while he receives its dividends it really doesn’t exist until 2025.
As seen in the Fortune article linked by Ellynn the cumulative tax savings for some of Trump’s nominees could run into 9 figures:
“Robert Willens, a Columbia Business School tax professor, predicts that the nominees’ total tax savings will probably amount to hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s a great thing for the nominees, they get to diversify their portfolios on a tax-free basis…”
Thanks to all for the info!
Good thoughts.
I remain deeply skeptical of a Trump presidency and most of what has come with it so far. I’m skeptical of Tillerson but appreciate Charlie’s thoughts here. Tillerson has done diplomacy of a sort for sure but, and maybe this is off-base, but there are a lot of other considerations for American foreign policy beyond business deals. I’m concerned about those other considerations.
Michael “Heckuva job” Brown had more government experience than most of these nominees.
I sure hope we don’t have a crisis to deal with anytime soon.