Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 02:30 PM Apr 2013

The SEC Is In A Position to Deal a Major Blow to Citizens United

http://www.politicususa.com/sec-position-deal-body-blow-citizens-united.html


Most Americans embrace the idea of accountability in governance, and it is difficult to believe any taxpayer would not want to know exactly where and why their tax dollars are being spent, as well as what politicians stand to gain when they allocate funds. In the corporate world, shareholders and investors with any business or common sense would demand, and deserve, an accounting of where the corporation spends its money, and what stockholders can expect in return, because every expense reduces investors share of company profits. Over the past six months, there have been increasing calls for publicly traded corporations to start disclosing to shareholders where, and how much, of company assets are spent on political campaigns, and because of the secretive nature of corporate campaign spending, corporations, Republicans, and America’s largest trade associations are gearing up for a major battle to keep secret campaign donations secret.

In what could be a major blow to the unspeakably horrendous Citizens United decision, it appears it well may be the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that deals a body blow to secretive campaign donations that has polluted the electoral process in America. An alliance of shareholder activists and pension funds have swamped the SEC with calls to initiate a disclosure rule requiring publicly traded companies to report to shareholders all of their political donations. The prospective rule has united major business groups to oppose the SEC’s rule-making ability, and their Republican lackeys are already taking steps to halt any SEC action with legislation making it illegal for the SEC to issue regulations holding companies under their jurisdiction accountable to their shareholders. Three weeks ago, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, and the Business Roundtable sent a letter to CEOs of Fortune 200 companies martialing support to oppose the SEC and wage war against shareholder and investor resolutions and proposals demanding to know where corporations are sending their investments.

The coming battle will test the S.E.C.’s chairwoman, Mary Jo White, who faces fierce opposition from Charles and David Koch’s organization, Americans for Prosperity, as well as Republicans and U.S. Chamber of Commerce on behalf of corporate leaders. It is another sign that America’s shadow government, corporate America, will not tolerate their dominion being challenged or their coup d’état thwarted by a government regulatory agency, and House Republicans made the pre-emptive strike introducing legislation prior to the SEC issuing a new ruling. The proposal is the result of a petition with over a half a million commenters calling for corporate accountability to their shareholders who argue they have a right to evaluate CEO oversight over a company’s resources, but Republicans, the Chamber of Commerce, and Koch brothers will not allow it.

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

mick063

(2,424 posts)
1. Another battle that the one percent will win.
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 02:37 PM
Apr 2013

Don't get your hopes up.

The robber barons won't stop until we put a few behind bars. Unfortunately, our Attorney General has announced this will not happen any time soon, if at all.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
2. This is by far the best response to Citizens United.
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 02:39 PM
Apr 2013

Disclosure is a very good thing. Far, far better than attempting to limit the First Amendment.

tkmorris

(11,138 posts)
5. There has been no attempt to limit the First
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 02:45 PM
Apr 2013

Unless of course if you take the position that corporations are in fact people. I do not.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
8. Say Congress passed a law banning corporations from publishing books critical of election candidates
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 03:04 PM
Apr 2013

during the run-up to the election.

Should such a law be constitutional? Or would it violate the First Amendment?

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
11. It is not constitutional if you don't believe that corporations have the same rights as a person.
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 03:37 PM
Apr 2013

I do not believe in corporate personhood.

If a corporation wants to tell people about their products or services, no problem, that is part of what their existence is all about.

Example: A corporation cannot register to vote.

If they are 'persons' the right of the corporation is being denied.

Should they sue because they can't vote?

librechik

(30,674 posts)
4. Mary Jo White should get along just fine with those other corporate shills
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 02:43 PM
Apr 2013

I doubt anything real or effective will get done, though.Repubs (mostly, but Dems helped) watered down corporate crime statutes so much in the last 30 years, there's no way to prosecute them successfully, and no prosecutor wants to take a case he can't win.

JVS

(61,935 posts)
6. I don't see how publicly traded corporations are allowed to donate to politicians at all.
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 02:56 PM
Apr 2013

Dodge vs. Ford dictated that Ford had to run his corporation for a profit. Donating to various causes including politicians is money taken away from profit. Every cent they give away is stolen from shareholders.

CanonRay

(14,101 posts)
12. Wake me up when the SEC actually passes the rule
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 04:36 PM
Apr 2013

because they haven't done shit in years. The SEC has become particularly worthless and corporate owned. To say I have my doubts is putting it mildly. I hope they prove me wrong.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The SEC Is In A Position ...