Corporate Shareholder Protection Act
I decided to highlight some Cali issues, just to see if y'all have been following or find them interesting.
First, currently on the ballot is Proposition 75, which would prohibit unions from using dues for political purposes without obtaining a prior written consent from each member annually. Before I give you my side, I’ll wait for a response or two (to see if you even care about my little California issues).
Secondly, the Governor (who recently announced re-election and endorsed Prop 75) came out today in support of the “Corporate Shareholder Protection Act”, which prohibits corporations from "making political contributions or expenditures for political activities except with shareholders’ prior informed consent by means of majority vote and reports to shareholders." This measure has not qualified yet for the ballot and it appears the Governor "accidentally" endorsed this measure today, so he'll probably wiggle out of it and backtrack in the coming weeks.
5 Comments:
Hmmm... so, if I read things correctly, both unions and big corporations will be prevented from using their financial resources for political purposes. Interesting. On its face, it sounds like reform. I'm skeptical that, in practice, corporations could be kept from lobbying (or unions, for that matter). So maybe it's just Arnold trying to score points on both sides of the aisle?
Why the different standards for corporations and unions? If a union has to get permission from EVERY member before making a contribution, so should corporations have to get permission from EVERY shareholder. Or, make them both simple majority votes. How is this different than the McCain campaign finance reform bill? I thought that legislation put a cap on corporate contributions anyway.
I'm supportive of unions and believe their operating practices should not be restricted by the government. Unions are democratic organizations that act on behalf of their members and leadership can easily be replaced, especially at the local level. Union members already vote on their endorsements. Not every member agrees with where the money goes, but there are choices. (I'm against Prop 75 for many other reasons, including that it's a naked power grab by extremely conservative Republicans simply trying to weaken unions.)
On the other hand, corporate shareholders do not vote on who the corporation supports financially -- and most often, probably are unaware of political donations.
There's no provision in Proposition 75 to prevent corporations from giving. And the measure applies only to public employees unions - not all unions.
When the Anti-Tax advocated behind Prop 75 tried this in the past (Prop 226 in 1998) they lost. Union members voted against by more than 3 to 1. The people behind this are the same people behind repealing the estate Tax. Lew Uhler, who was the sponsor of the proposition is a friend of Grover Norquist's, and is chairman of the National Tax Limitation Committee. They want the teachers, healthcare workers, and public safety associations out of the way so they can pass broad cuts to services and make big tax cuts. It's not about protecting the rights of the members, it's about cutting his political opposition off at the knees.
As for McCain-feingold - it only covers federal elections, not California state elections.
Well said and informative... who made the last comment??
Post a Comment
<< Home