Companies should NOT be contributing to political parties or movements at all. They are in business to generate a profit on their shareholders' investments, period!
Shareholders who have a political opinion which they wish to promote or support should do so out of their own resources.
The argument that the political environment is important to doing business is not sufficient to justify companies spending other people's money (shareholders) on political causes.
Onésimo Alvarez-Moro
See article:
The lobbying scandal rocking Washington has centred so far on corrupt relationships between lobbyists and legislators. But the issue is also giving new impetus to governance activists, who are increasingly demanding that big business do a better job of disclosing - and justifying - political donations.
A group of pension funds led by William Thompson, the New York City comptroller, is stepping up demands that six companies, including Wal-Mart and Chevron, disclose all direct and indirect political contributions to lawmakers and political parties.
The pension funds argue that incomplete disclosure may encourage executives to use company assets for objectives that are not necessarily shared by the entire company or its shareholders.
Mr Thompson's campaign on behalf of five New York City public pension funds would force the groups - which also include Southern Company of Atlanta, Union Pacific, AmSouth Bancorporation and Cinergy - to disclose all funds used for political contributions, the identity of the individuals who authorise contributions and the company's internal guidelines on political giving.
See full Article.
Posts
