The Magazine of Corporate Responsibility

Corporate Political Spending rss

A Growing Consensus on What to Do About Citizens United(0)

September 28, 2011

While the Supreme Court in Citizens United envisioned a world where shareholders could hold managers accountable for political spending, corporations have clever legal ways to hide their role in politics from the public. Over the past few weeks, a growing consensus among shareholders, corporate leaders and corporate law experts has emerged. All are urging increased transparency for corporate money in politics.

Full Story»

Fulfilling the Promise of ‘Citizens United’

The authors of a new research paper say the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision to permit corporations to spend unlimited sums to influence federal elections was premised on two yet-unfulfilled promises: Corporations would disclose their expenditures, and shareholders would be able to police such spending. Action by the SEC to require disclosure, they argue, might now “prove to be a favor” to businesses – and actually increase corporate valuations.

11 Reasons Why We Need the Shareholder Protection Act

The Shareholder Protection Act, introduced today in the U.S. Congress, addresses governance problems left in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United, which enables corporations to spend an unlimited amount of money on political advertising. The bill is modeled on the U.K. Companies Act, which requires prior shareholder approval of corporate political donations.

Home Depot Political Donation Resolution Results Reported

The shareholder resolution addressing political contribution policies at Home Depot Inc. was soundly defeated, the company said in an 8K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The filing said the resolution received 49.2 million for votes; against votes totaled 932.2 million, while there were 138.8 million abstained votes and 239.5million “broker non-votes.”


More in this category