Association of Ameritech/SBC Retirees
Association of Ameritech/SBC Retirees Blue Bulletin - Vol. 2, No. 2     Posted 4/20/07

If you have trouble printing out this bulletin, check your browser page margin settings. You probably have page margins set too large which is cutting off the page.  Try this to correct the problem.  Open Internet Explorer, on the top line menu go to: "File" then "Page Setup", Be sure that page margins are set as follows:  "Top, Left, Right to 0.25", "Bottom to 0.5"  These margin settings should work for most inkjet and laser printers.
(April 19, 2007)
Proudly representing retirees from the new AT&T Midwest Region, SBC Midwest Region,
Ameritech, as well as the five Bell Companies in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin
 
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION CORRESPONDING TO OUR SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL!
 
Yesterday (Wednesday, April 18) House Resolution 1257 was debated by a Committee of the Whole on the floor of the US House of Representatives.  The ‘pro’ floor leader was Representative Barney Franks (D, MA).  The ‘con’ floor leader was Peter Roskam (R, IL).
 
Excerpts from Rep. Franks’ opening remarks:
 
This is a bill to further the workings of the capitalist system of the United States. It has one very specific provision. It says that the shareholders, the owners of public corporations, will be allowed to vote every year in an advisory capacity on the compensation paid to their employees who run the companies.
 
   Now, Mr. Chairman, some might think this is unnecessary. In a better world, it would be. But there is not now any clear-cut, uniform, legal right for the shareholders to get such a vote. Some corporations allow it, some do not. Some boards of directors allow it, some do not. In a recent case, the SEC ordered AT&T to allow such a vote, but it was because of certain circumstances (the AASBCR proposal –ed). There is no general principle that allows it.
 
   We do have, thanks to the Securities and Exchange Commission under our former colleague from California, Mr. Cox, a provision that I am sure many considered to be an intrusion into the private affairs of corporations, because without regard to the wishes of the corporations, the SEC under Chairman Cox has unanimously adopted rules that require corporations to put in the annual proxy form a chart of compensation for the top officials and an explanation of the theory of the compensation by which they are there.
 
   Understand that this is a decision by the SEC to require corporations to do what they would not otherwise have done, because it only applies to those who haven't done it.
 
   We add one simple fact here. The SEC has said that it does not have the power to go further and compel corporations to allow the owners to vote. Our bill simply does that. Our bill simply says, you will have on your proxy form, printed anyway, what the compensation figures are. There is no debate about how they will be presented. We require, if this bill passes, corporations simply to add to that a box that says ``I approve/I disapprove,'' and you can check it as appropriate. And the sole expense to the corporation is the ink in printing ``approve'' or ``disapprove,'' and the tallying along with the other tallying. There is no additional paper, there is no additional anything else.
 
. . .
 
   We are talking about real money. We are talking about money that goes to these top executives that could be used for other purposes. For example, when Mr. Nardelli of Home Depot received a $210 million good-bye kiss that had been written into his contract, when he was fired and given a $210 million consolation prize, Home Depot was at the same time announcing that they were putting $350 million into improving the stores. Well, suppose Mr. Nardelli had been sent out into the cold, hard world with only $50 million for the rest of his life. $160 million more would have been available to add to that $350 million for the stores, considerably more than a third. In other words, that was a real number. If $350 million can fix up the stores significantly, another $50 million or $75 million could have increased that by up to 50 percent.
 
. . .
 
All we say is this: The shareholders own the companies, and we believe the shareholders should be allowed to vote.
 
   Now, some people have said that is up to the board of directors, why are you singling out compensation for the CEO? And there is a good reason. You can make arguments about corporate governance one way or the other. We are not going beyond one point here. The relationship between the CEOs and the boards of directors is very different than most of the relationships the boards of directors have. The CEOs and the boards of directors select each other. There is a lack of an arm's length situation there that we think makes it appropriate to single it out and let the shareholders vote.
 
If you wish to follow the progress of HR1257 (it was debated for an hour with no deciding vote), you may go to  http://thomas.loc.gov/ , enter HR1257 in the Search Bill Text window,   click the Bill Number button, and click the SEARCH button.   To e-mail your member of Congress, go to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/.   Now put your 9-digit zip code in the “WRITE ELECTED OFFICIALS” box and click the GO button.  Next click your REPRESENTATIVE’s link.    Then click Send Message , followed by Compose Your Own Letter and Next Step.  Fill out the required boxes and add your letter.   Then fill in your Sender Information.  (This is required because most Reps. don’t have time to deal with non-constituents – and you might even get a response.   Be sure to read all the instructions – i.e., don’t put your name in the body of the letter.  CapWiz will do that for you. 
 
My title was “HR1257”.  I chose “Commerce” as my Issue Area.  And my letter was:
Corporate Board Compensation Committees tend to become inbred - largely populated by CEOs of other corporations.  This bill would require Compensation Committees to justify their actions in print in the Proxy Statement - at least enough to work toward a YES vote.  It would allow a little sunlight into the dark area of runaway executive compensation.
 
It looks as if our Shareholder Proposal is right in the middle of the action.  Please vote “FOR” this proposal (Item 7 – Shareholder Proposal “D”) immediately.