NLPC seeks to promote integrity in corporate governance, including honesty and fair play in relationships with shareholders, employees, business partners and customers. In doing so, NLPC places special emphasis on:
* Asserting that the social responsibility of the corporation is to defend and advance the interests of the people who own the company, the shareholders. True responsibility is fidelity to one’s own mission, not someone else’s, or someone else’s political agenda.
* Exposing the seeking of influence on public officials by corporations, which is the inevitable result of high levels of government spending and intervention in the marketplace.
* Combating practices that undermine the free enterprise system, including philanthropic giving to groups hostile to a free economy.
Al Sharpton’s platform for his assault on Rush Limbaugh’s NFL ownership bid was the National Action Network (NAN), which is bankrolled by corporate America.
The following companies were identified this year by NAN as “sponsors”: American Honda, Anheuser Busch, Colgate-Palmolive, Comcast, Entergy, Ford Motor Company, Home Depot, Johnson & Johnson, Macy’s, PepsiCo, Pfizer and Wal-Mart. Sponsorship reportedly cost $50,000.
NLPC is asking these companies to end their support for Sharpton and NAN. Here’s how to contact them:
I am not sure why Rush Limbaugh would want to own an NFL team. It is surely more fun to criticize the establishment on a daily basis than to become part of it. Leaving that aside, the last person in the world who should have a say in the matter is Al Sharpton. (The next to last is his mentor Jesse Jackson.)
Sharpton has written a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell saying the NFL should reject Limbaugh’s bid. Yesterday the New York Times actually referred to Sharpton’s group, the National Action Network, as “a civil rights organization,” demonstrating the legitimacy that Sharpton has somehow come to enjoy in recent years. Let’s see if Goodell will further elevate Sharpton’s stature by responding in a serious way.
As we documented in Special Report earlier this year, Sharpton is unapologetic about the Tawana Brawley hoax. He is a racial agitator and divider, … Read More ➡
October 9, 2009- CNBC hosts Larry Kudlow and Trish Reagan discuss whether a one time tax credit for business owners is a good idea with NLPC President Peter Flaherty and Michael Pento of Delta Global Advisors.… Read More ➡
Now that taxpayers are Citigroup’s biggest shareholder, owning 36% of common stock, it is time for the company and its foundation to end its relationship with ACORN and its affiliates.
Citigroup has received $45 billion in taxpayer TARP funds. In addition, taxpayers are on the hook for the lion’s share of losses on the company’s $335 billion loan portfolio.
According to the 2008 annual tax return of the Citi Foundation, it provided the ACORN Institute, Inc. with grants of $500,000 for each of the years 2006, 2007 and 2008, for a total of $1.5 million.
According to the ACORN Institute website:
The ACORN Institute operates a countrywide network of ACORN Centers which (sic) provide free tax preparation, benefits enrollment, and foreclosure prevention services. In partnership with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)…
Working in conjunction with major national partners such as Citigroup, H&R Block,
Although we have not received a direct reply to our request that Bank of America sever all ties with ACORN and its affiliates, McClatchy newspapers reports:
In a statement, the bank said that it doesn’t condone the actions on the videos and that it is reviewing its work with ACORN.
Bank of America also said it and other banks have allowed ACORN to help tens of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure.
“Overall, we believe our investments have been leveraged to further the company’s commitments and benefit the country,” the bank said in its statement.
You would think with all the problems facing embattled CEO Ken Lewis, Bank of America would run, not walk, away from the ACORN imbroglio. The “statement” cited by McClatchy does not appear on the Bank of America website, or anywhere else on the web. Presumably, it was provided to McClatchy in response to its request for … Read More ➡
Bank of America has received $45 billion in taxpayer TARP funds, and has slashed its dividend to a penny. Yet it is one of ACORN and its affiliates’ biggest funders.
Our review of annual tax returns for the Bank of America Charitable Foundation, Inc. for the last three years (2006, 2007, 2008) found more than $3.6 million in grants to ACORN and its affiliates. Those grants include a grant of $2 million to ACORN Housing, Inc. last year, and direct grants to ACORN Housing, Inc. offices in Baltimore, Maryland and San Bernardino, California, the locations of undercover video stings.
On its website, ACORN Housing, Inc. describes its relationship with Bank of America as a “partnership.” The Bank of America website lists no less than 26 ACORN offices where:
Bank of America works with Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) Housing to provide special mortgage products to potential homeowners
NLPC has asked JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon to end financial support for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), and its affiliates. According to the 2007 tax return for the JPMorgan Chase Foundation, the most recent available, ACORN Housing, Inc. was the recipient of a million dollar grant in 2007. Another grant of $25,000 was made to the ACORN Institute. In a letter to Dimon, I warned:
Continued identification with ACORN harms the company’s brand name and reputation, and carries special risks for this company, a recipient of taxpayer TARP funds. The New York Times has identified you as President Obama’s “favorite banker.”
Yesterday, the Senate voted 83-7 to bar grants to ACORN from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). If it is inappropriate for HUD to fund ACORN, it is also inappropriate for a public company like JPMorgan Chase to do so.
The Securities & Exchange Commission this past July has proposed amending Item 407(c)(2)(v) of Regulation S-K to require disclosure of racial and ethnic diversity on corporate and related nonprofit fund boards. We have submitted a comment of opposition because we believe this rule change to be a highly misguided intrusion into corporate governance.
Even assuming benign intent – and that is a stretch of an assumption – the outcome would be anything but benign. Anyone with sound instincts knows that any submitted information would be fair game for organizations seeking to tie executive compensation to the creation of a rigorously-monitored affirmative action spoils system.
The SEC was established 75 years ago for the purpose of protecting investors in publicly-traded securities against fraud and incompetence. Now more than ever this mission must be paramount. Whether the proportion of blacks, Hispanic, Asians and other minority groups in a given company adds up to … Read More ➡
It may be high irony, but capitalists over the decades all too often have been at odds with capitalism. That is, business organizations, for any number of reasons, have been prone to support ideas and policies whose intent is to bring free enterprise under social control. This syndrome is well and alive at a pair of prescription drug/biotechnology industry organizations: the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and the Pharmaceutical Industry Labor-Management Association (PILMA). Each group is working to promote a radical expansion of government involvement in health care, acting in concert with Capitol Hill Democrats and especially the Obama administration. These measures effectively would nationalize health insurance in the name of providing coverage to most of the estimated 47 million currently uninsured. All are bad bets for Americans, whether as taxpayers, consumers – and, fittingly – as pharmaceutical providers.
These past several weeks have witnessed widespread and … Read More ➡