Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

(ix) The term "unaccountability” shall mean the complicated means by which even the most watched and regulated corporations are able to avoid legislative dictates, Congressional inquiries and/or judicial action.

(x) The term "compromise" shall mean an alternative process independent of legislation previously introduced by which a sponsoring and/or opposing Congressman can mutually support the method of achieving the objective of the original legislation.

(xi) The phrase "economic planning" shall mean a process by which birth and death statistics, age, technological availability, scientific research, social objectives, environmental organization, and political aspirations are coordinated on a long term basis.

(xii) The phrase "full employment" shall mean any circumstance where all but 2 percent of the total work force is gainfully employed, and the remaining group, multiskilled, and available for cyclical, short term employment.

(xiii) The term "deflation" shall mean the total elimination of all unnatural market forces that inflate artificially production cost and/or reduce the dollar value.

(xiv) The phrase "crime prevention" shall mean any lawful activity which diverts the skills, attentions, and aspirations of juveniles and/or adults from anti-social, exploitative, petty crime or other corruption and/or from the feeling of need to commit such acts.

(xv) The term "contribution" shall mean any gift made to An-AmericanAffair (currency, asset, idea, skill, or other thing of value) utilized by AnAmerican-Affair to implement the objectives of this Act. (Deductible in full from the donors estimated income tax due based on I.R.S. previous year estimates.)

TITLE IV. UNLAWFUL ACTS AND PENALTIES

FALSE STATEMENTS

SEC. 401. Whoever makes any statement, knowing it to be false, or willfully or knowingly overvalues any contribtuion, for the purpose of obtaining for himself or for any applicant any thing of value, loan or extension thereof by renewal, deferment of action, or otherwise, accepts, releases, substitutes a contribution, or for the purpose of influencing in any way the action of An-American-Affair or a subsidiary or for the purpose of obtaining money property, contract rights, or anything of value, under this Act, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $50,000 or by imprisonment for not more than ten years or both.

FORGERY Sec. 402. Whoever (1) falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any note, debenture, bond, or other obligation, or receipt, in imitation of or purporting to be a note, debenture, bond, or other obligation, coupon, or thing of value issued by An-American-Affair or a subsidiary, or (2) passes, utters, or publishes, or attempts to pass, utter, or publish any false, forged, or counterfeited note, debenture, bond, receipt, or other obligation, coupon, or report setting value purporting to have been issued by An-American-Affair or a subsidiary, knowing the same to be false, forged, or counterfeited, or (3) falsely alters any note, debenture bond, or other obligation, or coupon, issued or purporting to have been issued by AnAmerican-Affair, or a subsidiary, or (4) passes, utters, or publishes, or attempts to pass, utter, or publish, as true any falsely altered or spurious note, debenture, bond, or other obligation, coupon or thing of value issued or purporting to have been issued by An-American-Affair or a subsidiary, knowing the same to be falsely altered, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $50,000 or by imprisonment for not more than ten years or both.

MISAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS AND UNAUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES Sec. 403. Whoever, being connected in any capacity with An-American-Affair or a subsidiary, (1) embezzles, abstracts or willfully misapplies any moneys, funds, securities, or other things of value, whether belonging to it or otherwise entrusted to An-American-Affair or such subsidiary or (2) with intent to defraud An-American-Affair, the I.R.S., and/or subsidiary or any other body politic or corporate, or any individual, or to deceive any officer, auditor, or examiner of An-American-Affair or such subsidiary makes any false entry in any book, report, or statement of or to An-American-Affair or such subsidiary, or, without being duly authorized, draws any order or issues, puts forth or assigns any note, debenture, bond, or other obligation, or draft, bill of exchange, mortgage, judgment, or decree thereof, or (3) with intent to defraud, participates, shares, or receives directly or indirectly any money, profit, property, or benefit through any transaction loan, commission, contract, or any other act An-American-Affair, or such subsidiary, or (4) gives any unauthorized information concerning any future action or plan of An-American-Affair or such subsidiary which might affect the value of securities, or, having such knowledge, invests, speculates, directly or indirectly, in the securities or property of any company, bank, or corporation being consumed, received loan or other assistance from An-American-Affair or such subsidiary shall be punished by a fine of not more than $50,000 or by imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both.

INFRINGEMENT ON NAME

Sec. 404. No individual, association, partnership, corporation, or business entity shall use the words Project 76–An American Affair Inc. or a combination of these words which a court of competent jurisdiction shall find reasonably likely to mislead or deceive, as the name or a part thereof under which he or it shall do business.

ADDITIONAL PENALTIES Sec. 405. In addition to any other penalties provided in this title, the defendant in any action brought pursuant thereto shall, on conviction, be liable to AnAmerican-Affair, the U.S. Treasury or subsidiary for double any loss to such subsidiary and any profit or gain acquired by him as a result of the conduct constituting the offense for which he was convicted.

SUITS BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Sec. 707. No suit shall be brought alleging that An-American-Affair (or any director, officer, emp yee, or agent thereof) has engaged in any action, practice, or policy inconsistent with this Act; has violated any provision thereof; has obstructed or interfered with any activities authorized thereby; or has refused, failed, or neglected to discharge duties or responsibilities mandated by the Act except by the Attorneys General of the United States or the state of Ohio or his delegate. Such Attorney General may, by petition, in any Federal district court in any State where An-American-Affair in transacting business or where any such individual resides (or in the District of Columbia), seek such equitable relief as may be necessary or appropriate to prevent or terminate such conduct. Nothing in this section shall be deemed or construed to prevent the enforcement of the other provisions of this Act by appropriate officials of the United States, nor to prohibit suits by private parties against An-AmericanAffair based on breach of contract.

CORPORATE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 1976

U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,

Washington, D.C. The committee met at 10:08 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2228, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Vance Hartke presiding.

OPENING STATEMENT BY SENATOR HARTKE

Senator HARTKE. This is the second day of Commerce hearings to explore the close relationship between the corporation and the Government, to ascertain the best means of assuring compliance by the corporation with our Nation's laws and social standards while promoting the greatest possible economic productivity.

To me this is one of the most important questions which faces this Nation today. The corporate giants dominate our marvelously productive economy. By virtue of that power they also dominate to a large degree our personal lives. I believe these hearings are important because we are looking at the basic structure of the corporation and asking how this tremendous force in this society can best be put to use for everyone's benefit.

In spite of the number of scheduling difficulties, I believe we are going to be able to hear all of those that have been interested in making a presentation before the committee.

I want to thank all of those who are here today in advance for coming forth to assist us in exploring this issue. I want to especially thank Senator Durkin for monitoring these hearings yesterday in my absence.

Our first witness is the distinguished Ambassador, Peter Peterson.

STATEMENT OF PETER PETERSON, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD,

LEHMAN BROS.

Mr. PETERSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I apologize for not having a written statement. I have been traveling around the world a bit. But just so you understand my position from the outset, perhaps I thought that I had better make an honest dollar before you pass this legislation.

I have great difficulties with the proposal of Federal chartering of corporations on many grounds, philosophic and practical. On philosophic grounds, having really nothing to do with business as such, but having a lot to do with our political system, I find myself quite troubled by the idea that we are going to be managed in our society by what you might call constituency directors. It rather suggests a government and a set of institutions of special interests rather than a government of the people.

I suppose what it suggests is every time there is a new special interest or constituency, we would modify our institutions so that they can be represented.

I further suggest that if what we are saying by this kind of legislation is that every institution within itself must be diverse, must represent all the special interest groups, I suggest to you, Mr. Chairman, that what we will probably end up doing is destroying diversity, promoting uniformity, and more or less homogenizing society,

I believe our society is one of countervailing power centers in which various

groups do their own thing and in the course of doing their own thing, there is a very important marketplace of ideas, one of whose focuses is here in the Congress, of course.

What I think is being suggested is probably not really democracy, but something you might call corporativism or corporatism.

It suggests that going back to the early days of the Catholic Church and to the time of Mussolini in Italy there was this notion of what he called “national syndicalism" in which various corporations would be represented by an amalgamation of various special interest groups.

I suggest, however, that this idea of constituency directors is a manifestation of not just a business concept, but a much larger concept. If we say that institutions can't somehow represent their own interests, but every one of them must be "balanced,” I suppose we had better test this idea by extending it to its outer perimeters.

Are we suggesting, for example, that we should take most major institutions, labor unions, for example, and put environmental groups, consumer groups and, of course, business groups so that their judgments are balanced? Should we do the same thing with various consumer groups in our society ?

I suggest to you that this is a thoroughly bad idea, because what would happen is we would introduce highly adversary proceedings in the workings of all of our institutions. They would probably become highly politicized and if everybody were represented on everything, I submit to you they probably would end up doing very close to nothing.

But now in terms of business institutions, I suggest to you that we should, first, start with what the purpose or the essential function of a business institution is—if you are going to praise the validity of this concept of constituency directors.

First and foremost, I would say a business, a corporation, functions effectively if it is essentially as an economic institution; not a social institution, not a political institution. Just as we have discovered in our society of checks and balances that the separation of economic and political power is a good ideal, and as we have discovered- I think-in our society and in others around the world that economic freedom and political freedom is really indivisible, I suggest that trying to mix the essential functions of our institutions is not a valid concept.

I think every institution needs to have what I would call an essence. If we try to do everything, we usually end up doing nothing.

One of the old cliches—and I guess we need a new cliche is that the business of business is business. I guess what we mean by that is busi

« AnteriorContinuar »