« AnteriorContinuar »
United States unless you comply with X, Y, Z, one, two and three.
So should a Federal chartering act be passed and Exxon says, “To hell with you, we are going to incorporate in the Bahamas," you certainly have the power and the right to say that you can't do business in the United States unless you comply with the Federal Chartering Act.
Senator DURKIN. You perceive no problem?
Mr. SOLK. I don't see any constitutional problem. I see a policy question that possibly could be raised.
Senator DURKIN. People just touched on the Canadian experience. Have we something to learn from the Canadian experience!
Mr. SOLK. I am not all that familiar with the Canadian experience. However, on a more general approach, as I stated, I don't know of any other federal form of government that does permit local or provincial chartering. In every other federal system, it is done by the federal government, even though the individual states may be autonomous in certain matters.
I am somewhat familiar with the German system, and the German system apparently is very successful, in that the amount of confidence, the level of confidence that most Germans have in their corporations seems to be much higher than many Americans seem to express in American corporations.
So I think part of this is the competition between the States. New Jersey wants the revenue; California wants the revenue. And I, as an attorney, would feel morally bound to my client if I was incorporating a business, to tell them the advantages of incorporating in X, Y or Z.
I think that is why you do have a large number of incorporations in Delaware. It is advantageous taxwise, as well as policy reasons. Somewhere down the line, maybe that liberal indemnification provision in the Delaware statute is going to be of benefit to your client.
If there were no conflicting or competitive State statutes in which to go under, if every corporation of X size had to go under the Federal statute, you would eliminate that break that certain corporations can get now.
Senator DURKIN. Mr. Solk, Professor, I want to thank you.
The record will remain open, and feel free to submit your written statement.
I appreciate your time.
The next witness is Mr. Cooper and I am not sure how much longer we can go inasmuch as they will revoke my certificate if I continue this hearing beyond, I think we have permission to 1 o'clock. We can go for a few minutes, if Mr. Cooper is here.
STATEMENT OF L. NAPOLEON COOPER, CHAIRMAN, AP ACTION
& Co., INC., PROJECT 76–AN AMERICAN AFFAIR, INC., CLEVELAND, OHIO
Mr. COOPER. I am here but a few minutes doesn't seem to be a sufficient situation.
I expect my statement to be limited to my prepared comments, but that is 10 or 15 minutes in itself.
Senator DURKIN. Well, why don't we start.
Senator DURKIN. As I say, the committee got permission from the Senate to meet until 1 o'clock. They didn't specify whether it was eastern or central time. I know you are from Cleveland, so I think it is Cleveland time. Cleveland is central time, isn't it?
Mr. COOPER. Yes.
Senator DURKIN. Proceed in whatever manner you feel most comfortable. Your complete statement will appear in the record.
Mr. COOPER. What I was trying to say is I expect my comments to be limited to the statement, so I will read the statement.
Senator DURKIN. Fine. Whatever is most comfortable.
Mr. COOPER. I shouldn't have packed but you said you would adjourn at 1 o'clock and I did.
Senator DURKIN. No problem, really.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I am L. Napoleon Cooper, chairman, agent of record, chief executive, and founder of the AP Action & Co., Inc., Cooper, Inc., and Project 76–AN American Affair, Inc., all of which are not-for-profit public service corporations. They were founded in 1972 and incorporated in 1974 to make available socioeconomic alternatives counteract pro-Soviet antifree enterprise propaganda, prevent any increase in business or personal income taxation without reductions in needed social services.
I understand the hearings to be exploratory; specifically exploration into the corporate lawlessness, the corporate purpose, its real problems, and/or socioeconomic problems resulting therefrom.
Because of the extensive amount of information available on the workings of the energy establishment I will address my general corporate comment through the American oil cartel. That is, before it became the transuranium monopoly, and before it could do to Americans what OPEC did to it.
Congress permits States to issue corporate charters primarily because of public welfare concerns, but corporations exist for totally different reasons. Any level-headed examination of fact makes clear that the corporate purpose, like the personal, is to profit from extra effort.
I do not think myself obligated, notwithstanding my best interest, to exercise it. Corporations, likewise, are under no obligation to exer cise theirs. But for my ambition and integrity, even I might stoop too exploiting the helplessness and vulnerability of consumers.
The lack of corporate management accountability and the resulting general disregard of social order, resulted in the attempt by American oil companies to acquire, among themselves, powers equal to those of sovereign states.
Unaccountable management results also in other corruption, environmental suicide, human degeneration, busing, income taxation, and unemployment. At the root of this unaccountability close scrutiny shows that finance in America has no check and balance apparatus. Economic conditions are such that even Americans in large numbers are demanding as relief the nationalization of business. Not realizing that independent opportunity for public trade is as vital to political freedom as is the right to keep and bear arms, and equally threatened, pressing constitutional crisis.
The executive-business community relationship mandates constitutional redress. Its corruption has virtually made America politically indefensible for many in France, Italy, Canada, and England. Congress will meet this challenge or NATO and the U.S. Constitution will fail.
The Rockefeller energy plan presents an example, a plan I say to this committee that the Vice President plagiarized and corrupted. I submit this documentation to support the accusation.
I return to the statement.
In the name of energy independence and with taxpayer funds, the Rockefeller proposal proposes to reinforce the transuranium cartel, to establish a society of international privilege, to subordinate the power of the Congress and legitimatize the Zionist control of America's press-all in the interest of money for money's sake—a vile and empty end in itself. The international consequences will be moral degeneration, preoccupation with sexual savagery, ignorance, and ever-increasing taxation.
I am aware of no realistic approaches by the public, the business community, consumer action groups, or the Congress to prevent any of this coming about. Regulations will not do because the general halflife of any regulation the Congress might instruct the executive branch to implement is for a man like myself 5 minutes. By that I mean any law you can pass I can break within 5 minutes.
Nor will trustbusting do. The judiciary ordered John D. Rockefeller to divest over 50 years ago. His cartel was only recently restrained and then by OPEC replacing it. His transuranium cartel is still the strongest monopoly in the world.
Leaving corporate accountability to intellectually corrupt, morally bankrupt, economic experts of the left, right or the center is suicide. Did any among the Wall Street gang testify to the Senate that only a few wealthy individuals, so-called blind trusts, stockbrokers and chase-type banks would benefit from the $100 billion energy sham proposed by the Rockefeller administration? I say Rockefeller advisedly;
any among labor indicate that America's workers would be passing up an opportunity to end personal income taxation?
What executive branch regulatory agency, owing its existence to congressional action, testified that the same energy proposals would, in effect, merge, officially, the White House, the State Department and the New York Stock Exchange? Has anyone informed either the House or the Senate that both the energy and full-employment-economic planning bills amount to Care packages for organized crime? Or would it have mattered in the first instance? Many Americans wonder.
Under this state of affairs, if I were after total control of one monopoly or the other, I would encourage Mr. Nader and his mandatory Federal charter proposals. They present the perfect opportunity to seize sovereign prerogatives. I would be able to do this because of the virtual absence of corporate accountability. There exists no present means by which the Congress can implement economic directives. To maneuver itself into a position to do thusly, Congress must
perfect socioeconomic order. If it fails, it will perish as the lawmaking body. What can be done?
Because social disorder interchanges with corporate unaccountability, and vice versa, the only hope to relieve the situation. The Madison Doctrine in this instance, ambition must be made to counteract ambition, is the most likely approach to succeed.
To have any chance of bringing the doctrine to life Americans must by 1998, have at their disposal—on a day-to-day basis—a trillion dollar—that is 12 zeroes—multinational, public services, nongovernment, conglomerate agency. An American third century educational, agricultural, scientific research and industrial development, international complex, made up of corporate associations capable of and willing to provide the Congress ongoing oversight capacity. Utilizing voluntarily accepted Federal charters.
To build such an establishment requires a certain genius. I am willing to provide that but on my own terms. Energy independence will pay the cost. What is energy independence ?
Energy independence is an unlimited supply of safe, environmentally clean, nonhissil, nonsofar, nontransuranium fuel. A fuel the development of which would end the reckless waste of priceless reserves, and most environmental destruction, cut drastically all health care costs, aid full employment, instigate productivity, end income taxation, raise the urban standard of life, add to savings, making available better home for better-educated, less drug-dependent city dwellers, cut crime 80 percent and lessen racial conflict. All of which would end Soviet ideological advantage, help farmers and give Americans the time to, in the interest of preventing world war, openly debate siding with Africa and China against Russia. Regaining in this generation international peace of mind.
Should this committee recommend to the Senate that it commission a total presentation of the Cooper plan? The alternative in this instance, facts will make absolutely clear that it is a way out. A way out that is becoming the national character.
In the interim, I am prepared to improve upon the international reputation and investment capital formation ability of American business, offer legislation to the House and Senate that would put in motion examples of social citizen efforts to provide the Senate the general corporate oversight capability it must regain in order to exercise its constitutional prerogatives, without which its political function will within the near future become purely ceremonial. Purely.
The legislation in question will not require the establishment of an additional executive agency nor would it require new congressional appropriations.
În this regard, I expect to be asked the political and economic objectives of the plan. In reference to cost-risk, conflicting values that must be overcome, the probably positive and/or negative consequences of its success, and how important and what is, the timetable of implementation? Will the pilot plan's outgo be limited to its income, will it restrain and/or rechannel the exuberant escalating pressures and demands by citizens to better their lives through government action, and will it be able to accomplish its objectives in view of facts that make clear that the scope of national government, the vigor of multi
national business and the planetary range of individual liberty and human possibility have all been expanded and must be maintained ?
Senator DURKIN. I want to thank you, Mr. Cooper.
First I must make an announcement. Tomorrow's hearing will be held in room 2228. That is assuming we get clearance to meet. We have not yet gotten the authority from the Senate to meet, but assuming we do, the hearing will be in 2228 tomorrow.
Mr. Cooper, I just have a couple of questions.
Senator DURKIN. A. P. Action, that has nothing to do with A. & P. stores, does it?
Mr. COOPER. There is a corporate description of each corporation at the end of the statement presented.
No. It does not have anything to do with A. & P. [The attachment follows:]
CORPORATE DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE PER NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION
(A) A. P. ACTION & CO., INC., L. NAPOLEON COOPER, CHAIRMAN
Incorporated in Feb. 1974 to promote citizen efforts to change their relationship to Government and its social welfare operations.
(1) To immediately amend the U.S. Constitution to permit free and public trade, except in war-like confrontations. Effective 1984.
(2) To immediately amend the same to forbid the taxation of personal income. Effective 1984.
(3) To further immediately amend the same to prohibit the forced busing of U.S. citizens. Effective 1980.
(4) To legislate the immediate equity of charitable contributions for individuals and institutions, and to
(5) legislate the availability of a national charter to promote Non Government social welfare.
(B) LARRY N. COOPER, INC., L. NAPOLEON COOPER, CHAIRMAN Incorporated in Feb. 1974 to provide in perpetuus momentum the Private, American management and development of tax alternative assets, both plant and investment. To Fund through net gain an American educational, agricultural, scientific research and industrial development, international public service complex. And
(C) PROJECT 76-AN AMERICAN AFFAIR-INC., L. NAPOLEON COOPER, CHAIRMAN Incorporated in Feb. 1974 to provide the bicentennial year seed-fund-fundraising. To provide beginning operational and/or Investment capital to nonsectarian charitable and educational establishments.
P.O. Box 1994, University Station, Cleveland, Ohio 44106.
Founder, Senator DURKIN. Parts of your statement read something like the Republican platform. I wonder how we would be able to accomplish all this in such a short order with no taxes, or reduction in taxes?
Mr. COOPER. Well, in the first instance, I am not a Republican nor a Democrat. And in the other instance, for example, if I could have gotten the executive branch or a Member of Congress to act prior to Mr. Getty's death, I had a 50–50 chance of access to his estate. That is where I would have gotten the original funds.
However, the proposition is such that individual citizens will make available the funds under the proper circumstances to create by 1998 such a trillion-dollar establishment.
1 Not available for public office.