| (originally published in
Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly #489 Providing news and
resources for environmental justice - ApriI 11, 1996)
[Note: This is second of two articles
that explore strategies for going beyond the usual calls for
"corporate accountability." (Part 1 appeared in REHW #488.)
The author is part of a movement, already taking root in over a dozen
states, that advocates retaking the historic right of the sovereign
people to determine and direct corporate action.]
In view of the historic provisions that used to govern corporations
(see REHW #488), their representatives must be pleased that at least in
this country, boycotts and divestment strategies are considered radical,
and "dialoguing" is the preferred mode of interaction. The
rest of this paper is an exploration of ways to restructure today's
corporation so that citizen activist efforts to eliminate corporate
wrongs can amount to more than just a few hard-won needles in a
corporate haystack.
As we saw last week, corporations are a special form of business
entity given a state charter and certain privileges in exchange for
being subject to the will of the sovereign people as expressed through
state legislatures.
Over the last half a dozen generations, corporation representatives
have managed to set up barriers to insulate the corporation from citizen
influence. Several trends have made it more difficult to direct the
corporation towards serving the public interest it was created to serve.
Among them:
- Under cover of the U.S. Constitution's "commerce"
clause2 as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, federal regulatory
agencies have usurped many of the powers once exercised regularly by
state legislatures. Today's corporations are ideally suited to wage
battles on the regulatory front, because it is so difficult for
citizens' groups to match their resources.3 (In many ways, the late
19th century ascendance of the "commerce" argument is an
eerie foreshadowing of today's NAFTA and GATT controversies.)
- Through a series of leveraged expansions of the "diversity
clause" of the U.S. Constitution4 (allowing
"citizens" from two different states to be heard in
federal court instead of the presumably more biased courts of
either's home state), the U.S. Supreme Court "deemed
corporations "citizens" and thus gave them nearly
unrestricted access to federal courts.5 This saved corporations the
trouble of defending themselves in the courts of the state where
they actually cause the harms.
- In 1886 the U.S. Supreme Court decreed that corporations are
"persons" under the 14th amendment, thus granting them
protection under the Bill of Rights.6 Such guarantees of free
speech, due process, and equal protection under the law were long
considered to apply to human persons. This ruling gave corporations
unprecedented "rights" to question almost any law applied
to them, and frustrated the ability of the people to direct
corporate action in service of the public good.
- Stockholders, who used to really run corporations, have seen their
power dramatically reduced. Today the powerful corporate manager
class is insulated from stockholder influence by a variety of stock
voting tricks and governance structures that they themselves set up.
They are protected from most liability by state corporation codes
and lax laws and enforcement. And they write their own paychecks.7
In order to have a world that we would not be ashamed to bequeath to
the Seventh Generation, we must make two major changes in the governance
of the corporation. First, we must remove obstacles to citizen control
of the corporation. Second, we must reinstate provisions such as those
(enumerated in REHW #488) once governing corporations, and add others
that are particularly suited to our times.
"Model" provisions can become part of 1) state
constitutions, 2) state corporation codes and/or 3) the actual corporate
"charters," which are the documents states give to
corporations to formally bring them into existence. A program to
institute such changes would include areas such as the following:
People's power over corporations.
1. We the people can demand that state legislatures, the most direct
expression of the people's will, use their "reserved power" to
revoke the charters of errant domestic corporations. (A domestic
corporation is one chartered in that state.) The people of Delaware and
a few other states with "easy" chartering policies would have
a more exciting time than the rest of us here, since the overwhelming
majority of offending (U.S.) multinational corporations are chartered
there.
2. In other states, citizens can demand that their attorneys general
(or whatever agent is specified in their state laws and constitutions)
revoke the permission of errant foreign corporations to do business in
their state. (A foreign corporation is one chartered in another state in
the U.S. Those chartered in other countries are called alien
corporations.) Such actions have already been initiated against
Weyerhaeuser, WMX (formerly Waste Management, Inc.), and CSX
corporations.8 (See REHW #455.)
- Annul "rights" given corporations by judge-made law. We
can work for state constitutional amendments that underline
corporations' status as subservient to the people and the
legislatures, and assert that corporations are not legal
constitutional "persons" and thus are not protected by the
Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution.
- Re-open corporate affairs to legislative scrutiny. At one time,
all corporate records and affairs were open to legislatures or other
designated state officials so that state governments, on behalf of
the people, could monitor and evaluate corporate actions. We can
reinstate such provisions in state corporation codes.
- Reinstate stockholder/owner control over corporate management and
policy. For decades, concerned stockholders have attempted to curb
some of the worst excesses of corporate policies, only to find their
efforts thwarted by corporate management. We can modify states'
corporation codes to return a modicum of control of corporations to
their putative owners, the stockholders. Some basic provisions might
include a) a one stockholder, one vote policy, b) prohibitions
against issuing non-voting stock, c) removal of obstacles to
stockholders' access to information, initiation of policies, and
removal of unsatisfactory corporate management.
- Give state courts clear authority to hear all corporation cases.
State courts, more sensitive to local needs and conditions and more
accessible to citizens, once heard most corporation cases. During
the last years of the nineteenth century, numerous unsuccessful
attempts were made at the federal level to reinstate this practice.
Both federal legislation and federal constitutional amendments were
proposed. Either one would do the trick.
- Reinstate historic limits on corporations. State corporation codes
and/or corporate charters amended to include provisions such as the
following: a) Require corporations to have a specific purpose, with
a penalty of charter revocation if said purpose is either not
fulfilled or is exceeded. This would include a prohibition on the
kind of "look how ethical we are" advertising that
currently dissipates stockholders' dollars and discombobulates
public perceptions. b) Require a percentage of stockholders to live
within the chartering state. c) Prohibit corporations from owning
stock in other corporations. d) Issue corporate charters for only a
specific term of existence, perhaps ten or twenty years. e) Limit
real estate holdings to that necessary for corporate purposes. f)
Prohibit any and all political donations by corporations. g)
Prohibit all civic, charitable, or educational donations not
specifically provided for in the corporate purpose. h) Impose strict
liability for all corporate officers and/or stockholders.
- Initiate new limits on corporate activities. We can add provisions
(to state codes, charters, and/or constitutions) that:
a) Forbid corporations from doing business under pseudonyms or
alternative names.
b) Require corporations to use earth-friendly materials in all
stages of operations, and to list all ingredients.
c) Prohibit corporations from buying up patents for the purpose
of preventing others from exploiting them.
d) Require every corporate document to be signed by a human
being who thereby takes responsibility for the veracity of
statements and the soundness of judgments therein.
e) Require a corporation to pay for periodic health, safety,
and environmental audits by independent experts selected by
workers and affected communities.
f) Require that in the event of bankruptcy, corporate
management pay and perks be withheld until all other debts and
creditors are paid, starting with workers and small businesses.
g) Require 95% recycling.
h) Prohibit corporations from seeking or accepting
"incentive" packages from any government entity.
i) Establish a maximum ratio (like 1:5) between compensation of
the lowest-paid worker and the highest-paid executive.
j) Establish a process similar to "recall" procedures
for elected officials, so that citizens can initiate revocation
referendums [or corporate charters (in the case of domestic
corporations) and for certificates of authority (that allow
foreign corporations to do business in one's state).
k) Require uniformity of health benefits within each
corporation for all corporation employees (from CEOs to
wage-laborers).
This is just a sampling of some of the options open to us. Priorities
might include working to revoke corporate charters, to end The
privileges granted corporations under the judicial "corporate
personhood" doctrine, and to prohibit political contributions. Most
of the obstacles we face are in the arena of judge-made law, but
historic legislation and constitutional provisions offer us a solid body
of favorable precedents. Much debate lies ahead. But it is high time we
shifted the controversy from whether we control corporations to how we
do so.
The sky's the limit. What are we waiting for?
Notes:
[1] Jane Anne Morris is a corporate anthropologist working on
corporation issues as part of the Program on Corporations, Law and
Democracy (POCLAD). They can be reached at P.O. Box 246, So. Yarmouth,
MA 02664. Phone: (508-398-1445; FAX: (508)398-1552; email: poclad@people.org.
She is author of Not in My Back Yard: The Handbook (San Diego: Silvercat
Publications, 1994.
[2] U.S. Const. Art I. Sec. 8.
[3] An excellent discussion of the difficulties of relying on a
regulatory strategy to actually regulate corporate action can be found
in Christopher D. Stone, Where the Law Ends: The Social Control of
Corporate Behavior (NY: Harper & Row, 1975.)
[4] U.S. Const. Art. III Sec. 2.
[5] See note 15 in REHW #488
[6] Santa Clara County v. Southern Pac. R.R., 118 U.S. 394.
[7] A discussion of the historical process of taking power from
stockholders and giving it to a largely independent corporate management
can be found in Adolf A. Berle, Jr. ³Historical Inheritance of American
Corporations,² in Edmond N. Cahn, editor, Social Meaning of Legal
Concepts (New York: NYU School of Law, 1950) pgs. 189-218.
[8] Corporate Crime Reporter, Vol. 9 No. 25 (June 28, 1995).
Rachelıs Environment & Health Weekly (ISSN 1078-103x) is
published weekly by Environmental Research Foundation, 612 Third St.,
Suite 2A, Annapolis, MD 21403-3246. Peter Montague, editor; Maria B.
Pellerano, associate editor. RATES: $25 per year for individuals and
citizen groups; $45 for universities and libraries; $80 for
professionals and government agencies; $15 for students and seniors;
$400 for businesses; in Canada and Mexico, add $8.00; in all other
countries, add $15.00. AII payments in U.S. funds drawn on U.S. bank;
Visa and Mastercard accepted. Telephone (410) 263-1584; fax (410)
263-8944; E-mail: erf@rachel.org.
Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly is not copyrighted.
|