OnTheIssuesLogo

Mary Fallin on Corporations

Republican

 


Voted NO on letting shareholders vote on executive compensation.

Congressional Summary:

Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act: Amends the Securities Exchange Act to require that any proxy for an annual shareholders meeting provide for a separate shareholder vote to approve executive compensation for named executive officers. The shareholder vote shall not be:

  1. binding on the corporation
  2. construed as overruling a board decision, or as creating or implying any additional fiduciary duty by the board; or
  3. construed as restricting or limiting shareholder ability to place executive compensation proposals within proxy materials.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. BARNEY FRANK (D, MA-4): The amount of wages is irrelevant to the SEC. What this bill explicitly aims at is the practice whereby people are given bonuses that pay off if the gamble pays off, but don't lose you anything if it doesn't. That is, there is a wide consensus that this incentivizes excessive risk.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. SPENCER BACHUS (R, AL-6): True, the first 6 pages of the bill give the owners, the shareholders, a non-binding vote on the pay of top executives. But then come the next 8 pages, the switch, which gives the regulators the power to decide appropriate compensation for not only just top executives but for all employees of all financial institutions above $1 billion in assets and all without regard for the shareholders' prior approval. So under the guise of empowering shareholders, it is, in fact, the government that is empowered. And, finally, on page 15, the bill designates those same government entities which regulated AIG, Countrywide, and collectively failed to prevent the worst financial calamity since the Great Depression. This bill continues the Democrat majority's tendency to go to the default solution for every problem: create a government bureaucracy to make decisions better left to private citizens and private corporations.

Reference: Say-On-Pay Bill; Bill H.R.3269 ; vote number 2009-H686 on Jul 31, 2009

Voted YES on more funding for nanotechnology R&D and commercialization.

Congressional Summary:Extends funding for research and development topics, nanotechnology, project commercialization, prioritization of applications, and federal administration and oversight.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. NYDIA VELÁZQUEZ (D, NY-12): We need jobs that cannot be shipped overseas and will not evaporate in the next cycle of boom and bust. But those jobs aren't going to appear out of thin air. They need to be created. By expanding existing industries and unlocking new ones, H.R. 2965 will generate the jobs we need. Job creation is the primary goal of R&D. But in order to generate new positions, we have to first develop new industries. Commercialization is critical to that process.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. ED MARKEY (D, MA-7): I must oppose this bill because I have serious concerns about allowing SBIR awards to go to an unlimited number of businesses owned or controlled by venture capital (VC) firms. The SBIR program, responsible for over 60,000 patents, has always focused on innovation from truly small businesses for whom commercial capital market funding is typically not an option. However, with the change made in this bill, the SBIR program would be wide open to applicants that already are well-capitalized due to VC participation, crowding out the small businesses that have been the focus of the highly successful SBIR program.

While I support VC participation in the SBIR program, enabling an unlimited amount of large VC majority-owned firms to qualify for SBIR funding calls into question whether this program, intended for genuinely small businesses, is, in fact, still focused on these firms.

We should do everything in our power to strengthen small businesses that generate 70% of new jobs in our country. H.R 2965 does not do enough to ensure that small businesses are the focus of the SBIR program, and therefore I cannot support the bill.

Reference: Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act; Bill S.1233&H.R.2965 ; vote number 2009-H486 on Jul 8, 2009

Voted NO on allowing stockholder voting on executive compensation.

To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to provide shareholders with an advisory vote on executive compensation [and as part of that process, fully disclosing executive compensation].

Proponents support voting YES because:

We should not deprive the public, the stockholders, from being able to do anything meaningful once they find out about scandalous levels of executive compensation or board compensation. Everyone talks about the corporate board as the remedy. But the board is often a part of the problem, being paid huge amounts of money for showing up once or twice a year at meetings.

Give the stockholders a meaningful remedy. Once you get the mandatory disclosure put in place by previous legislation, we are saying the stockholders should be allowed to have a referendum on that and not have a runaround by the board.

Opponents support voting NO because:

This vote is based on mischaracterization--it is an unnecessary amendment. The opportunity for these kinds of votes already exists within the structure of corporate governance right now. A good company from Georgia, AFLAC, went ahead and already has these nonbinding shareholder votes. But there is a difference between having individuals in the private sector, shareholders and individuals outside of the mandating of government to have it occur and have government come in with its heavy hand and say, this is exactly what you need to do because we know best. Our constituents know better how to act and how to relate to corporations than Washington.

Reference: Shareholder Vote on Executive Compensation Act; Bill H R 1257 ; vote number 2007-244 on Apr 20, 2007

Other governors on Corporations: Mary Fallin on other issues:
OK Gubernatorial:
Brad Henry
Chris Powell
Connie Johnson
Drew Edmondson
Ervin Yen
Gary Richardson
Joe Dorman
Joe Maldonado
Kevin Stitt
Mick Cornett
Scott Inman
OK Senatorial:
Abby Broyles
Connie Johnson
James Inhofe
James Lankford
Mike Workman
Gubernatorial Debates 2021:
NJ: Incumbent Phil Murphy(D)
vs.State Rep. Jack Ciattarelli(R)
vs.Candidate Hirsh Singh(R)
vs.GOP Hair Doug Steinhardt(R)
VA: Incumbent Ralph Northam(D,term-limited)
vs.A.G. Mark Herring(D)
vs.State Sen. Amanda Chase(R)
vs.Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax(D)
vs.State Rep. Jennifer Carroll Foy(D)
vs.State Rep. Lee Carter(D)
vs.Former Governor Terry McAuliffe(D)
vs.State Sen. Jennifer McClellan(D)
vs.State Rep. Kirk Cox(R)

Gubernatorial Debates 2022:
AK: Incumbent Mike Dunleavy(R)
(no prospective opponents yet)
AL: Incumbent Kay Ivey(R)
(no prospective opponents yet)
AR: Incumbent Asa Hutchinson(R,term-limited)
vs.Lt. Gov. Tim Griffin(R)
vs.Trump Adviser Sarah Huckabee Sanders(R)
vs.A.G. Leslie Rutledge(R)
AZ: Incumbent Doug Ducey(R,term-limited)
(no prospective opponents yet)
CA: Incumbent Gavin Newsom(D)
vs.S.D.Mayor Kevin_Faulconer(R)
vs.Former Gov. nominee John Cox(R)
CO: Incumbent Jared Polis(D)
vs.Mayor Greg Lopez(R)
CT: Incumbent Ned Lamont(D)
(no prospective opponents yet)
FL: Incumbent Ron DeSantis(R)
vs.U.S.Rep. Val Demings(? D)
vs.Former Gov.Charlie Crist(? D)
GA: Incumbent Brian Kemp(R)
vs.Minority Leader Stacey Abrams(D)
vs.Senate candidate Shane Hazel(L)
HI: Incumbent David Ige(D,term-limited)
vs.State Rep. Andria Tupola(R)
IA: Incumbent Kim Reynolds(R)
vs.U.S.Rep. Cindy Axne(? R)
ID: Incumbent Brad Little(R)
(no prospective opponents yet)
IL: Incumbent J. B. Pritzker(D)
(no prospective opponents yet)
KS: Incumbent Laura Kelly(D)
(no prospective opponents yet)
MA: Incumbent Charlie Baker(R)
vs.Harvard Professor Danielle Allen(D)
vs.State Sen.Ben Downing(D)
MD: Incumbent Larry Hogan(R,term-limited)
vs.State Rep. Robin Ficker(R)
vs.State Rep. Peter Franchot(D)
vs.DNC chair Thomas Perez(D)
vs.RNC chair Michael Steele(? R)
Gubernatorial Debates 2022 (continued):
ME: Incumbent Janet Mills(D)
vs.Former Gov. Paul LePage(R)
MI: Incumbent Gretchen Whitmer(D)
(no prospective opponents yet)
MN: Incumbent Tim Walz(DFL)
vs.Mayor Mike Murphy(R)
NE: Incumbent Pete Ricketts(R,term-limited)
vs.U.S.Senator Bob Krist(R)
NH: Incumbent Chris Sununu(R)
(no prospective opponents yet)
NM: Incumbent Michelle Lujan Grisham(D)
(no prospective opponents yet)
NV: Incumbent Steve Sisolak(D)
vs.A.G.Adam Laxalt(? R)
vs.U.S.Rep. Mark Amodei(? R)
NY: Incumbent Andrew Cuomo(D)
(no prospective opponents yet)
OH: Incumbent Mike DeWine(R)
vs.Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley(? D)
OK: Incumbent Kevin Stitt(R)
vs.State Sen. Ervin Yen(R)
OR: Incumbent Kate Brown(D,term-limited)
vs.Gov. nominee Bud Pierce(R)
PA: Incumbent Tom Wolf(D,term-limited)
vs.U.S.Rep. Lou Barletta(? R)
RI: Incumbent Gina Raimondo(D,term-limited)
vs.Lt.Gov. Dan McKee(D)
vs.Secy.Matt Brown(? D)
SC: Incumbent Henry McMaster(R)
vs.State Rep. James Emerson Smith(? D)
vs.U.S.Rep. Joe Cunningham(? R)
SD: Incumbent Kristi Noem(R)
vs.State Rep. Billie Sutton(? D)
TN: Incumbent Bill Lee(R)
vs.Senate nominee Marquita Bradshaw(? D)
TX: Incumbent Greg Abbott(R)
vs.U.S.Rep. Allen West(? R)
VT: Incumbent Phil Scott(R)
(no prospective opponents yet)
WI: Incumbent Tony Evers(D)
(no prospective opponents yet)
WY: Incumbent Mark Gordon(R)
vs.Minority Leader Chris Rothfuss(D)

Gubernatorial Debates 2023:
KY: Incumbent Andy Beshear(D)
vs.Former Gov. Matt Bevin(? R)
Senator Rand Paul(? R)
LA: Incumbent John Bel Edwards(D,term-limited)
vs.Biden Adviser Cedric Richmond(? D)
vs.Senator John Neely Kennedy(? R)
MS: Incumbent Tate Reeves(R)
(no prospective opponents yet)
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families/Children
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Infrastructure/Technology
Jobs
Local Issues
Principles/Values
Social Security
Tax Reform
War/Iraq/Mideast
Welfare/Poverty


Contact info:
Email Contact Form
Fax Number:
202-226-1463
Official Website
Phone number:
(202) 225-2132
Search for...





Page last updated: Mar 02, 2021