<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2013/04/29/responding-to-objections-to-shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending-5-the-claim-that-shareholder-proposals-requesting-disclosure-do-not-receive-majority-support/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 13:53:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Responding to Objections to Shining Light on Corporate Political Spending (5): The Claim that Shareholder Proposals Requesting Disclosure Do Not Receive Majority Support</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2013/04/29/responding-to-objections-to-shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending-5-the-claim-that-shareholder-proposals-requesting-disclosure-do-not-receive-majority-support/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=responding-to-objections-to-shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending-5-the-claim-that-shareholder-proposals-requesting-disclosure-do-not-receive-majority-support</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2013/04/29/responding-to-objections-to-shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending-5-the-claim-that-shareholder-proposals-requesting-disclosure-do-not-receive-majority-support/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:26:34 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Academic Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HLS Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Program News & Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Citizens United v. FEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rulemaking Petition on Corporate Political Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shining Light on Corporate Political Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transparency]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/?p=44220?d=20150105102148EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In our first four posts in this series (collected here), we examined four objections raised by opponents of mandating disclosure of political spending and explained why these objections provide no basis for opposing such rules. In this post, we focus on a fifth objection raised by opponents of these rules: the claim that the SEC [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Lucian Bebchuk, Harvard Law School, and Robert J. Jackson, Jr., Columbia Law School, on Monday, April 29, 2013 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/bebchuk/" target="_blank">Lucian Bebchuk</a> is Professor of Law, Economics, and Finance at Harvard Law School. <a href="http://www.law.columbia.edu/fac/Robert_Jackson" target="_blank">Robert J. Jackson, Jr.</a> is Associate Professor of Law and Milton Handler Fellow at Columbia Law School. Bebchuk and Jackson served as co-chairs of the Committee on Disclosure of Corporate Political Spending, which filed a <a href="http://www.sec.gov/rules/petitions/2011/petn4-637.pdf" target="_blank">rulemaking petition</a> requesting that the SEC require all public companies to disclose their political spending, discussed on the Forum <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/tag/rulemaking-petition-on-corporate-political-spending/">here</a>. Bebchuk and Jackson are also co-authors of <a href="http://ssrn.com/abstract=1670085" target="_blank">Corporate Political Speech: Who Decides?</a> and <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2142115" target="_blank">Shining Light on Corporate Political Spending</a>, coming out this month in the <em>Georgetown Law Journal</em>. This post is the fourth in a series of posts, based on the <em>Shining Light</em> article, in which Bebchuk and Jackson respond to objections to an SEC rule requiring disclosure of corporate political spending; the full series of posts is available <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/tag/shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending/">here</a>.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>In our first four posts in this series (collected <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/tag/shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending/">here</a>), we examined four objections raised by opponents of mandating disclosure of political spending and explained why these objections provide no basis for opposing such rules. In this post, we focus on a fifth objection raised by opponents of these rules: the claim that the SEC should not require disclosure in this area because shareholder proposals requesting disclosure of corporate spending on politics generally have not received the support of a majority of investors.</p>
<p>Several opponents of the petition have argued that the SEC should not mandate disclosure of corporate political spending because, in many cases, shareholder proposals seeking such disclosure at individual companies are supported by less than a majority of voting shares. For example, Paul Atkins, a former SEC commissioner, <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/sec-rule-on-corporate-political-giving-too-extreme-87107.html" target="_blank">argued in a recent article</a> that “majorities of shareholders routinely refuse to support mandatory disclosure” of corporate political spending—and, thus, that shareholders are simply not interested in this information.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2013/04/29/responding-to-objections-to-shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending-5-the-claim-that-shareholder-proposals-requesting-disclosure-do-not-receive-majority-support/#more-44220" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Responding to Objections to Shining Light on Corporate Political Spending (5): The Claim that Shareholder Proposals Requesting Disclosure Do Not Receive Majority Support">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2013/04/29/responding-to-objections-to-shining-light-on-corporate-political-spending-5-the-claim-that-shareholder-proposals-requesting-disclosure-do-not-receive-majority-support/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
