Today I’ve written a column for the Capitol Weekly on the so-called "Shareholder Protection" measure being qualified for the June 2006 ballot by union-forces, motivated by both ‘payback’ for having Proposition 75 ("Paycheck Protection") foisted upon then, as well as to try to counter, tactically, the impact of having public employee union PAC coffers start to dry up without mandatory
dues assessments on their members. In a nutshell, this measure forces a public company to have their stock holders vote before funds can be spent on political candidates or causes.
Tha analogy that union bosses are trying to make is that holders of stocks in publically traded companties deserve the same type of ‘protection’ against "their money" being used for political purposes without their express permission. This argument is comparing apples to oranges. If you are a public employee, it’s
not like you can quit your job if you are unhappy with the union’s use of the money they confiscate from your pay. However, if you own stock in a company, and you are not happy with what they are doing…guess what?? You can SELL THE STOCK!
So, if you are upset at finding out that Dominos Pizza spends money on pro-life causes, you can DUMP your stock, and go buy something more appealing to your ideological bent — perhaps Ben and Jerry’s!
Read my entire column on the so-called "Shareholder Protection" initiative here. Also, the actual text submitted by the proponents to the Attorney General is attached.