Forwarded mail received from:
CENTER1:CENTER2:TCPBRIDGE:CI:SMTPGATE:"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
This is from the PUBLABOR list, a response to Clinton's economic
Herbert Stein's column in WSJ last week. Further grist for the
discussion of the "evil of two lessers" discussion recently.
Thanks to Jim Devine for the posting of David Brower's piece.
LaborTalk: The No-Fault Corporation
By Harry Kelber
Here's the latest word on the subject of corporate
responsibility. It comes from no less an authority than Herbert
Stein, former chairman of the President's Council of Economic
Advisers under President Nixon.
Writing in The Wall Street Journal of July 15 under a banner
headline, "Corporate America, Mind Your Own Business," Stein says
that corporations "discharged their responsibilities when they
maximized profits." It's a hard-nosed message that's easy for
ordinary folks to understand: The sole guiding principle of any
company is to make as much money as possible for its investors. It's
a blunt response to those who criticize corporations for their
outrageous executive salaries, bloated profits and tight-fisted
attitude toward their employees.
Stein strongly advises that "corporations should not accept
responsibility for doing anything the government asks them to do."
That, of course, should not inhibit them from accepting the
innumerable tax breaks, depreciation allowances, subsidies, grants
and special favors they get from Congress, presumably to make them
more competitive and improve the American economy.
Stein argues that a company's "shareholders"--its employees
and customers--do not deserve any special consideration, except in
instances where it maximizes its profits. Corporate greed is a
healthy instinct, economically justified since, as Stein says,
"maximizing profits is the guide for attaining a certain kind of
efficiency in the use of the economy's resources."
According to this view, corporations have every right to move
their factories to low-wage countries to boost their profit margins
and they have no responsibility whatever for the economic and social
wreckage they leave behind. It's not their problem that their
employees are left without a livelihood and that the communities
that provided them with essential services suffer financial loss.
It is not only their right but their duty to fight against any
legislation that puts a crimp in their profit picture. To cut labor
costs, they must exert pressure to keep wages and benefits to the
lowest possible level. That also means they must use whatever
means at their disposal to develop a "union-free environment." In
short, corporations must strive to be a law unto themselves and
oppose any government regulations that interfere with their single-
minded mission to enrich their investors.
Obviously, this is a view that the labor movement must
challenge. But how? Outside of the occasional blasts against
corporate greed, there is no clearly-defined strategy or legislative
agenda to compel corporations to be accountable for their behavior
to the American people.
We need not expect the Clinton administration to take on this
job. The White House and virtually all members of Congress are
beholden to Big Business, not only for its political contributions but
for the enormous pressure it can exert as the nation's most powerful
"special interest" group.
The best that President Clinton has been able to do is to create
a "corporate citizenship award" in the name of the late Ron Brown,
the former Secretary of Commerce, who acted as a salesman for our
corporations, drumming up business for them by using the economic
and military power of the U.S. government as selling points. Does
anyone think that corporations will abandon their quest for
superprofits in order to get the President's award?
The question of corporate responsibility should be a prime
issue in this election. It is not. Candidates are avoiding it. Can the
AFL-CIO come up with a specific program to make corporations
accountable and compel the major political parties to respond to the
issue, as it did with the minimum wage and Medicare?
