Swaying Not To Sway.

       Here's something interesting in the Washington Post. The new head of the Security and Exchange Commission was testifying to Congress about a proposal to require publicly traded corporations to reveal any political campaign donations they make, to their stockholders.
       Some Congressmen are telling the new head of the SEC that she should not endorse this proposal because it would cause the SEC to become embroiled in an IRS type scandal. Apparently because the SEC personnel would be unable to stop themselves from becoming partisan activists.
       An admonition not to allow herself to be swayed by anyone bent on inappropriately targeting conservative corporations was advised by the chair of the sub-committee she was testifying to. In other words, don't enact this rule because it might be detrimental to the recipients of the largess.
       But isn't there an attempt on the part of the chair of this committee to sway her against approving a rule that might hurt his fund raising abilities? Wouldn't it make better law to require transparency between management of Corporations and their stockholders? I mean after all, the stockholders are the owners. Shouldn't the owners have the right to know where the money is flowing that otherwise might be flowing into their pockets? Or into research and development? Or even employee benefits?
       It's not that corporations can't throw money away, or invest in a Congressman or Senator who might throw business their way or pass legislation favorable to them or fix a parking ticket. All of these things could be beneficial to the corporation. Or it's management. But the stockholders might not see it as being beneficial to the stockholders. And the stockholders might not care if a Congressman likes it or not.