Do You Really Know Who Supports Employee Stock Ownership? explores how Rep. Dana Rohrabacher [R-CA] and Rep. Ron Paul [R-TX] have consistently supported ESOPs, and cites H.R. 6419: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income compensation received by employees consisting of qualified distributions of employer stock as a recent example. The post discusses what constitutes good Congressional support:
A nice remark about employee stock ownership, however, is not good enough, as what employee ownership advocates need to protect stock programs such as ESOPs is more than nice words, and a pat on the back. A member of Congress needs to stand up for employee stock ownership, just as Congressman Paul, and Congressman Rohrabacher have done year after year by signing on to pro-ESOP, or pro-employee stock ownership proposals. And on the key committees, a vote for the pro-ESOP position, or a speech in public, before the press and colleagues, also qualifies as a true pro-employee stock ownership position.
It provides a historical look at the Congressional support of ESOPs:
- 1980-1986: "limited, but very, very deep" support from Russell B. Long and President Ronald Reagan
- 1986-1989: "ESOPs had to rely on a handful of members to save ESOPs", such as Beryl Anthony, Cass Ballenger, Sen. Max Baucus [D-MT], and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher [R-CA].
- 1989-2000: "very wide, but shallow" support
It also expresses concern of current ESOP support in the majority party:
In recent years, we are unsure who among the majority party in Congress will really stand up with intensity and push to promote employee stock ownership. We are making progress, but there is not a comfort level that any Democrat in Congress would fight for employee stock ownership.
0 comments:
Post a Comment