Mr. Chairman, some of the examples we have heard from the other side of the aisle, Milken, Keating, Leeson, they all share something important. Each of these acted with intent. Each of these acted with the intent to defraud. The legislation that we are considering today would not affect shareholder actions against those people or people like them in the future. Those people would be jointly and severally liable. That has not changed in our legislation, and, Mr. Chairman, I think that is a compelling point in ending this debate.
Jack Fields: “Mr. Chairman, some of the examples we have heard from the other side of the aisle, Milken, Keating, Leeson, they all…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of legislation on shareholder actions during a committee debate.
Share
More from Jack Fields
I support the amendment, because it provides a more efficient mechanism for an auditor to report the discovery of acts of questionable legality to management, the board of directors, and, if necessary, to the Securities and Exchange…
I appreciate all of the gentleman's kind remarks. I think it is refreshing for the public and the country at large to see both sides of the aisle working in an extremely complex issue area, working together and finding commonality. Mr…
I just want to take the time to thank him and also the gentleman from California for this fine work. This is a very sensitive area, very complex area, but it is a very important area for the American public, and I just wanted to…
I will restate to the gentleman that it is my strong belief that this is a fair statute and there should not be two different types of treatments, one for governmental entities and those for all others. I think this is fair to all who…





