section 951 dodd frank wall street reform and consumer protection act

**PLEASE READ ALL DIRECTIONS AND MAKE SURE YOU WILL BE ABLE TO COMPLETE ASAP/IN A FEW HOURS! I’ve already paid someone to do this and they left me high and dry and haven’t contacted me (5 hours past due time) so now I’m in a massive hurry to get this done asap —-  only respond if you have read the entire directions and KNOW THAT YOU CAN TURN IT IN SOON!!!!

Section 951 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires public companies to provide their shareholders with an advisory (non-binding) vote on executive compensation and severance packages, generally known as “ say-on-pay” votes.

Proponents of this legislation suggest that, even though the votes are not binding and the final decision on the compensation package is in the hands of the board of directors, those directors are elected by shareholders, and a shareholder vote against a compensation or severance package may exert pressure on directors to reconsider the package and make changes.

Opponents suggest that say-on-pay is more government regulation, still another intrusion into free enterprise, and if shareholders vote on CEO pay, citizens should be able to vote on the salaries of their Congressional Representatives, Senators and the U.S. President.

What’s your take on the issue? Your posting should address each of the following:

1. Would you support an amendment to the say-on-pay to make shareholder votes on CEO compensation packages binding? Why or why not? Explain your reasoning.

2. Should U.S. citizens have the ability to vote on compensation packages for top government workers (i.e., Congressional Representatives, Senators and the U.S. President)? Why or why not? Explain your reasoning.

Your initial posting is due by midnight, Sunday of Session 4. Your initial posting should consist of a minimum of 4 full paragraphs. Please make certain to cite any outside sources used.