December 27, 2021
Re: S7-17-21
Cydney Posner quoted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce 's \"take on the proposal, contending that the 'rules finalized by the SEC last year created a level playing field and ensured that investors would have access to high quality information free of bias. If the SEC decides to roll back these rules, it will signal that it is not serious about rooting out and eliminating misinformation and conflicts of interest in the proxy process and will instead place special interests at the head of the line, harming investors and markets. We will engage with the SEC to stop these misguided proposals from moving forward' (\"SEC proposes to undo key provisions of key 2020 proxy voting rules\" JDSupra 29 Nov 2021).
The proposed exceptions to the amendments are intended to force PVAB to provide accurate information in a timely manner. These requirements for their solicitations are not onerous. It is basic. To undermine several years of staff research and careful crafting of policy in this roundabout way is ill- advised. Institutional investors and PVAB are not the most important stakeholders, (corporate governing bodies and individual shareholders are with respect to protection of democratic participation and institutional integrity) yet this last minute halt on implementation of long sought after highly contentious rules seems to serve their interests. The financial services sector of the economy does not need these pusillanimous protections. Gary Gensler needs to stop pulling his punches. Rhetorically I 100% support the statements of Commissioners Peirce Roisman on these proposed rule changes. It surprised me that their statements resonated with me as much as they did, as I expected to be more aligned with Chair Gensler, so this diversity of views on a rather Byzantine topic (the 71 page rule-making proposal is very comprehensive and the Factsheet concise,both much appreciated) indicate that this is not a partisan issue. Of course it has political dimensions and a certain amount of agonism is involved. This rule-making process is a contest on certain levels. It worries me that PVAB regulation that has been designed to check conflicts of interest that can bias their product (proxy voting information and advise, yes opinion but omg, such over concern for liability) is being hobbled by workarounds.
Further, I do worry about from whence does this resistance to long desired rules for PVAB come? Their very recent efforts at a SRO cannot be considered sufficient. C'mon y'all.
The Note e focus on providing a remedy for misleading proxy voting information is essential to retain. Please do not go forward with this weird, circuitous approach to these proposed rules. Lack of enforcement and disingenuous interpretation of rules, regulations, guidance,and notes is bad for confidence in administrative processes and trust in financial markets more broadly.