With This, I'm Done With Hannigan
The LA Times went 3-1 today, running an editorial on Sean Hannigan's ouster as CalPERS president without mentioning the pension fund's lackluster performance. (here)
It's clear that Hannigan's ouster had to do with his overly aggressive pushing for "corporate reform," i.e., the big union agenda, not CalPERS financial performance. And that's right and good. Let's just not overlook the simple fact that he put his political agenda ahead of his obligation to earn the highest return for those state employees who he represented.
Some don't like my "whine and push, whine and push" assessment of radicals:
Brilliant. Why strive for perfection when you can settle for mediocrity? Assuming you don't approve of mismanagement, waste, fraud and abuse in corporate America and support some of the efforts of the Sarbanes-Oxley act, why would you stop there? Wouldn't you try and continue fighting the excesses?
Any mismanagement of the public's money is reprehensible, whether it's Fleishman-Hilliard's alleged rip-off of $4.3 million from the people of Los Angeles, Enron stiffing investors, or Harrigan' acting out his hatred of management at the expense of the people he is supposed to represent. I'm all for tough prosecution of anyone who takes from the public trough.
But the simple fact is that Hannigan was a punisher of corporations, not a reformer. He may have been well-intentioned, but throughout his career (and perhaps his life) he surrounded himself with corporation-bashers and union nest-featherers, and it showed in how he ran CalPERS. Even the LA Times acknowledged he pushed too hard.
The vast majority of public companies are honest. Over-regulating them in the interest of catching an Enron is actually punishment for doing the right thing.
It's clear that Hannigan's ouster had to do with his overly aggressive pushing for "corporate reform," i.e., the big union agenda, not CalPERS financial performance. And that's right and good. Let's just not overlook the simple fact that he put his political agenda ahead of his obligation to earn the highest return for those state employees who he represented.
Some don't like my "whine and push, whine and push" assessment of radicals:
Brilliant. Why strive for perfection when you can settle for mediocrity? Assuming you don't approve of mismanagement, waste, fraud and abuse in corporate America and support some of the efforts of the Sarbanes-Oxley act, why would you stop there? Wouldn't you try and continue fighting the excesses?
Any mismanagement of the public's money is reprehensible, whether it's Fleishman-Hilliard's alleged rip-off of $4.3 million from the people of Los Angeles, Enron stiffing investors, or Harrigan' acting out his hatred of management at the expense of the people he is supposed to represent. I'm all for tough prosecution of anyone who takes from the public trough.
But the simple fact is that Hannigan was a punisher of corporations, not a reformer. He may have been well-intentioned, but throughout his career (and perhaps his life) he surrounded himself with corporation-bashers and union nest-featherers, and it showed in how he ran CalPERS. Even the LA Times acknowledged he pushed too hard.
The vast majority of public companies are honest. Over-regulating them in the interest of catching an Enron is actually punishment for doing the right thing.
posted by Laer at 7:56 AM
<< Home