Packing a Powerful Lineup

I received a visit in early 2008 from Terry McWilliams, founder of a Louisville area-based investor relations firm. After conducting a successful equity/investment conference in his home state, he was looking to bring the idea to Indiana. The initial event did take place that fall at the then recently opened Lucas Oil Stadium.

Terry and a team of supporters are back in 2010 with a strong list of Hoosier companies that are going to talk about their performance and their future plans. The primary audience: analysts, fund managers and institutional investors. And, as Terry explained in a recent e-mail, the people who can benefit the most are "those with companies that plan to go public, as they can witness the investor commuications process from a front row seat."

You can check out the details of the September 9 event (at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway this time around). It’s certainly a bit of a niche audience/event, but anytime you can get the likes of the following in one place to talk about their organizations, that’s a good thing — and an insight into our immediate and longer-term economic future from some executives who are at center stage of the battle.

Big names: Eli Lilly, Cummins, Steel Dynamics, NiSource, Zimmer, Hillenbrand, Interactive Intelligence, a variety of banks and more. Michael Oxley, co-author of the Sarbanes Oxley Act, will deliver a keynote presentation.

Supreme Court Case Could Impact Sarbanes-Oxley

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, a lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of a large portion of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A recent e-mail from the Competitive Enterprise Institute notes, "The law, which was rushed through Congress after the Enron and WorldCom scandals, created numerous corporate governance and accounting rules that have been criticized by both Democrats and Republicans as excessively burdensome to smaller companies, detrimental to U.S. competitiveness, and ill-equipped to protect shareholders from fraud. The decision the Court makes could be more consequential to jobs growth than any job summit politicians might have."

NPR explains:

The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on Monday testing the constitutionality of the federal anti-fraud law that grew out of the Enron scandal. At issue is the constitutionality of the board Congress created to oversee independent audits of publicly traded companies.

But even more could be at stake.

As Congress debates what measures are needed to avoid a repeat of the financial institution failures of the last year, it is hard to remember that eight years ago, a different kind of scandal shook the foundations of the business world. It involved the collapse of some of the nation’s largest corporations — Enron, WorldCom and Tyco — and how those companies deceived their investors through sham outside audits. Enron’s bankruptcy in 2001 was, at the time, the largest in U.S. history.

"It was the canary in the mine shaft," says Paul Sarbanes, who in 2001 was chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

"You had a number of major companies engaged in convoluted, often fraudulent, accounting schemes to inflate their earnings, to hide their losses and to drive up their stock prices," he observes.

And the outside audits of these companies, even though conducted by industry standards, were worthless.

The debacles provoked a crisis of confidence in capital markets. After extensive hearings, Democrat Sarbanes, and his Republican counterpart in the House, Michael Oxley, co-authored a bill to ensure that investors would get accurate financial information about publicly traded companies. President Bush signed it into law in 2002.

Instead of allowing the accounting industry to regulate itself, as it had before, the law created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the PCAOB, or as it is uncharitably known, "peekaboo." The board is technically private and is funded by a fee charged to public accounting firms. Its five board members are top accounting specialists appointed by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

But pro-business conservatives have attacked the board as unconstitutional. They contend it is a hybrid institution accountable to no one, that both makes rules to govern public accounting and enforces them.