From: aronoff [aronoff@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 8:40 PM To: rule-comments@sec.gov Subject: File # S7-14-03 TO Jonathan Katz, Secretary US Securities and Exchange Comm RE Election of Directors to Public Companies (and privately held companies, too, with revenues or assets exceeding $100,000,000 if subject to SEC review -- if not subject, don't try to get involved) The election of corporate directors should: a.. guarantee a majority are "outside" or "totally independent" directors b.. outlaw only management's slate of directors c.. outlaw if you don't vote, management votes for you for their slate of directors d.. outlaw this voting of "yes" and "withhold" vote, no other no other voting is acceptable e.. allow stockholders (who, after all "own" the company) to submit their own slate of directors, one or ten, whatever the case be provided we don't have a huge listing of candidates in so doing (make sure they own a minimum number of shares, for example and maybe combine that with a year of ownership) f.. if over 1000 shares are voted or 10,000 or whatever, that a confirmation is sent by the company to the voting large shareholder confirming the receipt of their vote g.. my experience is if you allow the public company's management to do any h.. selecting of governance, they will select "friendly" not "independent" while proudly proclaiming the quality of their hand-picked puppets -- no words are ever spoken (at least not openly) but selected all know "their responsibilities and take them seriously" [we all understand those code words except the SEC ?] i.. isn't time that the SEC bring credibility to its work effort, its "watchdog" function? j.. if the public companies didn't have the influence on the SEC they do, we'd be better off! Sincerely, Bob Aronoff PO Box 607 South Pasadena CA 91031