From: DukeoW@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 4:34 PM
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
Cc: DukeoW@aol.com; 8.5@consultant.com
Subject: Board of directors elections

With only a couple of exceptions the current election process is fatally 
flawed. Self interest and greed dominate boards, with trivial risk due to 
shareholders paid for liability insurance. So what if Enron or Worldcom are 
populated by crooks, the insurance will protect the board responsible for 
supervising Ken Lay and his clones. 

Basically the model of Berkshire Hathaway is one possibility. No directors 
insurance, major investment in the stock of the company, significant 
management experience, and minimal directors fees. 

The other is to seek and present more than one candidate for board positions, 
with some input from huge holdings of bodies like Callpers, the New York, 
Maryland, and other state retirement systems. Since they are selective most 
of the universe of public companies will not have representation in this 
group. I trust not the mutual funds management to be qualified to chose and 
vote for board members. In a sense it leaves one on the horns of a dilemma. 

I wish I had a solution, but I also believe that the present self interest of 
boards is not in the investors interest. 

As one who has held stocks for decades with turnover of less than one percent 
a year, I qualify as a long term owner. While I do not have the total assets 
of Mr. Warren Buffett, I was in high school in the same city; my tenure 
overlapped his education. Some reason has gotten me to use most of his 
methods in my investments. I feel we owners need a better deal, a fair deal, 
and an unstacked deck!

James Little
305 Patton Pl.
Rockville, MD. 20851

301 762 3215