SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : The ENRON Scandal -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ron who wrote (727)1/17/2002 11:14:43 AM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 5185
 
"As Enron Corp. was imploding in December, Harvey Pitt, the new head of the
Securities and Exchange Commission, called a private meeting of the
accounting industry's top officials. The industry, already under pressure, was
facing questions about why Arthur Andersen LLP failed to detect financial
woes at the energy trader."

" But Mr. Pitt didn't call for sweeping changes. Rather, people briefed on the
meeting say that the SEC chief -- after years as a private attorney representing
securities and accounting firms -- offered the accounting officials some advice:
Come up with a statement addressing growing concerns about the industry's
ability to audit large corporate clients."
.........................................................................................................................

I've seen numerous editorials that are critical of his actions. The columnists believe
that he has a conflict of interest. As the article notes:

"Some investors' lawyers are critical. "As a private attorney, Mr. Pitt earned
millions of dollars representing big Wall Street and accounting firms, including
Arthur Andersen," says Jacob Zamansky, a New York-based lawyer
representing investors. "As SEC chairman he appears to be siding with the
industry rather than the public investors whom he is charged to protect."



To: Ron who wrote (727)1/18/2002 4:16:52 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 5185
 
A System Corrupted
January 18, 2002
The New York Times


"Yet all the evidence suggests that the Bush administration
doesn't get it. On the contrary, until the latest revelations
it was moving in the wrong direction. Harvey Pitt, the new
chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission,
made his reputation as a lawyer who represented
accounting firms - including Andersen - in struggles to
maintain auditor independence. Now we've seen what
Andersen did with that independence. "

By PAUL KRUGMAN


Clearly, Larry Lindsey
shouldn't have described the
Enron affair as a "tribute to
American capitalism," and Paul
O'Neill shouldn't have declared:
"Companies come and go. It's part
of the genius of capitalism." Both
the top White House economist
and the Treasury secretary have been excoriated for their
callousness. But did they have a point?

Yes, they did - but their remarks suggest that they still
don't understand what happened. The Enron debacle is
not just the story of a company that failed; it is the story
of a system that failed. And the system didn't fail through
carelessness or laziness; it was corrupted.

Mr. Lindsey and Mr. O'Neill were, in effect, patting
themselves on the back for allowing Enron to fail. Indeed,
that is one redeeming feature of the saga. It turns out that
you can be too well connected; Enron was so enmeshed
with the Bush administration that any bailout would have
been politically disastrous.

But it's missing the point to focus on Enron's eventual
failure. The real issue is what Enron executives got away
with during the good times.

We usually take the viability of the modern corporation, in
which professional managers look after the interests of
shareholders, for granted. But as economists since Adam
Smith have warned, a separation between ownership and
management opens the possibility of insider abuse.
Indeed, Smith thought that such a separation was a bad
idea, except in a handful of businesses.

But you can't run a modern economy with family-owned
companies and partnerships. So capitalism as we know it
depends on a set of institutions - many of them provided
by the government - that limit the potential for insider
abuse. These institutions include modern accounting
rules, independent auditors, securities and financial
market regulation, and prohibitions against insider
trading.

The Enron affair shows that these institutions have been
corrupted. None of the checks and balances that were
supposed to prevent insider abuses worked; the
supposedly independent players were compromised.

Enron's byzantine network of 3,000 subsidiaries and
partnerships - one for every seven employees - made a
mockery both of accounting rules and of rules against
insider trading. Not incidentally, the network also allowed
the company to evade taxes in four of the last five years.
And Enron executives knew what they were doing. A letter
last August from an Enron vice president to the chairman,
Kenneth Lay, described how shell companies with names
like Condor and Raptor were used to create fictitious
profits, and quoted one manager as saying, "We are such a
crooked company."


The accounting firm of Arthur Andersen was told of these
concerns. Yet it gave Enron a free pass, and shredded
documents when questions arose. The regulators were
nowhere to be seen, partly because politicians with
personal ties to Enron, like Senator Phil Gramm, took
care to exempt Enron from regulation.

Mr. Lindsey and Mr. O'Neill would have us believe that
all's well that ended badly; because Enron was allowed to
fail, justice was done and the system worked. But Enron
isn't a person; the evildoers here were Enron executives,
who collectively walked off with at least $1.1 billion.

It's not just a matter of the utter unfairness of it all -
employees lose their life savings while crooked executives
walk away rich. It's also a matter of what it takes to make
capitalism work. Investors must be reasonably sure that
reported profits are real, that executives won't use their
positions to enrich themselves at the expense of
stockholders and employees, that when insiders do abuse
their positions their actions will be discovered and
punished.

Now we have seen a graphic demonstration that the
system that was supposed to provide those assurances
doesn't work. And nobody I know in the financial
community thinks Enron was an isolated case.

Yet all the evidence suggests that the Bush administration
doesn't get it. On the contrary, until the latest revelations
it was moving in the wrong direction. Harvey Pitt, the new
chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission,
made his reputation as a lawyer who represented
accounting firms - including Andersen - in struggles to
maintain auditor independence. Now we've seen what
Andersen did with that independence.

The truth is that key institutions that underpin our
economic system have been corrupted. The only question
that remains is how far and how high the corruption
extends.

nytimes.com