@article{john_f._hulpke_corporate_2013,
	title = {Corporate {Misdeeds}: {Unanticipated} {Consequences}},
	volume = {21},
	shorttitle = {Corporate {Misdeeds}: {Unanticipated} {Consequences}},
	url = {http://search.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1356611805?accountid=10382},
	abstract = {In 1758, Benjamin Franklin wrote "for want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for want of a shoe the horse was
lost; and for want of a horse the rider was lost." In 1966 General Motors used dirty tricks to discredit Ralph Nader
instead of improving auto safety. GM’s tricks were discovered and Nader became famous. After a lawsuit with GM,
Nader was also financially secure. GM created Ralph Nader. In the year 2000, Nader ran for the US presidency. In
Florida where Bush received a few hundred more votes than Gore, Nader received 97,000 votes. Without these votes
for Nader, the results would have been different for the year 2000 US presidential election. One can credit the Bush
victory to General Motors. Would we have started working on Global Climate Change sooner if Gore had won? No
one can say, but we can say, GM misdeeds were one factor leading to the election of George W. Bush in 2001, and
Al Gore was NOT elected US president.
As Barry Mitnick puts it, “Indeed, for a topic as old and widely studied as corporate political activity
(CPA), it is astonishing how little we know��� (Mitnick, 1993). Although we still know little, we do have a base from
which to continue. The role of business in US elections serves as one point of beginning. Thus scholars are
appropriately looking at campaign financing (Mizruchi, 1992), "soft money" (Beaver, 1998; Sorauf, 1992), Political
Action Committees (PACs) (Eismeier \& Pollack, 1988; Milyo, Primo, \& Groseclose, 2000), lobbying (Levitan \&
Cooper, 1984), and similar topics. Other researchers have looked at corporate influence in Washington and other
capitals (Mintz \& Cohen, 1976). Individual case studies may help start the analytic process. Some have taken the
case approach to look at corporate misconduct and the governing process (Estes, 1996). In the next few pages we
will build on these earlier works to consider one question: Can corporate misdeeds be connected to the year 2000 US
presidential election? In such a close election, any of a number of things could be said to have made the difference.
With a little imagination, one can even say that misdeeds of one firm, General Motors, put George W. Bush in the
White House.
Much will be said and written about the selection of George W. Bush as 41st president of the United States
of America. Some will point to the fact that the loser in the race, Vice President Al Gore, lost the vote in his home
state of Tennessee. Others point to Arkansas, another state Bush won although Gore "should" have won. Even more
attention has gone to, and will go to, Florida, with its incredibly close vote count, old vote counting machines, and in
one county, a ballot that people agree caused some Gore backers to cast votes for other candidates (Nyhan, 2000).
Those making each of these arguments can accurately say, "if only…", then Gore would have won the keys to the
White House instead of Bush. If any one of these things had been different, then, things would have been different.
For want of a nail, the shoe was lost;
For want of the shoe, the horse was lost;
For want of the horse, the rider was lost;
For want of the rider, the battle was lost;
For want of the battle, the kingdom was lost,
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
Such speculation is not necessarily useful, but having said that, one must also acknowledge that the
speculation will go on. Perhaps some good may come of it: if indeed vote counting machines missed more votes in
poorer communities (with large minority populations), steps may be taken to improve counting systems for all
voters. If poorer voters are thus given the right to have their votes counted in future elections, democracy will be
better served.
But there is perhaps another way we can benefit from this story. Perhaps we can use the US presidential
election of 2000 to illustrate a point often stated but widely ignored. Even a little business misconduct can have far
reaching impact.},
	language = {English},
	number = {1},
	urldate = {2014-09-13},
	journal = {Journal of American Academy of Business},
	author = {{John F. Hulpke}},
	year = {2013},
	keywords = {General motors company (gm), automotive, recall},
	pages = {44--51}
}

{"_id":"mgfFpQmeFTugBYqnQ","bibbaseid":"johnfhulpke-corporatemisdeedsunanticipatedconsequences-2013","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-08-11T01:44:26.962Z","title":"Corporate Misdeeds: Unanticipated Consequences","author_short":["John F. Hulpke"],"year":2013,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero/SHSguy","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Corporate Misdeeds: Unanticipated Consequences","volume":"21","shorttitle":"Corporate Misdeeds: Unanticipated Consequences","url":"http://search.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1356611805?accountid=10382","abstract":"In 1758, Benjamin Franklin wrote \"for want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for want of a shoe the horse was lost; and for want of a horse the rider was lost.\" In 1966 General Motors used dirty tricks to discredit Ralph Nader instead of improving auto safety. GM’s tricks were discovered and Nader became famous. After a lawsuit with GM, Nader was also financially secure. GM created Ralph Nader. In the year 2000, Nader ran for the US presidency. In Florida where Bush received a few hundred more votes than Gore, Nader received 97,000 votes. Without these votes for Nader, the results would have been different for the year 2000 US presidential election. One can credit the Bush victory to General Motors. Would we have started working on Global Climate Change sooner if Gore had won? No one can say, but we can say, GM misdeeds were one factor leading to the election of George W. Bush in 2001, and Al Gore was NOT elected US president. As Barry Mitnick puts it, “Indeed, for a topic as old and widely studied as corporate political activity (CPA), it is astonishing how little we know��� (Mitnick, 1993). Although we still know little, we do have a base from which to continue. The role of business in US elections serves as one point of beginning. Thus scholars are appropriately looking at campaign financing (Mizruchi, 1992), \"soft money\" (Beaver, 1998; Sorauf, 1992), Political Action Committees (PACs) (Eismeier & Pollack, 1988; Milyo, Primo, & Groseclose, 2000), lobbying (Levitan & Cooper, 1984), and similar topics. Other researchers have looked at corporate influence in Washington and other capitals (Mintz & Cohen, 1976). Individual case studies may help start the analytic process. Some have taken the case approach to look at corporate misconduct and the governing process (Estes, 1996). In the next few pages we will build on these earlier works to consider one question: Can corporate misdeeds be connected to the year 2000 US presidential election? In such a close election, any of a number of things could be said to have made the difference. With a little imagination, one can even say that misdeeds of one firm, General Motors, put George W. Bush in the White House. Much will be said and written about the selection of George W. Bush as 41st president of the United States of America. Some will point to the fact that the loser in the race, Vice President Al Gore, lost the vote in his home state of Tennessee. Others point to Arkansas, another state Bush won although Gore \"should\" have won. Even more attention has gone to, and will go to, Florida, with its incredibly close vote count, old vote counting machines, and in one county, a ballot that people agree caused some Gore backers to cast votes for other candidates (Nyhan, 2000). Those making each of these arguments can accurately say, \"if only…\", then Gore would have won the keys to the White House instead of Bush. If any one of these things had been different, then, things would have been different. For want of a nail, the shoe was lost; For want of the shoe, the horse was lost; For want of the horse, the rider was lost; For want of the rider, the battle was lost; For want of the battle, the kingdom was lost, And all for the want of a horseshoe nail. Such speculation is not necessarily useful, but having said that, one must also acknowledge that the speculation will go on. Perhaps some good may come of it: if indeed vote counting machines missed more votes in poorer communities (with large minority populations), steps may be taken to improve counting systems for all voters. If poorer voters are thus given the right to have their votes counted in future elections, democracy will be better served. But there is perhaps another way we can benefit from this story. Perhaps we can use the US presidential election of 2000 to illustrate a point often stated but widely ignored. Even a little business misconduct can have far reaching impact.","language":"English","number":"1","urldate":"2014-09-13","journal":"Journal of American Academy of Business","author":[{"firstnames":[],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["John F. Hulpke"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2013","keywords":"General motors company (gm), automotive, recall","pages":"44--51","bibtex":"@article{john_f._hulpke_corporate_2013,\n\ttitle = {Corporate {Misdeeds}: {Unanticipated} {Consequences}},\n\tvolume = {21},\n\tshorttitle = {Corporate {Misdeeds}: {Unanticipated} {Consequences}},\n\turl = {http://search.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1356611805?accountid=10382},\n\tabstract = {In 1758, Benjamin Franklin wrote \"for want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for want of a shoe the horse was\nlost; and for want of a horse the rider was lost.\" In 1966 General Motors used dirty tricks to discredit Ralph Nader\ninstead of improving auto safety. GM’s tricks were discovered and Nader became famous. After a lawsuit with GM,\nNader was also financially secure. GM created Ralph Nader. In the year 2000, Nader ran for the US presidency. In\nFlorida where Bush received a few hundred more votes than Gore, Nader received 97,000 votes. Without these votes\nfor Nader, the results would have been different for the year 2000 US presidential election. One can credit the Bush\nvictory to General Motors. Would we have started working on Global Climate Change sooner if Gore had won? No\none can say, but we can say, GM misdeeds were one factor leading to the election of George W. Bush in 2001, and\nAl Gore was NOT elected US president.\nAs Barry Mitnick puts it, “Indeed, for a topic as old and widely studied as corporate political activity\n(CPA), it is astonishing how little we know��� (Mitnick, 1993). Although we still know little, we do have a base from\nwhich to continue. The role of business in US elections serves as one point of beginning. Thus scholars are\nappropriately looking at campaign financing (Mizruchi, 1992), \"soft money\" (Beaver, 1998; Sorauf, 1992), Political\nAction Committees (PACs) (Eismeier \\& Pollack, 1988; Milyo, Primo, \\& Groseclose, 2000), lobbying (Levitan \\&\nCooper, 1984), and similar topics. Other researchers have looked at corporate influence in Washington and other\ncapitals (Mintz \\& Cohen, 1976). Individual case studies may help start the analytic process. Some have taken the\ncase approach to look at corporate misconduct and the governing process (Estes, 1996). In the next few pages we\nwill build on these earlier works to consider one question: Can corporate misdeeds be connected to the year 2000 US\npresidential election? In such a close election, any of a number of things could be said to have made the difference.\nWith a little imagination, one can even say that misdeeds of one firm, General Motors, put George W. Bush in the\nWhite House.\nMuch will be said and written about the selection of George W. Bush as 41st president of the United States\nof America. Some will point to the fact that the loser in the race, Vice President Al Gore, lost the vote in his home\nstate of Tennessee. Others point to Arkansas, another state Bush won although Gore \"should\" have won. Even more\nattention has gone to, and will go to, Florida, with its incredibly close vote count, old vote counting machines, and in\none county, a ballot that people agree caused some Gore backers to cast votes for other candidates (Nyhan, 2000).\nThose making each of these arguments can accurately say, \"if only…\", then Gore would have won the keys to the\nWhite House instead of Bush. If any one of these things had been different, then, things would have been different.\nFor want of a nail, the shoe was lost;\nFor want of the shoe, the horse was lost;\nFor want of the horse, the rider was lost;\nFor want of the rider, the battle was lost;\nFor want of the battle, the kingdom was lost,\nAnd all for the want of a horseshoe nail.\nSuch speculation is not necessarily useful, but having said that, one must also acknowledge that the\nspeculation will go on. Perhaps some good may come of it: if indeed vote counting machines missed more votes in\npoorer communities (with large minority populations), steps may be taken to improve counting systems for all\nvoters. If poorer voters are thus given the right to have their votes counted in future elections, democracy will be\nbetter served.\nBut there is perhaps another way we can benefit from this story. Perhaps we can use the US presidential\nelection of 2000 to illustrate a point often stated but widely ignored. Even a little business misconduct can have far\nreaching impact.},\n\tlanguage = {English},\n\tnumber = {1},\n\turldate = {2014-09-13},\n\tjournal = {Journal of American Academy of Business},\n\tauthor = {{John F. Hulpke}},\n\tyear = {2013},\n\tkeywords = {General motors company (gm), automotive, recall},\n\tpages = {44--51}\n}\n\n","author_short":["John F. Hulpke"],"key":"john_f._hulpke_corporate_2013","id":"john_f._hulpke_corporate_2013","bibbaseid":"johnfhulpke-corporatemisdeedsunanticipatedconsequences-2013","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://search.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1356611805?accountid=10382"},"keyword":["General motors company (gm)","automotive","recall"],"downloads":0},"search_terms":["corporate","misdeeds","unanticipated","consequences","john f. hulpke"],"keywords":["general motors company (gm)","automotive","recall"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["pmvNCr8nXaLroZwhA"]}