Some commentators have stated, “You cannot legislate morality. ” Is the S-O Act an attempt to legislate morality? Why, or why not? There is a need to establish some standards to protect shareholders and investors from losing their investments. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was not just an attempt to legislate morality. It was more of providing a framework to steer businesses towards what is considered right and correct.
The commenter is correct in saying that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act lets the business executives and other bigwigs know of the consequences of being proven to have committed unethical decisions in the workplace. However, the prospect is not so grim as how the writer had said it. With the SOX in place, there is now a higher degree of transparency. Enron and others like it committed their fraudulent behaviors before the Act was passed.
But in the last couple of years, the country has not been rocked with a big accounting scandal. Comment 2: I am of the same opinion as the writer of this comment. What’s sad about our society is the lack of moral responsibilities in many quarters, and this fact is highlighted with the need to have the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The need to have the Act implies that ethical behavior will be shelved when there is a lot of money involved.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. CPE Inc. Online. Retrieved July 27, 2008, from http://www. cpeonline. com/cpenew/sarox. asp Tishler, Carla. (2003, May 5). Sharing the Responsibility of Corporate Governance. Harvard Business School Working Knowledge. Retrieved July 27, 2008, from http://hbswk. hbs. edu/item/3458. html What is Business Ethics? wiseGeek Home Page. Retrieved July 27, 2008, from http://www. wisegeek. com/what-is-business-ethics. htm Xlibris Home Page. Retrieved July 27, 2008, from http://www2. xlibris. com/about_xlibris. html