More on Voluntary Adoption of Majority Voting

In a recent press release concerning director voting, the ABA Committee on Corporate Laws states:  "One positive development is the growing trend of voluntary adoption by certain corporations of corporate governance guidelines that address the failure of nominees to satisfy a minimum vote requirement."  It then cites what Pfizer, Inc. did as an example.  I discussed Pfizer's adoption in my earlier post on the issue.  As that post indicates, I just don't see how this "growing trend" is a positive development.  At best, it is a neutral development; at worst, it is a negative development because a corporation can hold up its voluntary adoption "as a step in further stregthening corporate governance," to paraphrase Disney, when in reality the adoption of a Pfizer type so-called majority voting standard does nothing for corporate governance.  Am I missing something here?

[Bill Sjostrom]