Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.
19001 S. Western Avenue, A404
P.O. Box 2722
Torrance, CA 90509-2722
310-468-5030
310-468-7809 Fax
Irving A. Miller
Group Vice President
Corporate Communications
February 4, 2002
Peter Flaherty
President, National Legal and Policy Center
George Mason Square
103 West Broad St., Suite 620
Falls Church, VA 22046
Dear Mr. Flaherty:
During an appearance on The O’Reilly Factor television show, you raised questions about Toyota’s diversity plans, threats of a boycott by Reverend Jesse Jackson and the truthfulness of statements made by our company and by myself.
Toyota shares your desire for a factual representation of our diversity efforts. Unfortunately, many observers, including yourself, have fallen victim to some unfounded assumptions and conventional wisdom, and I want to take this opportunity to set the record straight as I did in a recent meeting with Mr. O'Reilly.
We find that there are three prevalent myths about Toyota’s 21st Century Strategic Diversity Plan.
Myth Number One: Toyota’s diversity plan was a deal or payoff with Jackson and Rainbow/PUSH.
Unlike many other companies that have signed covenants with Jackson, Toyota’s plan is a significant departure. It is not a contract or agreement with any specific minority group or leader. There is no hidden document or sidebar arrangement. In fact, the document has been posted on Toyota’s web site in its entirety, for all to review. Toyota’s intention was to publish and execute this plan, regardless of reaction by Jackson or any other minority leader. We believe the plan’s good intent and solid business sense speaks for itself.
Myth Number Two: Toyota’s spending with minority-owned business will financially benefit Rainbow/PUSH or Reverend Jackson.
None of the approximately $700 million-per-year spending on goods and services from minority businesses will go directly to Jackson or Rainbow/PUSH. Many observers incorrectly assume that Toyota will pick businesses preferred Jackson. For example, you pointed to ad agency Burrell Communications and the financial firm Blaylock and Partners as “proof” that Toyota financially supports Jackson and Rainbow/PUSH, because these companies have had associations with Jackson.
The fact is that after an exhaustive agency review of six finalists, Burrell had the qualifications, resources and presentation that earned the account. We made the choice based strictly on business considerations. It may be of some interest to you that Reverend Jackson’s recommendation was not Burrell Communications.
Regarding Toyota Motor Credit’s securities, you were misinformed in stating that Jackson supporters received a $300 million bond underwriting deal. The bond issue in question was announced on June 27, 2001 and its lead manager was Goldman Sachs. Ten million dollars of this was offered by the minority firm Blaylock & Partners as a subcontractor chosen by Goldman Sachs. This issue was in the works prior to Jackson’s first threat of a boycott and certainly prior to the announcement of our Diversity Strategy. Toyota Motor Credit traditionally mixes its underwriters as a matter of prudent business policy. Last month, Toyota Motor Credit Corporation issued another asset-backed security offering in which no minority underwriters were involved.
To conclude that doing business with such minority firms supports Jackson, or your assertion that purchasing stock on the NYSE indirectly benefits Jackson, defies logic. This is no more reasonable than to say that since Toyota pays my salary and I contribute to my church or political party, therefore Toyota intentionally supports these organizations. We believe that in a free society, what our associates and suppliers do with their income is their business.
Myth Number Three: In order to do business with Toyota, minority-owned businesses must go through Rainbow/PUSH.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Toyota presently purchases more than $600 million in goods and services per year from minority owned enterprises. The vast majority of these have no relationship with Jackson or PUSH and came to be Toyota business partners the old fashioned way... they earned it! These entrepreneurs went directly to Toyota and provide quality and efficient service at a fair price. They met the same criteria as any other business and are held to the same standards. This will not change in the future.
Reverend Jackson is a controversial figure. Toyota does not endorse him or his actions. As a large corporation that manufactures and markets products in the U.S., we seek good relationships with leaders of many communities. Reverend Jackson is just one. He does not speak for our company, nor does he guide our business decisions. Say what you will about Jackson and Rainbow PUSH, but please take the time to learn the facts about Toyota’s diversity plan, rather than making uninformed and unfair statements about our company.
Sincerely,
signature: Irving Miller