Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit Bart Gruzalski's column >>

BART GRUZALSKI

We need both inner awareness (spirituality) and outer activism (spirituality in action)
Articles Posted: 2  Links Seeded: 8
Member Since: 1/2012  Last Seen: 2/21/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Fighting Back Against Corporate Personhood | Truthout

Seeded on Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:46 AM EST
Read ArticleArticle Source: Truthout - All Articles
politics
Seeded by Bart Gruzalski
Advertise | AdChoices

Rarely have so few imposed such damage on so many. When five conservative members of the Supreme Court handed for-profit corporations the right to secretly flood political campaigns with tidal waves of cash on the eve of an election, they moved America closer to outright plutocracy, where political power derived from wealth is devoted to the protection of wealth. It is now official: Just as they have adorned our athletic stadiums and multiple places of public assembly with their logos, corporations can officially put their brand on the government of the United States as well as the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the fifty states.

Andrew Jackson, the overwhelming people’s choice of 1828, vetoed the rechartering of the Second Bank of the United States in the summer of 1832. Twenty percent of its stock was government-owned; the rest was held by private investors, some of them foreigners and all of them wealthy. Jackson argued that the bank’s official connections and size gave it unfair advantages over local competition. In his veto message, he said: “[This act] seems to be predicated on the erroneous idea that the present stockholders have a prescriptive right not only to the favor but to the bounty of Government. . . . It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes.” Four months later, Jackson was easily reelected in a decisive victory over plutocracy.

The predators roared back in the Gilded Age that followed the Civil War. Corruption born of the lust for money produced what one historian described as “the morals of a gashouse gang.” Judges, state legislators, the parties that selected them and the editors who supported them were purchased as easily as ale at the local pub. Lobbyists roamed the halls of Congress proffering gifts of cash, railroad passes, and fancy entertainments. The U.S. Senate became a “millionaires’ club.” With government on the auction block, the notion of the “general welfare” wound up on the trash heap; grotesque inequality and poverty festered under the gilding. Sound familiar?

Then came a judicial earthquake. In 1886, a conservative Supreme Court conferred the divine gift of life on the Southern Pacific Railroad and by extension to all other corporations. The railroad was declared to be a “person,” protected by the recently enacted Fourteenth Amendment, which said that no person should be deprived of “life, liberty or property without due process of law.” Never mind that the amendment was enacted to protect the rights of freed slaves who were now U.S. citizens. Never mind that a corporation possessed neither a body to be kicked nor a soul to be damned (or saved!). The Court decided that it had the same rights of “personhood” as a walking, talking citizen and was entitled to enjoy every liberty protected by the Constitution that flesh-and-blood individuals could claim, even though it did not share their disadvantage of being mortal. It could move where it chose, buy any kind of property it chose, and select its directors and stockholders from anywhere it chose. Welcome to unregulated multinational conglomerates, although unforeseen at the time. Welcome to tax shelters, at home and offshore, and to subsidies galore, paid for by the taxes of unsuspecting working people. Corporations were endowed with the rights of “personhood” but exempted from the responsibilities of citizenship.

That’s the doctrine picked up and dusted off by the John Roberts Court in its ruling on Citizens United. Ignoring a century of modifying precedent, the court gave our corporate sovereigns a “sky’s the limit” right to pour money into political campaigns for the purpose of influencing the outcome. And to do so without public disclosure. We might as well say farewell to the very idea of fair play. Farewell, too, to representative government “of, by, and for the people.”
Unless.

Unless “We, the People”—flesh-and-blood humans, outraged at the selling off of our government—fight back.

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

  • Bart Gruzalski's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: 112th United States Congress, American Progressives, American_Politics, Anti-War, Brave New World, Breaking News, California Issues, Centervine, Corporate Watchdogs, Corporatism, DemGuys, Democracy, Democrats, EconVine, Election 2012, Eurovine, FIRED UP DEMOCRATS!, Free Market, Free Thinkers, Get On Your Soapbox, GOP Watch , Gut Check America, Happy with Corporate America?, LaborVine, Left of Center, Living with Less, Mad As Hell!! Aren't You??, Newsvine HONOR Vine, Newsvine International, Nightly News (Old), Nonviolence creates progress, Obama Supporters, ObamaExpress, Obamaholics Anonymous, ObamaVine, Occupy Wall Street, Offshoring America, Oligarchy, Open Minded, Open Source Intelligence, Outraged Americans For Justice, OWS Consolidarity, Political Analysis, Power to The People!, Proud Liberal and Progressive, RepubliCON Watch, Respectful Debate, Rocky Anderson, Justice Party, Seeders and Posters w/ Manners, Soapbox, Successful Solutions, The Great American ReEducation, To MSNBC, US News and Views , V.O.I.C.E. in America, We Must Change, WTF?
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (7)
Bart GruzalskiDeleted
Bart GruzalskiDeleted
Boudicea

Oh here we go again. Southern Pacific was NOT the first case to decide that corporations had 'rights." In fact, the court itself did not even VISIT the issue - they simply stated that they all agreed corporations had rights and ignored the question.

See this explanation

  • 1 vote
Reply#3 - Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:57 PM EST
crispy2000

Sorry Bart Gruzalski, there is nothing to "fight back against"!

Corporations have been around for over 1000 years:

There is no surviving record of a charter first establishing the [City of London Corporation] as a legal body, but the city is regarded as incorporated by prescription, meaning that the law presumes it to have been incorporated because it has for so long been regarded as such even in the absence of written documentation. The corporation's first recorded royal charter dates from around 1067, when William the Conqueror granted the citizens of London a charter confirming the rights and privileges that they had enjoyed since the time of Edward the Confessor. Numerous subsequent royal charters over the centuries confirmed and extended the citizens' rights. [Source]

The whole idea of a corporation as a "legal person" is that it has an identity, a name, some legal rights and responsibilities, in many of the same ways a human person does. It has the ability to enter into contracts, to sue and be sued, own property, pay taxes, and so on. A corporate person is distinct from a human person in the obvious ways: it cannot marry, vote, speak, write, or be put in jail.

Many/most of the rights granted to corporations, such as the right of due process, are simply extensions of those rights held by the human persons making up the corporation. Just as the government can't legally confiscate John Smith's bank account without due process, it also can't legally confiscate (without due process) the bank account of Smithco, Inc., which is owned by Mr. Smith.

The "personhood" of corporations is simply a model (a.k.a. legal fiction) of how laws apply to groups of people acting in concert (corporations). Corporations of themselves are neither good nor evil. "Corporation" is just a concept related to the actions of a group as a whole.

Many people are confused by the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, believing that it grants corporations and labor unions an unlimited "right to pour money into political campaigns". It didn't. The court held that the limits of BCRA on "electioneering communications" could be used to unconstitutionally limit freedom of speech:

"If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech."

It's a matter of human liberty. As Justice Kennedy wrote:

When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.

Regarding pouring money into campaigns, the Supreme Court specifically did not change the BCRA's restrictions on campaign contributions.

  • 2 votes
Reply#4 - Thu Feb 2, 2012 7:07 PM EST
Leave a Comment:
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
(XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
Newsvine Privacy Statement
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
FUN STUFF:
  • Leaderboard |
  • E-Mail Alerts |
  • Top of the Vine |
  • Newsvine Live |
  • Newsvine Archives |
  • The Greenhouse |
COMPANY STUFF:
  • Code of Honor |
  • Company Info |
  • Contact Us |
  • Jobs |
  • User Agreement |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • About our ads
LEGAL STUFF:
  • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com