... Why Don't They Pay Federal Income Taxes Like Citizens?
Not so long ago, I highlighted what I consider a fundamental misreading of our Constitution, namely the century-long assertion by the Supreme Court that business corporations are entitled to constitutional protections as living citizens are. In that post, I mentioned that the SCOTUS was expected to rule on corporate free speech in relation to federal election campaigns. (Curiously, this was one of the more trafficked posts in what is a very scarcely read blog.)
Well today, the SCOTUS ruled -- and not unexpectedly -- in a 5-4 decision that reinforces the principle that "corporations" are "persons" in the eyes of our Constitution and laws. (Of course, "enemy combatants," real living humans who probably engaged in real crimes against our Citizens, remain "non-persons" not entitled to any protections given in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. But, I digress.) Naturally, opinions are as divided as our "apolitical" SCOTUS, with many of our more expressive authoritarian leaning citizens expressing glee that no one can be silenced, not even corporations! On the other side, citizen advocacy groups bemoan this decision as the end of any real representation in elections as now even greater amounts of BIG MONEY will flow into the electoral process, lining the pockets of the infotainment ad delivery companies, airing even more campaign ads (at least they will displace the erectile dysfuntion pitches) and further distracting-bamboozling-and stupefying the voters who bother to do their civic duty.Do powerful interests already greatly influence our elections? Yep. Do they really need more ability to influence elections? Apparently so. (Don't believe me? Take a few minutes watching David Corn and Kevin Drum on a recent episode of Bill Moyers Journal.)
Does today's decision make our elected representatives more responsive to their constituents? Nope. But does anyone really care anymore? Based on the ill-informed punditry screaming the same BS talking points all over the media tonight ("Now Unions can spend unlimited!" "Small Business can get into the elections YAY!" "Middle class candidates have a shot against multi-millionaire, self-financing incumbents!"), it seems that the level of delusion is high and that by next week, many will be convinced that this is the best thing to happen to elections since Bush v. Gore equally protected all ballots (except for the ones not counted).
How many will be so informed as to know that the plaintiff in this case is a criminal, wingnut election fraudster backed by the very corporations so happy to be able to throw their money around unfettered? My guess, only that "angry left" -- you know, the same cabal of people who are so all powerful that Scott Brown pretty much walked away in the Massachusetts special election!
Well friends. We do live in a Republic. That is, if we can keep it.
.svg.png){kind=small}
Posts
11 comments:
I am absolutely effen livid about this SCOTUS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BVqIjKyJh0&feature=related
Remember the movie Network? Way ahead of its time. Or was it?
They have been working on this for decades.
I share your mistrust of corporations. We need them, but we should not trust them and our politicians should not be in bed with them.
I also say, Let Free Speech Reign!
We are smart enough to sort out the bullshit. For those who aren't, John Stewart does an excellent pointing it out every day.
RZ -- you and I both, friend.
SF -- I wish I could share your faith in people being smart enough to sort out the BS. Stewart is great, but he doesn't reach all. And I am always amazed (and routinely amazed) by how good folks(people I know to be smart, involved citizens) are ill-informed about who is behind the politicians they admire.
As for free speech -- AMEN. But people speak. Not artificial corporations.
SP
This is not a question of "persons and corporations."
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...
It says nothing of citizens or corporations or special interests. Free speech is a God-given right and the constitution says government cannot abridge it.
The Bill or Rights applies to the People of our nation, friend. Not to any sort of artificial entity like a corporation.
Corporations are not persons. They are THINGS. Things with resources that far outstrip all but the most wealthy of citizens. Corporations exist because We the People willed them into existence through the machinations of our republic. Corporations are not naturally existing persons or even living beings. How then could they believe themselves to exist as beings endowed with "natural rights"? Endowing "things" with such personhood rights is a dangerous development that moves our republic far, far away from one grounded on the "we the people" who "consent" to be governed.
But don't simply take my word for it. Consider what the Founders had to say:
There is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by...corporations. The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses. -Madison
"I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." -Jefferson
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them [the banks], will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. -Jefferson
Or what great Presidents had to say:
The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.. corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed. -Lincoln
Probably the greatest harm done by vast wealth is the harm that we of moderate means do ourselves when we let the vices of envy and hatred enter deep into our own natures. But there is another harm; and it is evident that we should try to do away with that. The great corporations which we have grown to speak of rather loosely as trusts are the creatures of the State, and the State not only has the right to control them, but it is duty bound to control them wherever the need of such control is shown. -T Roosevelt
No business is above Government; and Government must be empowered to deal adequately with any business that tries to rise above Government. -F Roosevelt
Friend, don't simply fall for the tripe talking points being peddled by those who front for the corporations themselves and seek to use you as a unwitting mouthpiece. Think it through.
SP
If this is allowed to stand. Which it most likely will.
IT IS OVER! !
The Corps will be the founding fathers of The New Corporate States of ChiMeriKa. Sovereign Wealth Funds from other countries will be all over this. The people that say "my vote does not count" will now be correct.
Patriot: Can you give me a source for the founder quotes? I've read the Jefferson one, but Madison's is new to me.
Of course, read in context, they were warning against the moneyed interests who had bought whole parts of England, as well as bankers who control the money (we're already there on that one).
Ironically, the specter of becoming beholden to private interests is what drove us to create the Federal Reserve. The panic of 1908 (I think, somewhere around that time) force the US government to go to JP Morgan and John Rockefeller for a bailout. Imagine that.
I don't reject the tenor of the quotations you cite. Big corporations, like government, are to be regarded as a necessary evil and always looked upon with suspicion.
Your comment about the bill of rights applying to people betrays a false understanding that the constitution grants us rights--it does not. It merely guarantees them and vests the federal government with certain circumscribed duties.
I'm sure you know that many in the constitutional delegation balked at a bill of rights because the correctly maintained that these rights already existed, and that naming some would deprecate the innumerable others and lead people to believe that if it ain't in the constitution it's not a right.
And anyway, what is a corporation but a collection of people with the right of free speech? After all, it's not a building or a corporate logo authoring the speech, it's a collection of people.
This is not an easy issue, and I appreciate the chance for good conversation with someone who thinks differently.
We disagree, but we both love this country and respect the constitution, and that's a good starting point.
SF -- Here's but one location for the Madison quote: http://www.quotiki.com/quotes/1669
While the Founders were profoundly affected by their experience with England, its not always a clear case that quotes such as Madison's were drawn solely from that experience. Just as you note the controversy regarding natural/inalienable rights and the need to enshrine them in the Bill of Rights, so to were the controversies over merchants vs labor (farmers, mainly) and the need for a more republican (small r), egalitarian society. Guys like Hamilton sought to let money roam freely, others like Jefferson and Madison believed that unrestrained money led inevitably to ARISTOCRACY -- a class that was to be avoided at all costs.
I agree that corporations are a grouping of peoples -- sometime for profit, sometimes not. And that all those INDIVIDUALS hold a right (protected by the Bill of Rights) to free speech. But the corporation itself is an artificial entity, given life by the regulation of the state and protected by it through the state's laws, regulations and enforcement. It is not a person endowed with a natural life -- perhaps an artificial "life" in that they are founded, exist and then no longer exist.
And who says that the corporation speaks for all of the individual living people within? It is a persistent complaint that labor unions (a form of corporation) take dues and then use them in "speech" that not all member support. Is this not also true for Bank of America or Microsoft? So I don't buy the argument that those individual rights translate into corporate personhood endowed with a free speech right.
SP
Should the Federal Reserve Bank then not be classified as a Corporation? It is not owned by the Federal Government, but rather International Central Banksters. A good book on the Federal Reserve, [which is not federal at all] is The Creature From Jekyl Island.
Won't you join me in supporting "Murray Hill, Inc." for Congress? It's running in the 8th Congressional District in Maryland, because thanks to the Supreme Court ruling, corporations are people too!
http://www.murrayhillincforcongress.com/
Having corporations elected to Congress will benefit us all by eliminating the lobbyist middlemen and seating corporations and their interests directly in the legislative bodies. Just think how nice your life will be when McDonalds and Dell represent you in Congress, and Halliburton occupies the White House (legitimately!)
Welcome back Vienna!
Murray Hill sounds like a great candidate!
SP
Post a Comment