IMO, that is one reason why the election cycles are so long now....to exhaust those without super-bucks and keep them from continuing to campaign effectively. There should be legislation to limit this problem besides getting rid of the horrid "rulings" at the links below, which was NOT a clear ruling, but which gave corporations "personhood" and has been used extensively to our collective detriment from then until the present day, especially now with the OTHER horrid ruling by scotus, the oxymoronic "citizens united" case for unlimited campaign contributions ruled as a matter of
"free speech".... for corporations, without disclosures as to sources, etc. .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad
---------------------
The doctrine of corporate personhood creates an interesting legal contradiction. The corporation is owned by its shareholders and is therefore their property. If it is also a legal person, then it is a person owned by others and thus exists in a condition of slavery -- a status explicitly forbidden by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. So is a corporation a person illegally held in servitude by its shareholders? Or is it a person who enjoys the rights of personhood that take precedence over the presumed ownership rights of its shareholders? So far as I have been able to determine, this contradiction has not been directly addressed by the courts.
http://www.ratical.org/corporations/SCvSPR1886.html
---------------------
Sen. Bernie Sanders: Corporations Are Not People and They Shouldn't Be Allowed to Buy Our Elections Corporations should not be able to go into their treasuries and spend millions and millions of dollars on a campaign in order to buy elections.
http://www.alternet.org/story/153391/sen_bernie_sanders_corporations_are_not_
people_and_they_shouldnt_be_allowed_to_buy_our_elections
----------------------
Bill Moyers reminds us that repairing American democracy begins with reasserting that corporations do not have the same constitutional rights as citizens.
http://www.alternet.org/story/153349/moyers%3A_why_%27we_the_people%27_must_triumph_over_corporate_power?akid=7981.318675.gakOe0
"free speech".... for corporations, without disclosures as to sources, etc. .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad
---------------------
The doctrine of corporate personhood creates an interesting legal contradiction. The corporation is owned by its shareholders and is therefore their property. If it is also a legal person, then it is a person owned by others and thus exists in a condition of slavery -- a status explicitly forbidden by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. So is a corporation a person illegally held in servitude by its shareholders? Or is it a person who enjoys the rights of personhood that take precedence over the presumed ownership rights of its shareholders? So far as I have been able to determine, this contradiction has not been directly addressed by the courts.
http://www.ratical.org/corporations/SCvSPR1886.html
---------------------
Sen. Bernie Sanders: Corporations Are Not People and They Shouldn't Be Allowed to Buy Our Elections Corporations should not be able to go into their treasuries and spend millions and millions of dollars on a campaign in order to buy elections.
http://www.alternet.org/story/153391/sen_bernie_sanders_corporations_are_not_
people_and_they_shouldnt_be_allowed_to_bu
----------------------
Bill Moyers reminds us that repairing American democracy begins with reasserting that corporations do not have the same constitutional rights as citizens.
http://www.alternet.org/story/153349/moyers%3A_why_%27we_the_people%27_must_triumph_over_corporate_power?akid=7981.318675.gakOe0
No comments:
Post a Comment