Skip to main content

View Diary: Corporations are NOT People: Support my Constitutional Amendment to Repeal Citizens United (196 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Santa Clara was a taxation issue (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MKinTN, raincrow, zedaker, gecko

    as I recall -- and setting aside the whole Bancroft Davis headnote -- I think it came down to paying for fences, which then became extending tax privileges enjoyed by citizens to a railroad that refused to pay them... and then the headnote gives us the whole underpinning of person = corporation.

    I'm saying - I don't think a corporation should enjoy ANY of the protections afforded to a citizen, at least, not automatically.

    I'm not saying that I'd legislatively oppose out of hand specific legislative decisions to grant these protections -- I'm simply saying that I want them specifically granted by the legislature (so we actual citizens have a chance to weigh in, etc).

    Like I said... I'd rather rip up every ounce of jurisprudence going back to Dartmouth and start fresh.

    If someone wants to lay out a list of obvious protections that ought to be in place immediately upon ratification - and I'm sure some exist (some weakened form of Dartmouth... maybe with a bar for public interests) - fine, we can pass and enroll in tandem.  

    Heck - you can make the SEC's job a whole easier if they're no longer bound by something approximating the same rules applied to individual liberties... Possible to abuse?  Sure - like I said - write up individual (weakened) exceptions.   But at the end of the day - shred it to the bone and rebuild only that specifically blessed, not granted by proxy.

    But I think there's a greater need here than simple campaign contributions.

    Full Disclosure: I am an unpaid shill for every paranoid delusion that lurks under your bed - but more than willing to cash any checks sent my way

    by zonk on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 12:29:53 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  you'd make the SEC's job easier (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zedaker, johnny wurster

      because there wouldn't be any securities market in the United States.  

      Every state (though really just Delaware) has a general corporation law.  So i'm not sure i quite understand the objection.  A state could easily pass a law saying corporations can't make campaign donations.  Probably couldn't apply ex post facto, though.  

      "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

      by Loge on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 12:55:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site