Skip to main content

View Diary: Call Your Senator! - Merkley for Majority Leader (20 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  FraidKnot - a corporation is a person with (0+ / 0-)

    rights: Uncheck. The SCOTUS has never made such a statement.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Thu Jan 24, 2013 at 02:28:17 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Right. Completely off base from Citizens United. (0+ / 0-)
      •  In Citizens United the majority made a clear (0+ / 0-)

        distinction between "natural persons" and "groups of people" such as associations, clubs, unions, and corporations. In fact the issue of "corporate personhood" was not even a point that was litigated in CU.  Post Citizens United corporations still cannot contribute to the campaign of any politician for federal office, not even $1. The Tillman Act of 1907 remains in full force and effect. If corporations had all the same rights as people, they would be able to make campaign contributions directly to candidates. That's just one example of rights that a natural person has that corporations don't have. Corporations have some of the same rights as people such as entering into contracts, to sue or be sued, and to own real and personal property. These rights extend back to a nineteenth century Supreme Court case, Southern Pacific v Santa Clara (1886), and involve hundreds of cases in state and federal court. No court has ever declared that corporations are people with all the same rights and privileges of "natural persons". However, don't feel bad, nearly all of the diaries about Citizens United that have ever been written here at DKOS have material factual errors. Unfortunately we became part of an Internet echo chamber of misinformation.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Thu Jan 24, 2013 at 03:55:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wrong. The fact that corporations can't give (0+ / 0-)

          unlimitedgive unlimited funds is merely a technicality.  They For the first time can give unlimited funds, anonymously no less, to PACs.  And that's the point.  I couldn't care less whether the SCOTUS ever actually said, implied or mimed that corporations are human beings.

          •  Unlimited funds directly to candidates (is what it (0+ / 0-)

            should have been)

          •  Fraid - they can't give any money to PACs (0+ / 0-)

            You have your facts wrong. Corporations can make unlimited independent expenditures which they can do directly or through some other specific types of organizations like 501 c 4s, but they can't make any contributions to PACs.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Thu Jan 24, 2013 at 08:10:07 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Karl Rove's Americant Crossroads is a 527 org. (0+ / 0-)

              Below is a link, and I've also copied/pasted from the FAQs from that website regarding the restrictions (or lack thereof) in terms of corporations giving to 527s.

              Do 527s have financial restrictions?
              Financial restrictions on 527s are very few: there are no upper limits on contributions to these committees, and no spending limits, either. Any type of donor may contribute, from individuals to unions to corporations, even other non-profits. There is no specific prohibition on foreign contributions.


              •  Corps can contribute to some 527s (0+ / 0-)

                but not those 527s organized as PACs.

                "let's talk about that"

                by VClib on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:20:46 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  American Crossroads is a super PAC. One of the (0+ / 0-)

                  biggest, if not THE biggest.  American Crossroads is a 527.  Corporations can give as much as they want  and never be disclosed.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site