"Today, the Court has enthroned corporations, permitting them not only all kinds of special economic rights but now, amazingly, moving to grant them the same political rights as the people.
This is a moment of high danger for democracy so we must act quickly to spell out in the Constitution what the people have always understood: that corporations do not enjoy the political and free speech rights that belong to the people of the United States."
Professor Jamie Raskin, constitutional law expert at American University's Washington College of Law and Maryland state senator
By SCOTT TUROW
Published: August 17, 2010
The New York Times
Chicago
"With all respect to Wanda Brandstetter, the Constitutional amendment this nation most urgently requires is one that reverses the notion that unrestricted political spending deserves protection as free speech. Without that, who could fault a juror for looking around at contemporary political life and feeling that Rod Blagojevich had been unfairly singled out?"
By David Swanson
The DISCLOSE Act, a bill passed by the House that would regulate corporate election spending was blocked in the Senate on Thursday by a filibuster -- momentum is building to eliminate that anti-democratic tool.
By Radhika Balakrishnan and James Heintz, Huffington Post
This January the U.S. Supreme Court issued a shattering ruling that will intensify corporate influence in our democracy to an unprecedented degree. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court ruled that government restrictions on corporate election spending are unconstitutional because such restrictions violated corporations' right to free speech as set out in the first amendment of the Bill of Rights. In effect, the Court was evoking a core civil right to advance corporate power. This is a dangerous precedent, one that will undermine the obligation of the government to respect and protect human rights by giving corporations full reign to advance their own interests in the democratic - yet increasingly plutocratic - United States.
The idea that corporations have the same rights as you and me comes from a Supreme Court decision over 120 years ago - Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1886) - the focus of which was whether railroads could deduct their debts from the value of their property for tax purposes. The Supreme Court laid down a much broader ruling, effectively stating that corporations should enjoy the same equal protections under the law as individuals. Equal protection under the law was spelled out in the 14th Amendment which was adopted following the Civil War. The original motivation for the amendment had little to do with advancing corporate influence. It overturned the Dred Scott decision (in which slaves were denied citizenship) and laid the groundwork for ending segregation in the U.S. and subsequent civil rights laws.
READ THE REST AT Huffington Post
By Patrick Ball/Staff Writer, GateHouse News Service
Concord — The Massachusetts Corporate Political Accountability Act is strong start but doesn’t fix the problem created by the Citizens United decision, according to Concord lawyer Jeffrey Clements.
Democracy in Balance: Corporate Power in Politics
Forum I
Concord, Mass.
With Jeffrey Clements and John Bonifaz
One hour in five parts:
"Corporations are not people. Money is not speech." These are fundamental truths that our nation needs to remember -- and add to the Constitution.
Follow this amendment on Thomas for cosponsors and hearings.
Proposing the `Doris `Granny D' Haddock Amendment of 2010' to the Constitution of the United States regarding the authority of Congress and the States to regulate the spending and activities... (Introduced in House)
HJ 82 IH
FreeSpeechForPeople.org is a project of Voter Action, US PIRG, Public Citizen, the Center for Corporate Policy and the American Independent Business Alliance. Details »
