Two years ago this week the U. S. Supreme Court ruled in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case that corporations are persons and have the same First Amendment rights as do, well, real people.
Essentially the court ruled that money is free speech and is protected by the First Amendment. Under the Citizens United ruling the definition of a corporation is not limited to business constructs such as Exxon-Mobile, G.E. etc. who, with no disclosure obligations, can spend as much money as they want to influence elections.
A corporation can also be formed by a group of individuals with a vested interest in an issue or candidate. The sole purpose of these political corporations is not to make money but to give away money, to political campaigns.
The Citizens United decision virtually allows an unlimited amount of money to flow into an electoral process that is already awash with money; an electoral process in which our country is quickly losing faith in. The Citizens United decision is destroying our Democracy and must be stopped.
There is a growing grassroots movement from across the political spectrum for a constitutional amendment to reflect the common-sensible judgment that corporations are not persons and that money is not free speech.
On Saturday, Jan. 21, between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. there will be a rally at the intersection of Larkin Avenue and Jefferson Street in Joliet calling for a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United decision. This event will be held in coordination with hundreds of similar events taking place nationwide.
If you believe corporations are not persons, that money is not free speech and wish to take the first step in getting money out of politics, join us.
—Ron Kurowski
If only individual people could contribute to political candidates, industry lobbyists, labor unions and other "power aggregators" would have a lot harder time buying the influence that so corrupts our political process. Just my $0.02...
As far as linking First Amendment protections to the paying of taxes, it should be noted that corporations, as defined by the Supreme Courts ruling, may be artificial constructs - Super Pacs - who don't pay taxes. There is nothing in the Constitution that supports this ruling! And as you noted our political process has already been corrupted by money. This ruling will only exasperate that situation. I can see no justification for this ruling on any level. Ron Kurowski
The south wanted to have their slaves as property, but also wanted them to be counted as a person for the allotment of representatives. The Founders knew if that happened they would always be out voted on the issue of abolishing slavery because the southern states would not vote to abolish slavery and would have almost a 3-1 advantage against the northern states. So the Founders came up with the 3/5 rule so that they could abolish slavery. It had nothing to do with the Founders believing that blacks were less of a person and everything to do with abolishing slavery. PS-The Declaration Of Independence originally said "right to life, liberty, and property", but jefferson removed it; because he knew that the slave owners would make the case that "property", which slaves were considered to be, would essentially give approval for owning slaves and used to keep slavery alive. How could you abolish something if the founding documents promised you that you can keep it.