The highest court in the US is on the cusp of granting corporations the legal right to spend unlimited money on election campaign ads under the guise that corporations are "citizens." Currently, corporate campaign financing is limited. That may soon change.
Citizen watchdog group US PIRG denounced this trend as further subterfuge of the political process by super wealthy powerful interests. According to inside sources at US PIRG, the US Supreme Court is deciding whether it will set aside 100 years of case law precedent that would drastically tip the scales in favor of corporate interests. This could completely disenfranchise the average American whose interests have already suffered as a consequence of well-heeled corporate lobbyists pitting the interests of Big Business against the public citizenry. The US Supreme Court is writing its collective opinions deciding whether to make corporations "citizens" with rights that fail to include the repsonisbilities and obligations of citizenship.
A Government of "We the People" or "We the Corporations?"
The US Supreme Court jurists are appointed by the President and confirmed by the US Senate. Their appointments are for life. Their rulings impact every life of those among the ranks of the governed. The US Supreme Court case which could irredeemably and irretrievably prejudice the scales of justice against average citizens in favor of corporations is Citizen's United v. The Federal Election Commission — the controversial case that was re-argued in Washington, DC on September 9th 2009.
"Bank of America does not come over for dinner. Countrywide isn't a regular at Thanksgiving. Neither has been included in "We the People." Now imagine if Exxon Mobile's CEO could freely write checks from the corporate treasury account to run advertisements for or against candidates. If they only spent 1% — $850 million — that would be five times what all corporate PACs in America raised to spend on Congressional campaigns in 2008," said Andre Delattre, Executive Director of US PIRG.
Corporations Are Artificial People
Currently, a "corporation" is defined as an "artificial person" under US law. It is not (in theory) a constituent member of the voting body politic. Corporations are entities comprised of people who are executives and shareholders — the investor class. These people are individuals who can participate in the political election process provided they are lawful US residents.
Granting citizenship without imposing citizen responsibility on corporate entities cross the dangerous line of fascism: the merging of state and corporate power. But it is not only Wall Street's heavy hitters who would unfairly benefit. Churches, religious groups, and "faith-based" initiatives would benefit because they are non-profit corporations.
The Merging of Church and State
If the US Supreme Court decides to endow corporations with the full privileges of citizenship, that would also extend to non-profit corporations as well. Under US law, churches are non-profit corporations as defined under 501 (3)(c) of the IRS tax code. Granting 501 (3)(c) corporations citizenship would merge state and corporate interests as well as state and church interests, leading to a blend of theocracy and corporatism.
Since the vast bulk of income and wealth of non-profit corporations is untaxable, the geopolitical landscape could be altered drastically. Government could be skewed dangerously against the interests of the average American citizen. Is this the "change" we want?
 |
