Hello:

SHOULD your congressman represent you, or the corporate interests in your district?

I ask, because our right winged friends think that ALL a business has to do to make money, is provide a good product at a good price... If that's so, then why would a businessman need representation as an individual, AND as a corporation??? Doesn't that give him TWO voices? Besides that, since all a business needs is a marketplace to compete in, what favors could a business person possibly get from his congressman???

Towards that end, does a corporation have the same rights as YOU, an individual??? Does the corporation have free speech rights? If that's so, why do the owners have free speech rights as individuals, AND free speech rights as a corporation??? Doesn't that give them TWO voices, one much more powerful than the other?

If corporations can give political donations, and you own, lets say, 25 of 'em, doesn't that give you 25 times the political clout as everybody else???

Does any of the stuff above bother you?

excon

NeedKarma

I believe the question being asked here is not how the government controls corporations but how the corporations control government, which leads to votes and decisions made to favour the corporation not the citizens. Ex, you can correct me if I'm wrong.

speechlesstx

I think we understand the question, NK. It doesn't bother me that businesses have a voice, I believe that's essential. It does bother me that so many politicians are willing to accept and pass out favors and like Chris Dodd, get away with it. My point in my previous post is that this is always implied as the GOP is beholden only to corporate interests while giving a pass to the left.

Billionaire George Soros has tried his damnedest to be a puppet master over elections and the Democrats are so intertwined with unions, "community organizers," Planned Parenthood etc. it's impossible to tell where one ends and the other begins. So if we want to discuss politicians being unduly influenced by entities let's lay it all on the table.

tomder55

This is where this will lead. Obama doesn't like FOX . If FOX doesn't have the right to the same free speech afforded individuals then it would be lawful for the Obots to prohibit FOX from criticizing Obama.

NeedKarma

I don't think this is a GOP/DEM thing, it definitely applies to all politicians. The practice of accepting those "donations" doesn't seem to serve the interests of the constituents. Anyway ex is explaining himself well in the other thread, I'll leave it with him.

excon

Hello again,

You're correct, of course, NK. That's the idea...

But, I wrote a whole thing on it, and it gave me pause... As I wrote, I asked myself a few questions...

Do people have the right to associate with other like minded people, and have that association speak collectively for them??? I'd have to say yes.

Can people speak with their money? I'd have to say yes.

Does that mean that people with money have a bigger voice than people without? It goes without saying that they DO, but it flies in the face of "equal protection under the law", which is what the Fourteenth Amendment is about.

I suggest, however, that there are SOME provisions that we've carved out from the Constitution, otherwise corporations would be allowed to VOTE?

Plus, if a corporation is a "person", then when a corporation gets convicted of a crime, why doesn't anybody go to jail?????

THOSE exception have been carved out, and Clete is right. We need to carve out new rules for today.

excon

inthebox

Every single person, regardless of wealth, has ONE vote, so unless there is outright direct paying for votes or other voter fraud, what good would it do to make more rules. The rules should apply to those governing and to every citizen, whether that is Walmart or Acorn or Exxon or the AFL/CIO. But we know the current rules are not followed, always enforced or just bypassed.


G&P

speechlesstx

I think maybe The Goracle has a bigger voice than the rest of us, he's poised to become the first "green" billionaire.

$560 million in government grants just happened to go to utilities this company The Goracle invested in has contracts with. Add his cap and trade investments and it's no wonder he's positioned himself as the green guru. Now do you really think he has our best interests in mind?

twinkiedooter

It's the old saw of "Money talks and Bulls*it walks". And big corporate has a LOT more money than any one person has - even multiplied by several million people ten times over.

It's never what the people want or what is good for them, blah, blah, blah. It's what Big Pharma wants. It's what Big Insura wants. It's what Big Corporation wants. It's NEVER what the "little folks" want or need for that matter. They don't count period. The only thing that the "little folks" have to offer up is their hard earned money carefully sifted out of their wallet under the guise of "insurance premiums", "prescriptions that cost too much", "overpriced automobiles", "overpriced homes", "overpriced doctors", blah, blah, blah.

paraclete

Now you know that the only way to prevent what you speak of is to completely change the system of government. That has been tried in certain parts of the world and it appears they couldn't make it work. China is an interesting experiement at the moment but the little people have no voice there either. What you need are honest politicians who are allowed to follow their own conscience, a seeming contradiction not only to the party system of government but to human nature, perhaps the implementation of citizen initiated referendums as used in Switzerland might give the people the voice they are denied

galveston

I'm gonna make some of you angry here.

I want to focus on your "honest politicians" and add honest CEO's, honest business owners, etc.

What makes anyone honest?

Fear of punishment?

Nope!

People are either honest or not based on who they ARE on the inside. Every man is a law unto himself, he is his own policeman.

Decades ago, you could find business owners and corporation heads that actually had some degree of concern for those that worked for them. There was a strong Christian influence in this country, at least stronger than now, and it was this inner character that kept owners from fleecing their employees and customers.

Politicians often went to church to hear what the pulpit had to say about issues before they voted.

Those days are long gone. Now we live with the consequences of a culture deprived of any moral compass.

Success is defined by the amount of material wealth one can amass, not whether a person is honest and fair.

Christian principle demands that we treat others as we would like to be treated.

That means that a Christian politician will vote based on the best interests of all his constituents, not just the ones that contribute the most to his campaign.

That means that a Christian CEO will not grab millions every year while doing everything possible to keep the employees working for minimum wages.

The answer to all this is a real Christian revival, one that affects the culture around it.

There! I told you I would make some of you angry!