Saturday, March 6, 2010

Introduction: Free, Corporate and Bought Speech

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

That’s all the Constitution says about free speech. That’s all the Constitution guarantees. Everything else is determined by Congressional legislation and/or the court’s opinions interpreting the Constitution and the legislation/law. Even many lawyers – so indoctrinated by their years of study of "case law and precedent" – have lost sight of this basic truth. They tend to believe that the "personhood of corporations" and related issues are constitutionally guaranteed. No, these issues are a matter of law and opinion, not the Constitution.

The Soul, the Body and the Heart of the Network

The following few paragraphs are the most important thought behind everything else the Network stands for. It is the reason we created it. This is the fundamental...the foundational reason we cannot loose if we act with sufficient vigor to force our representatives to do what we elected them for. Reread the 1st Amendment above and look for where it mentions anything about money. It doesn't, does it? There is no explicit or implicit link between free speech and money -- none at all. If there is no link or Constitutional guarantee that free speech rights can justify unlimited money being used to control any sector of our society, any and every use of money can be regulated or even outlawed by new legislation. The heart of the legislation we propose will say:

"The Constitution of the United States of America makes no link between free speech and money. In order to fully protect the free speech rights of the individual citizens of our country, the Congress has the absolute right to create legislation to limit or completely eliminate the influence of money to affect any matter of public concern. Any and all prior legislation or court opinions to the contrary are hereby made null and void right now."

We will then continue within this legislation to establish those details and institutions only now made "legal" and protected from any incursion of big money that we the people require of our representatives. We believe the following ideas should be considered:

A publically financed, national elections website which will be freely available to any candidate for public office -- from dog catcher to president -- and public interest campaigns with all the software appropriate to the conduct of elections.

Public financing of elections to level the playing field and allow those who don't have unlimited funds to finance them to run. Establishing very low limits for individual campaign contributions and only from voters in the voting district they would represent.

The ground rules for debates and TV coverage established to provide equal access for all qualified candidates. And much more....




If you care about freeing our country from the control of big money, instill this concept into your mind and have it ready for any conversation you might have. It is rock solid and based in the foundation of our country. Never let anyone argue that our goals are in any way un-American. It just ain't so. We stand for democracy. We stand for the rights of our citizens. We stand against their tyranny. We will not budge.

Do not grant the high ground claiming to stand for the American ideal or values or anything. They are wrong. They are lying and deceiving us to allow them to have the control. We won't stand for it any longer. We will not bend to anything the Tea Party people or the Heritage Foundation or even the Supreme Court says to the contrary.


The public is seething. Some people think the problem is big government. If you really look, you will see that the real problem is the corrupting control of government by big money interests, not government per se: Corporate America controls our government in ways that continue to allow their officers $ Millions in salaries and bonuses at the same time they sell us bogus financial instruments which deplete our retirement funds, force us into bankruptcy, and increase our health insurance costs while they figure out how to eliminate risk and refuse coverage in ways that are producing record profits. From right to left and from bottom to very near the top, we all know this and we’re fed up.

While concern over the power of huge corporations, unions or other organizations to control both the economy and government has been growing for years, it has reached a crescendo from both the right and left following the recent “Citizens United” Supreme Court decision unleashing a new flood of corporate funding which enables them to buy our representative and thus the entire process to a vastly greater degree than before. There is a growing sense on both the right and the left that it is not big government that should concern us, but rather the ability of corporate American to control our government in their own self interest and against the public interest.

There is a growing consensus that this Supreme Court decision must be reversed. Almost everyone who agrees is calling for a Constitutional Amendment to remedy the situation. Most of these voices also only address the one issue relating to the application of the principle of free speech to corporations. This is too narrow a proposed fix to solve the overall problem. When you fix the levy, you have to fix the whole thing.

We strongly disagree on both of these last points. The Constitution requires a long, expensive and difficult process to propose and approve amendments. The framers were wise to make this difficult in order to protect us from a short-term majority easily changing the foundations of our democracy, especially the Bill of Rights protections. However, this tedious process is not necessary in our current situation.

1) We believe the full remedy is possible through the much simpler process of legislation which requires only one majority vote by Congress and it’s a done deal. With the right understanding and political will, we could change the face of how governmental business is done in our country next week. Well, that might be a little optimistic, but…

2) We further believe that the full remedy must include a comprehensive redefinition of all aspects of free speech. Over a period of many years the concept of free speech has become distorted to the point that the intent of the First Amendment has virtually been reversed leaving the American public less free than perhaps at any time in our history. As is, corporations are protected; people are subjected. That’s not the way our founding fathers saw it, nor should we. In a democracy we have the power to change that. If we don’t, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

We will examine each of these distortions and propose the legislation we believe is necessary to fully guarantee the deepest meaning of free speech for our citizens which underlay the very foundations of our representative democracy. Anything less will necessarily leave the door open for the corrupting influence of big money to again virtually control our economy and government as it does now.


Contact us: WeDontHaveFreeSpeech@outlook.com

p.s. If you want to read or share our complete introductory series and other blog posts about this and other issues,  see our Annotated Table of Contents below. Or if you have questions or comments, email us.     


Annotated Table of Contents

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/sign-the-pledge-big-out?source=c.em&r_by=14960502
Insist candidates vote for a single act of Congress stating: “There is no relationship between speech and money stated or implied in the US Constitution and therefore no such relationship exists” as the basis of further reforms to limit the abuses of Big Money interests.
Best summary of the proposed “Recover our Democracy Act;” its Constitutional basis; removing purported legal objections, public financing of elections, limits on campaign contributions, public funding of federal elections, preprogrammed campaign website, redefining a bribe and much more
Cut and paste text to share by electronic media to spread the word on our plan
Our appointment being ignored while lobbyists immediately enter our Congressman’s office
Being on the outside: Explaining the meaning of our logo…the corrupting influence of Big Money
Political contributions, Citizens United Supreme Court Decision,  “We don’t have free speech. We can’t afford it,” our solution is an act of Congress,
 “Backdoor money in politics, quid pro quo,  “anything of material value offered or given to, or received and accepted by any candidate, incumbent or governmental employee under any circumstance shall be defined as a bribe,” penalties defined for candidates and government employees.
Our early commentaries: Free speech is fundamental to democracy, different views, uses and limitations of free speech, public financing of elections, fair and balanced media coverage

Original free speech: freedom to speak our mind,  power to “buy” both the “content” and the “delivery” of “free” speech,  "personhood" of corporations, Supreme Court and  Citizens United, ownership of the media, points of view,  political advertising, educational content, bought speech,…

Trickle down economics, tax reductions, income disparity, deregulation, power by changing belief systems, abuses, distortions and lies, is it regulation or just bad regulation?, affording governmental programs and high taxes, millennia of struggle by the rich to retain control vs. democracy,

 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed Citizens United

Humans speaking their mind without fear, means of extending the reach of speech [meida], bought speech, literally “free” speech decoupled from money, power of the media, corporate personhood, limitations of free speech, campaigns and political speech, alternative communications for elections: public financing, freedom of the Internet….
Figures on campaign contributions given by largest lobbying corporations [6+ years old = pre Supepr PACs]
One of our earliest posts:We don't have free speech that has meaningful access to our own representatives. Our logo, our slogan, our chants, young adults, spreading the word on the Internet, Obama’s election, making videos,
Largely unedited, free associated ideas on framing the legislation
Free public website designed and formatted to conduct campaigns for office and public issues , FEC provided bank account, and credit cards , campaign accounting system and regulations, partial design specifications, real time public review access…
the most logical public space to allow the free flow of information on issues of public interest
understanding the power of corporations as a means of amassing power and money, the founding fathers originally rejected the existence of corporations,” corporations are not mentioned in the Constitution and have no protected rights; therefore, Congress may limit or abolish corporations as deemed necessary for the public good. Growth of corporate power, personhood of corporations and personal rights attributed to corporations , theory of 14th amendment [due process] applies to corporations,
 

Friday, March 5, 2010

"Free" Speech or "Bought" Speech

The only truly “free” speech which is constitutionally protected is the freedom to speak our mind without fear of government control or retribution. It seems clear that this alone is the intent of the framers of our Constitution. Free speech has to do with the content of speech – the facts and arguments supporting one’s position or opposing another position. It has nothing to do with the preferential ability to deliver opinions on a scale unimaginable to its authors in 1787 that gives the few virtual control over public opinion through the control of the information the public receives. By default the se;f-interested views of the ultra-wealthy become the only voice meaningfully heard.

The way wealthy, conservative business interests see it, free speech is about their power to “buy” both the “content” and the “delivery” of “free” speech – although they would never say it this way in public. Their argument stems from a legal definition giving corporations the same status called the "personhood" of corporations and the same rights as living human beings – the citizens of our country.

Using this argument, business interests have gained the agreement of the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case recognizing their corporate right to free speech and thus blocking almost any limitation on their ability to spend unlimited funds to control both the content and means of delivery in their use of political speech. They use the power of their money to buy our representatives through their campaign slush funds, to buy political ads for or against candidates and issues, and to directly control the media through ownership control. They are able to use this unlimited corporate ownership and/or funds and to write them off as business expenses.

(a) To purchase unlimited political advertising beyond the means of others for or against both issues and candidates according to their private business interests.

(b) To buy, centralize and control the media thereby gaining the ability to directly control programming, the TV personalities and news anchors, the content and how it is portrayed to such an extent that only a limited point of view is able to reach the public at large. The concentration of media ownership world-wide has surged in recent years giving control to a mere handful of the largest companies in the world. Recent efforts of high tech corporations to take control of satellite, cable, broadband communication links as well as the Internet itself.

(c) They have increasing inroads into both public and private schools from pre-school through graduate school in ways that determine the content of the curriculum making it directly a tool of their interests. They own the companies that create the curriculum or subsidize third parties to “ghost write” it for them. There have even been attempts to put their advertising into curriculum materials and in schools.

(d) Directly paying the salary of professors who agree with their self interests and will convey this bias in all that they teach. Controlling the content of the curricula and the professors allows corporations to indoctrinate whole generations of students to their self-interested views.

(e) As with the "Swift Boaters" and the "Birthers," “bought” speech [especially when disconnected from the responsibility of a particular party or campaign] is often nothing more than propaganda carefully crafted by media experts to deceive, create fear, bias or engender prejudice. Such “independent” inputs are almost always viciously negative and add little to the substance of public discourse regarding the issues.

For those who want even more legal detail and history, click here.

This is not the free speech conceived by the authors of our Bill of Rights and Constitution.

p.s. If you want to read or share our complete introductory series and other blog posts about this and other issues,  see our Annotated Table of Contents below. Or if you have questions or comments, email us.     


Annotated Table of Contents

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/sign-the-pledge-big-out?source=c.em&r_by=14960502
Insist candidates vote for a single act of Congress stating: “There is no relationship between speech and money stated or implied in the US Constitution and therefore no such relationship exists” as the basis of further reforms to limit the abuses of Big Money interests.
Best summary of the proposed “Recover our Democracy Act;” its Constitutional basis; removing purported legal objections, public financing of elections, limits on campaign contributions, public funding of federal elections, preprogrammed campaign website, redefining a bribe and much more
Cut and paste text to share by electronic media to spread the word on our plan
Our appointment being ignored while lobbyists immediately enter our Congressman’s office
Being on the outside: Explaining the meaning of our logo…the corrupting influence of Big Money
Political contributions, Citizens United Supreme Court Decision,  “We don’t have free speech. We can’t afford it,” our solution is an act of Congress,
 “Backdoor money in politics, quid pro quo,  “anything of material value offered or given to, or received and accepted by any candidate, incumbent or governmental employee under any circumstance shall be defined as a bribe,” penalties defined for candidates and government employees.
Our early commentaries: Free speech is fundamental to democracy, different views, uses and limitations of free speech, public financing of elections, fair and balanced media coverage

Original free speech: freedom to speak our mind,  power to “buy” both the “content” and the “delivery” of “free” speech,  "personhood" of corporations, Supreme Court and  Citizens United, ownership of the media, points of view,  political advertising, educational content, bought speech,…

Trickle down economics, tax reductions, income disparity, deregulation, power by changing belief systems, abuses, distortions and lies, is it regulation or just bad regulation?, affording governmental programs and high taxes, millennia of struggle by the rich to retain control vs. democracy,

 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed Citizens United

Humans speaking their mind without fear, means of extending the reach of speech [meida], bought speech, literally “free” speech decoupled from money, power of the media, corporate personhood, limitations of free speech, campaigns and political speech, alternative communications for elections: public financing, freedom of the Internet….
Figures on campaign contributions given by largest lobbying corporations [6+ years old = pre Supepr PACs]
One of our earliest posts:We don't have free speech that has meaningful access to our own representatives. Our logo, our slogan, our chants, young adults, spreading the word on the Internet, Obama’s election, making videos,
Largely unedited, free associated ideas on framing the legislation
Free public website designed and formatted to conduct campaigns for office and public issues , FEC provided bank account, and credit cards , campaign accounting system and regulations, partial design specifications, real time public review access…
the most logical public space to allow the free flow of information on issues of public interest
understanding the power of corporations as a means of amassing power and money, the founding fathers originally rejected the existence of corporations,” corporations are not mentioned in the Constitution and have no protected rights; therefore, Congress may limit or abolish corporations as deemed necessary for the public good. Growth of corporate power, personhood of corporations and personal rights attributed to corporations , theory of 14th amendment [due process] applies to corporations,


Is the Problem Big Government or Big Business?

Some people think the problem of our world today are the result of big government. We have been told for years that if we just lower taxes, get regulations out of the way and let the "free market" do it's thing, everything will be fine. It's called "trickle down" economics; it's been in effect for most of the last 30 years; and it has proven itself not to work. During the administrations of Presidents Reagan and Bush American jobs decreased and unemployment and the federal debit increased. This was reversed during the Clinton administration. Low taxes for the very rich, deregulation and cutting government safety net programs are substantially the reason we are in the mess we are today.

What has happened in reality is that the very rich and powerful have become very much more rich and powerful while the rest of us have barely held our ground or fallen behind economically. Since they substantially control the media through which we receive our information through both ownership and advertising, they continue to do everything in their power to convince us that allowing them to amass wealth and control the processes of both the economy and our government is the only way things will work well. All evidence shows the exact opposite to be true.

They tell us if things are not working well, it's because the government is interfering in the process or because taxes are too high and robbing the economy of initiative and investment capital. They call it socialist, communist, facist. They are calling Obama an elitist and neo-monarchist. This is name calling and designed to induce fear. It is a tactic used by those who cannot win a rational argument. In fact it is they who consolidate control themselves in ways that defy our democratic principles. The history of religion shows this to be a [false] belief system which has been used with only minor changes in language to control society for over 5,000 years. "Belief" is much easier and cheaper than force of arms to keep society subdued.

If you really look, you will see that the real problem is the corrupting control of government by big money interests, not government per se. What are a few examples? Do you know that the first third of the money we pay in medical insurance premiums are spent on finding ways to deny the coverage we paid them to insure? In effect, we are paying them NOT to cover us. They are spending our own premium money to disallow the coverage we bought. This money they are taking away from us is enough money to pay for the health care of the uninsured! Those numbers are well established facts if you do your research, but, of course, that's not what we normally hear in our media. Does anything smell fishy about that to you? Unfortunately, this type of story is not the exception, it is the rule of how things work when selfish interests are allowed to control both the information and the process.

Or how about using $ millions in campaign contributions enabled the drug companies "convince" [bribe] Congress to write so-called "reform legislation" which forbids the government from negotiating the price they charge us to be as good or better than the price they charge in other countries? That's called reform? Is government to blame? Or is the ability of drug companies to buy the process through unlimited campaign contributions to blame? There's no doubt in my mind.

Did you see Erin Brockovich and how Pacific Gas and Electric knowingly poisoned the ground water and who hired a host of lawyers to deny any responsibility while people got sick and died? It's a true story you know. And industry interests tell us that the Environmental Protection Agency is bad and needs to be limited or eliminated. They tell us that people like this who are sick and dying due to PGE's actions are driving up the cost of everything by their "frivolous" lawsuits. Yes, some suits are, but many if not most are redress of real injuries, and if we ever limit the courts from pursuing our protection from corporate abuses, God help us.

These abuses are not the result of governmental regulation. They are the result of bad or no regulation coupled with corporate malfeasance and greed. They are the result of the lack of regulations which protect us. For many years Alan Greenspan, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, was one of the strongest advocates of low taxes, deregulation and the ability of the free market to police itself of abuse. He has now changed his mind and is speaking out. He fully admits that he was wrong about all of these points particularly regarding the deregulation of the financial institutions.

Regulation came into being during the Great Depression which made things so bad that our government was finally able to limit the extreme abuses of giant corporations. The Glass Steagall Act of 1933 protected us for half a century from high risk financial instruments which are not much more than scams. In the 1980s greedy business interests were able to remove the regulatory limits which allowed them to create the the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980-90s, the Enrons, the toxic mortgages, the virtual cons which came to be called derivatives, the huge "profits" resulting in usurious salaries, benefits and bonuses going to those who created the economic crisis we face today.

The problem is not big government. It's unrestricted big business operating under the sole principle of "profit motive" while ignoring all moral responsibility for the damage they have done to the rest of us and our environment. While we lost our homes, our jobs, our retirement accounts,...while tax dollars bailed out their companies that failed because of their high risk gambles they made -- not with their own money, but with ours,...after they received our bail out, they turned around and gave themselves those $20 million bonuses again. Again we are told the problem is government. No, it was government controlled by greedy business interests which made us believe that they were too large, too important to fail. It's a lie.

Do we need schools? Do we need roads and bridges and airports and air traffic controllers? Do we need police and fire protection? Do we need environmental protection for our air, water and land? Libraries? FDA? CDC? The protection of laws and courts to enforce them? FDIC insured investments? Protection from unfair labor practices -- sweatshops, child labor or slave labor, health and safety on the job? Do we need Medicare and our Social Security retirement programs and the taxes to fund them? Then we need government. Government is not bad. [This is not to say that we don't need to ferret out real waste and abuse. We should and must, but that is an entirely separable issue. Most of these abuses are not intrinsically the fault of government, but because private interests have been able to distort the government in ways that serve their private interests.]

We are told that we can't afford the governmental programs because of the growing debt. No, we can't afford all these things because the very rich are paying historically low tax rates while the rates for the rest of us have remained level or gone up. We really do need many if not most of our government programs and we need the taxes to pay for them. And we need those who can most afford to pay taxes to pay their fair share. If we still had the tax rates in effect in the 1940-50, we would have something like an additional $2 trillion per year in the federal treasury -- enough to put the budget in the black and to begin to pay down the deficit, fund Social Security and all those other things our government "wastes money" on.

While taxes were high [going up to 94% as opposed to only 35% today], the economy grew, there was no lack of motivation or creativity or investment capital, the middle class grew, savings grew, people could afford homes, education, cars, health care... For over a half century taxes were nearly double today's rates for the most wealthy; things worked; and, no, we didn't become communist. The ideas that government and taxes are bad are all a tactic based on fear which keep us from seeing what the real problem is: the extreme greed of the very wealthy and how that warps everything else. This corruption of our society only continues because we believe what they teach us.

No, the problem is not government; it's government controlled by and serving the very wealthy at the expense of the rest of us. This idea is not socialism or communism. That notion is all a con. The answer to most of our problems is not less government; it's working to make sure the very democracy, the government of, by and for the people that the founders of our nation established is alive and well today. It's not working for less government; it's working for GOOD government. Will our government serve and protect us, or will it serve and protect the ability of the wealthy to take the lion's share off the top without regard to the rest of us? Which do you prefer? Which is the true foundation of our great nation? Which is the basis of the society which five centuries of our fore bearers fought to gain for us?

Since the dawn of civilization the very rich and powerful have done everything they can to convince the rest of us that we should trust them,...that they know what they are doing,...that things will fall apart unless we let them control the process,...that they deserve their wealth and power,...that they earn it through their intelligence and hard work [as if they are the only contributors to our economy and the only ones worthy or rewards],...some go so far as to claim that their wealth and power are a sign of God's blessing and that if we don't share in the blessing it is because we are not worthy. If you read the Old Testament prophets or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, it is clear that status, wealth, and power are the antithesis of the Bible teachings. "Woe unto you, you Scribes, you Pharisees, you hypocrites..." But it amazes me how many people who say they think the Bible is the unerring Word of God believe it justifies economic injustice, that it does not demand taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves...

Since the end of the Dark Ages, the western democracies have struggled against what was then called "the divine right of kings and nobles," or today is what amounts to the "divine right of profit." It's all the same thing. It's all a belief system and a carefully crafted lie they perpetrate that allows them to continue their strangle hold over everything without opposition. It's time to end this fiction. It's time to see that the "emperor has no clothes." It's time to see that the ultra-rich who are driven by greed should be the last people on earth we should trust with the power to control our economy and government. It's time to take back the power that rightfully belongs in the hands of the citizens of our great country, not in the hands of those who abuse it.

Contact us: wedonthavefreespeech@outlook.com

p.s. If you want to read or share our complete introductory series and other blog posts about this and other issues,  see our Annotated Table of Contents below. Or if you have questions or comments, email us.     


Annotated Table of Contents

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/sign-the-pledge-big-out?source=c.em&r_by=14960502
Insist candidates vote for a single act of Congress stating: “There is no relationship between speech and money stated or implied in the US Constitution and therefore no such relationship exists” as the basis of further reforms to limit the abuses of Big Money interests.
Best summary of the proposed “Recover our Democracy Act;” its Constitutional basis; removing purported legal objections, public financing of elections, limits on campaign contributions, public funding of federal elections, preprogrammed campaign website, redefining a bribe and much more
Cut and paste text to share by electronic media to spread the word on our plan
Our appointment being ignored while lobbyists immediately enter our Congressman’s office
Being on the outside: Explaining the meaning of our logo…the corrupting influence of Big Money
Political contributions, Citizens United Supreme Court Decision,  “We don’t have free speech. We can’t afford it,” our solution is an act of Congress,
 “Backdoor money in politics, quid pro quo,  “anything of material value offered or given to, or received and accepted by any candidate, incumbent or governmental employee under any circumstance shall be defined as a bribe,” penalties defined for candidates and government employees.
Our early commentaries: Free speech is fundamental to democracy, different views, uses and limitations of free speech, public financing of elections, fair and balanced media coverage

Original free speech: freedom to speak our mind,  power to “buy” both the “content” and the “delivery” of “free” speech,  "personhood" of corporations, Supreme Court and  Citizens United, ownership of the media, points of view,  political advertising, educational content, bought speech,…

Trickle down economics, tax reductions, income disparity, deregulation, power by changing belief systems, abuses, distortions and lies, is it regulation or just bad regulation?, affording governmental programs and high taxes, millennia of struggle by the rich to retain control vs. democracy,

 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed Citizens United

Humans speaking their mind without fear, means of extending the reach of speech [meida], bought speech, literally “free” speech decoupled from money, power of the media, corporate personhood, limitations of free speech, campaigns and political speech, alternative communications for elections: public financing, freedom of the Internet….
Figures on campaign contributions given by largest lobbying corporations [6+ years old = pre Supepr PACs]
One of our earliest posts:We don't have free speech that has meaningful access to our own representatives. Our logo, our slogan, our chants, young adults, spreading the word on the Internet, Obama’s election, making videos,
Largely unedited, free associated ideas on framing the legislation
Free public website designed and formatted to conduct campaigns for office and public issues , FEC provided bank account, and credit cards , campaign accounting system and regulations, partial design specifications, real time public review access…
the most logical public space to allow the free flow of information on issues of public interest
understanding the power of corporations as a means of amassing power and money, the founding fathers originally rejected the existence of corporations,” corporations are not mentioned in the Constitution and have no protected rights; therefore, Congress may limit or abolish corporations as deemed necessary for the public good. Growth of corporate power, personhood of corporations and personal rights attributed to corporations , theory of 14th amendment [due process] applies to corporations,