Get Big $$$ out of politics Now
Understanding the basic Legal issues
Most of the many organizations committed to limiting huge contributions to campaign slush
funds are insisting on a Constitutional Amendment to end Citizens United. While
this is a crucial cause, we believe their efforts are often concentrated too
narrowly because: 1) most approaches fix only one of very many ways Big $$$ dominates
our government; and 2)
a Constitutional Amendment is very complicated,
expensive and takes years to pass. We believe there is a better, simpler, and
more comprehensive way worth considering.
In our analogy of a levy –
a solid wall made of money surrounding our governmental institutions – Big $$$
Interests are on the protected inside of the levy. We citizens are left outside
to drown in the flood without our government’s protection. Especially by many friends
on the right, the government itself is seen as the enemy. We suggest that the
real problem is not government itself. However, there is a serious problem when
government becomes “owned” by Big $$$. That’s an important difference and it’s
what we have now. Since the dawn of human society, we have needed government to
provide for the common needs we cannot accomplish individually [roads, bridges,
schools, police, fire protection…]. Government must also protect us not only
from foreign threat, but also domestic threat [like Big $$$ co-opting our
government].
It is time to take that
Big $$$ levy down completely; only then can we build a new levy that eliminates
the ability of Big $$$ to buy control of our government again. When a flood is
about to overtop a levy, sticking your finger in one hole is of no use. When
you fix a levy, you have to fix the whole thing or all your efforts are in
vain. We need to be sure that there are no leaks for Big $$$ to get through to
overwhelm us again. Is that even possible? We believe it is and most of it can
be achieved in one Act of Congress which includes several necessary actions.
The Constitution is the
supreme law of our land. Its body includes the outlines of the powers and
limitations of our government. Having just overthrown the burden of English
tyranny, the founding fathers felt it was necessary to protect our young nation
from becoming subjected to such oppressive government again. Thus, the Bill of Rights – the first ten
Amendments to the Constitution – was specifically designed to guarantee this
protection. Nonetheless, we are once again faced by an out-of-control
government that often seems to be working against us, rather than for us. The
majority of Americans now agree that we must regain control of our government
and demand it once again be “Of the people; by the people; and for the people.”
The outcome is not
guaranteed. The power of Big $$$ will not give their control up easily. And
therefore, the path before us will not be easy either. It's up to us to make
our representatives understand exactly what we demand – the Constitutional
government that protects us and serves the public interests. The First
Amendment is the foundation of that protection; but also ironically the
adulterated foundation on which Big $$$ has stolen it from us. What does it
actually say?
“Congress shall make no
law … 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.”
To build that new levy to
protect us, we have to concentrate on the whole picture. It’s time to break the link between money and free
speech altogether. Don’t allow anyone confuse you. That’s all it says! To change that requires a
Constitutional Amendment. Everything else is based on laws, regulations. As
long as our demands remain consistent with to the Constitution, the changes we
need can be accomplished through the far simpler legislative process – i.e. a
single act of Congress as follows:
“There is no relationship between speech and money
stated or implied in the US Constitution and therefore no such relationship
exists.”
Isn’t this last statement
a completely logical statement accurately describing the First Amendment? Once
that is established, every way money is or is not allowed to influence politics
can be limited or forbidden. That is the necessary foundation on which all
other regulation of the abusive power of Big $$$ must firmly stand. It is
unassailable by any court on strict Constitutional grounds. No other foundation
will hold up the new levy to protect public interests. Although the following
is implied, the act would well include:
“All previous
regulations, laws and court opinions on all levels of government which are in
conflict with this legislation shall cease and desist immediately when this
Congressional Act is signed into law by the President of the United States
without any further legislative, executive or judicial action.”
Why
is this second section important? In the
early days of industrial revolution, the power of the nobility began to be
replaced by industrialists. In passing, it is noteworthy that “corporations,” unencumbered
“profit” and the “free market” are not even mentioned in the Constitution and
therefore not constitutionally protected. Since corporations were seen as the primary
method of accruing wealth rapidly and passing it from generation to generation,
early laws actually required corporations to be dissolved upon the death of
the corporation’s founders. This is all to say that our founders realized limitations
are necessary in order to guarantee that corporations not become oppressive.
As we moved into the middle
and late 1800s, step by step corporations became established in law and
court decisions which became progressively complex. From a purely practical
point of view, the concept of the “personhood of corporations” grew “organically”
out of having attributes similar to individual people: to enter into contracts,
sue and be sued, to establish credit and banking services, own property, pay
taxes, engage banking services, establish credit… and so forth. The early-foreseen dangers faded into the
background, and these new “legal fictions” became embodied in law and accepted
as common practice without further question. Over time, corporations and the so-called free
market became seen as part of “God, mother and country” in people’s conceptions
– accepted without question.
Similarly, “ free speech” evolved from the ultimate democratic process of town hall
meetings progressively to being mediated by 1] a handful of national mega-media
corporations that exist today and 2] the huge cost of buying ads and airtime to
present “free speech” through the media. The “legal fiction” that money is a form of
speech was not created by the Constitution as seen before, or an Act of
Congress, but only by a bare majority of the Supreme Court in the 1976 Buckley
v. Valeo ruling. As most often said by those on the right, this process is
called “legislating from the bench” and from a strict Constitutional point of view
is questionably legal. Only the legislative branch has this power, not the
courts. This evolved finally to the point that the courts married the two
concepts by “recognizing” that corporations “as people” also had the “protected”
right of free speech in the Citizens United ruling of 2007. Today this Gordian
knot of “legal fiction” makes placing any limitation on Big $$$ in politics
almost impossible to achieve. In Greek
mythology, the Gordian knot cannot be untied. The only answer is cutting
through it entirely with a very sharp knife.
It logically follows that the solution to our problem is not
just to dissolve the “marriage” between the personhood of corporations and free
speech, but to cut through the link between money and speech “legal
contributions” through which Big $$$ has come to control our government. Next
we will cover the back door…bribery. The bribery opening is even more insidious
than huge campaign contributions, media buys, etc. It is also why an Amendment
to end Citizens United alone will not solve our problem. I promise you will
like how we handle this one. If you miss it or any part of the series, email us
and we will catch you up.
Thank you.
Richard S. Galloway
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,
No comments:
Post a Comment