From which all problems stem...

[chaska]

Corporate money finances our elections. Until we get corporate money out of our election system corporations will continue to increase their control over this country and all others.

Discuss.

[wli]

1. that's just step one

Somewhere along this line is to revoke corporate personhood.

[chaska]

3. AMEN.

[WeRQ4U]

7. Are we still allowed to sue them then?

It might be hard to have it both ways.

[wli]

9. Of course; just name the board of directors as the defendants.

Nothing like personal responsibility to convince these crooks to clean up their acts.

[WeRQ4U]

10. Problem is... you wouldn't have corporations or anything like them.

The reason people USE corporations and the reason people invest IN corporations is because of the limited liability. They are the perfect answer for big business.

Now if you just don't want big business, that's another story.

[wli]

11. organizations will still exist, they just won't have legal force

Hence, personal responsibility at all levels.

[WeRQ4U]

12. You'll have to explain that to me.

What I see, legally, with organizations is a heirarchy of liability. A general partnership having none, all the way up the ladder to a corporation having none. (minus rare instances of fraud and intentional misconduct allowing creditors to "pierce the corporate veil").

My problem with eliminating personhood and allowing liability within the corporation is this: Corporations are set up BECAUSE they have limited liability, the same is true for Limited Liability Companies. They are PERFECT for large or small scale investors because there is minimal risk.

If we made corporate officers and shareholders responsible for the actions of the corporations, there would be no corporations, since their only use is limited liability. What would happen then. You cannot have large scale investments in general partnerships, there is too much risk.

[wli]

13. it's pretty easy

The board of directors gets together and says they're some organization or other. No need for the state to even recognize the organization. They're free to assemble and act collectively. No problem.

[chaska]

2. Do you agree, disagree, whatever?

It's not my "theory", so I won't take it personally.

I think this is something that we should be pushing for in a big way. As in the number one concern.

[WeRQ4U]

8. I agree.

Getting big money out of the election process seems so fundamental to me. It makes a mockery of the representative governement formula. They no longer vote consistent with their voter base, they vote based on who might give them more money the next time around. It's so completely corrupt.

[info being]

4. The problem is the divine right of the shareholder

The universally accepted idea that corporations are only accountable to the shareholder is as absurd as the idea of the divine right of kings. Why, when employees spend their days working in the company...when society must live with what the company has done, do we accept this?

Today's core problem is the corporation itself. Breaking the divine right of the shareholder and taking away corporate personhood is a good start to cleaning this joint up a bit.

[chaska]

5. NO argument here, but....

Shouldn't we be first and foremost following the lead of Maine and Oregon in outlawing corporate contributions?

Can anyone describe these programs in any detail?

[CrispyQ]

6. Yes, it's a serious issue.

We need to get corporations out of everything that was/is the Commons, & make them accountable to the community first, shareholders second.

If they can't make a profit without harming human beings (including their workers, the citizens who live near their facilities, or the customers who use their product/services) or without harming the environment of the communities they do business in, then the corporation should have to forfeit their profit & too bad shareholders. Next time maybe you'll pay closer attention to the decisions the BOD & Officers of the company made & demand integrity in their future business practices.

This 'profit at all costs' attitude is ruining the world.



http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/

snip...

Our Bill of Rights was the result of tremendous efforts to institutionalize and protect the rights of human beings. It strengthened the premise of our Constitution: that the people are the root of all power and authority for government. This vision has made our Constitution and government a model emulated in many nations.

But corporate lawyers (acting as both attorneys and judges) subverted our Bill of Rights in the late 1800's by establishing the doctrine of "corporate personhood" -- the claim that corporations were intended to fully enjoy the legal status and protections created for human beings.

We believe that corporations are not persons and possess only the privileges we willfully grant them. Granting corporations the status of legal "persons" effectively rewrites the Constitution to serve corporate interests as though they were human interests. Ultimately, the doctrine of granting constitutional rights to corporations gives a thing illegitimate privilege and power that undermines our freedom and authority as citizens. While corporations are setting the agenda on issues in our Congress and courts, We the People are not; for we can never speak as loudly with our own voices as corporations can with the unlimited amplification of money.

===

When you read more & discover that the corporate personhood 'ruling' wasn't even a ruling -- it was the header notes of a court clerk that established the corporate personhood precedent. The things corporations have gotten away with & continue to get away with since being declared persons is simply mind boggling.

"Unequal Protection" by Thom Hartman is a great book on this subject. I also recommend David Korten's "When Corporations Rule the World."