- Politics and Social Issues»
- Politics & Political Science
Support Democracy: Support One Dollar, One Vote
The Supreme Court is bringing us closer every year to a true democracy of the elite. It took them a long time to acknowledge the truth that corporations are people. We know they are people because corporations like GM and Toyota shit on people all the time with their faulty driving machines. In addition, companies like BP and Exxon take huge dumps in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. And the energy company Freedom Industries recently shat sludge into the water supply in West Virginia. If companies can shit on us, they must be people. Corporations can break laws and get away with murder like people. Corporations can cheat, lie, steal, eliminate jobs, and pollute just like people. But remember, corporations are rich people and they don’t get prosecuted.
Acknowledging that corporations are people is a good start on the way to a richer world. Who better than a few billionaires and their corporations to run things for everyone else. Letting poorer people have a say just confuses us and interferes with our efforts to control the world’s resources and money supply. It is what I call the virtuous cycle of money.
A second boost to elite rule, i.e. democracy, is when the supreme court realized that money is speech. Whether they learned this from direct payments from their business cronies or they were just taking orders, I do not know (sometimes it takes money to grease the wheels of good decision making). Whatever it was, the recent McCutcheon ruling expanded on previous court rulings such as Buckley V. Valeo to make sure money has more power in our elections than ideas. The ruling makes it possible for people to contribute the maximum amount of money to multiple candidates and eliminates life-time limits on donations. That really helps our money talk. We know that money buys elections, and it helps that real democratic forces like multinational corporations have a bigger say in politics. Thank you Judge Scalia and the boys for standing up for the helpless rich!
Before this Supreme Court ruling, poor Shaun McCutcheon, CEO of Coalmont Electrical Development, was having his freedom of speech rights to spend outrageous amounts of money on campaigns infringed. So, like any red-blooded man, he sued so he could share more of his free speech with candidates. By using his free speech to influence politicians, he will be able to spend more of the speech he gets through cuts in regulations and tax loopholes. Now, instead of only being able to spend $2,600 per candidate in an election (5,200 over two years), he can spend $2,600 on any and all candidates during an election. That way, he can influence races not only in his Congressional district, but in all districts and all states, simultaneously. Like any financial instrument, investing in politicians makes you money. And increasingly, it makes you more speech.
Why invest so much money in elections? It is because there is a big payoff. Firms that donate and lobby get tax benefits in directs cuts and loopholes and reduced attention from federal regulators, “…lobbying and campaign contributions can confer special benefits to corporations, while corporations breaking the law can reduce the probability of getting caught...If you doubt the value of lobbying or campaign contributions, consider that American corporations now spend about $3.5 billion/year on lobbying alone. The Cato Institute estimates the value of the resulting corporate welfare at about $90 billion/year.” (Ibid)
The fact is that investing in legislation through campaign donations and lobbying makes us more money. That is why it is essential that we get rid of campaign finance laws so beleaguered corporations can continue the upward profit spiral that has occurred since the recession started in 2008. And because we do so much for America, we need One Dollar, One Vote laws passed now. That would mean that for every dollar you have in assets, you get one vote. Since the richer you are, the better you are, this will make for a healthier nation.
Poor people aren’t good people, or they wouldn’t be poor. So their influence over elections and politics should be and is limited to voting for the candidate we choose for them. However, worthy men of means like McCutcheon should be allowed more influence. In fact, according to the scriptures, the more money you have, the more worthy you are.
The Supreme Court case Santa Clara V. Southern Pacific is widely credited with creating the legal necessity of corporations as people. However, the ruling didn’t state outright that “corporations are people”, but the court’s uncontested decision did give corporations equal protection under the law guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. “The defendant Corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in section 1 of the Fourteen Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Amendment Fourteen guarantees equal protections under the law for all persons in the United States. Thus, giving corporations protections under this Amendment, makes them, ipso facto, people. And if corporations get all the legal protections of people, then they also have free speech. (Ibid)
The Sherman Antitrust Act, Section 7, codified corporations as people,
“Section 7. "Person" or "persons" defined
The word "person", or "persons", wherever used in sections 1 to 7 of this title shall be deemed to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of either the United States, the laws of any of the Territories, the laws of any State, or the laws of any foreign country.”
So a law that was written to break up trusts that illegally colluded to fix prices and undercut the competition declared those separate corporate entities to be people. Who needs trusts when we can collude in the halls of Congress?
The Supreme Court had ruled corporations are people, which is fitting since they were breeding like worms at the turn of the 19th century. In the 1970s, the court recognize that money is speech. In the case of Buckley v. Valeo, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of New York Senator James Buckley who was challenging contribution limits. “The Court concurred in part with the appellants' claim, finding that the restrictions on political contributions and expenditures ‘necessarily reduce[d] the quantity of expression by restricting the number of issues discussed, the depth of the exploration, and the size of the audience reached. This is because virtually every means of communicating ideas in today's mass society requires the expenditure of money.’ The Court then determined that such restrictions on political speech could only be justified by an overriding governmental interest.” (Ibid) And letting average citizens have as much influence on elections as rich men is not compelling enough for the government to override the elite’s power to influence elections.
That meant that the wealthy, the better born and bred and more worthy, could use more of their money for speech, and that we had more free speech than the unworthy, lazy poor. Poor children shouldn’t choose to be born into poor families if they don’t want to be parasites. The poor are parasites, and we need to cut handouts to them, cause they are parasites. Because the poor are lazy parasites, they shouldn’t be allowed to vote at all. That day is soon coming. But until then, we need to push the One Dollar, One Vote law.
Senator Max Lucre from the state of Cashitownya is a major proponent of One Dollar, One Vote. Please support him in his efforts to make your vote pointless.