cat here!
Doom and Gloom you have a point...you vote each time you spend folks...credit, debt, all those toys have a price in blood...play with me here? If every time you fill your car with gas you think of it as Blood...If every time you buy some useless bull shit you saw on TV that is going to make you more manly...more viral more something...you said...hey! this crap is a burden...now I have to get apartment insurance! When you buy you vote...Gloom and Doom forgive me on this...It isn't scary or fear filled to depend on yourself and your neighbors...it's fun...My neighbor loved to put food by I like to grow food...she canned what I grew we shared...I made wine we shared..no money...Hey Washington...want your taxes...I'll pay you in home brew, I'll just leave it on the lawn think you can buy any wars with it?? go Amish!!

If we had a government with any balls and a sense of social justice, they'd turn our well indoctrinated military on Wall Street and issue the order: Kill! Kill! Kill! Put those damn cyborgs to work.

Oh sure, Corporate America will be more than happy to take their boot off our necks. Those in office like the money way too much.

Larry, Don't toss out all ear marks; some are important needs for a given state. E.g., The MN I35 bridge was funded by a special appropriation-because the need was urgent and on a federal highway system. However, if bridges on state highways are in need of replacement, short of falling down, the time-consuming procedure of putting a special appropriation through Congress would be too clumsy to be a workable procedure. It can be accomplished by an earmark-but one with some oversight to make sure it is not a 'bridge to nowhere' type of earmark. I think the earmark procedure has a place, but needs some non-political and objective oversight-kinda like a FISA court for earmarks.

Until there is a constitutional amendment that excludes corporate entities (INC's, LLC's, etc.) from 14th Amendment protections, the troglodytes on the Supreme Court (Scalia, Thomas, Alito, & Roberts to begin with) will be there to protect to protect the companies they invest in despite Larry Lessig's best efforts. Lessig's ideas are bold and are what is needed, but as long as the Supreme Court holds that corporations have the same protection under the law as a real person while they have less liability for bad acts at the same time, Lessig will be a political Sisyphus.

re NateW 10:53am

agreed. corporate personhood is the keystone issue. pull it away and the whole rotten edifice crumbles.

Either that, or take personhood more literally, with all of the obligations. Persons have nationalities. They cannot outsource themselves, dodge taxes. When a person commits a crime, all parts of his body go to jail, not just a finger or foot.

As THE CALL sang "Just corporate criminals-playing with tanks". I would like to see a politician declare that all PAC money he/she receives will either be put into "A General Election fund" for ALL who are running for elected office to use equally. Barring that ever to happen, it would go to the persons home state General fund. just think of the roads that could be repaired amongst other needed projects and charities.

Sorry, but if people aren't running for Congress against this current crowd, this won't change. The current crowd up there is fat, rich and happy with the current system, and the mass amounts of money that flows to incumbents helps to guarantee that they continue to get the benefits of it.

So, this is a nice little announcement, but you have to read the fine print about several 'phases' into the future where just maybe it might start to have some teeth. Down where it starts to talk about backing candidates that support this idea.

And the way it sounds, its all setup so that it can't take effect in this election. So he's basically DELAYING any action on this until at least the next election cycle if not further away.

Meanwhile, if you want to back a candidate TODAY that rejects a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations, go look up your local Green Party. They are already at the place where this guy won't get to for years with all his 'layers' and 'phases'.

PS ... Watch the slimy wriggly talk from Democrats on this issue. For instance, Mr. Obama often touts his not taking money from lobbyists ... but meanwhile is money is flooded with corporate donations. They just don't come directly through lobbyists. But he's happy to hob-nob with all the Wall St types and take contributions directly from all the corporate execs.

GOOD LUCK LARRY...but the government is bought, paid for, and wrapped up in taxpayers' ribbon!

If corporate personhood were REAL and not just a "when it benefits the rich we use it, when it doesn't, it doesn't apply" then Monsanto and many others would probably be on death row or already executed. Corporate personhood is a fraud. Money is not the same as speech. I am hopeful because what I heard in Obama's speech on Race and Wright, is his mention of corporate greed extracting wealth from this country. He is the first of the three finalists for president who has noted that. Clinton is a corporate shill. That is all she has ever been. McCain... at this point he is just saying what his handlers tell him too. And his handlers are corporate shills.

It leaves us with only one choice people. Obama.

It is time to reject corporate influence, not just on Washington, but on all governments in the so called "civilised" Western World.
But, wait a moment - this is just a Utopian idea, because governments are put in place by the elitist minority, to control our every move.
We have been castrated and subjugated by our oligarchy, who have steadily eaten away at our rights and liberties over the past couple of decades. Even peaceful protests are now broken up, the unions have been emasculated, and there are few if any mainstream newspapers which can claim to be "on the side of the worker". Many hard fought battles of the early 20th century may as well have been in vain, because the ruling classes have totally infiltrated our rich legal systems.
The danger, is that the majority of the people are in danger of losing their voice again.

COMarc - you seem to be too cynical here. You're ignoring facts. Accepting contributions from corporations (they're not all bad you know) is not the same as taking money from registered lobbyists and PACs.

In his "more perfect union" speech, Obama mentioned the "real culprits" of our f'd up country, "a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices and short-term greed."

By doing so, he got the attention the most corrupt and powerful captains of the establishment, who do not want to see change.

Naturally they (and apparently you too) are working to turn the American people away from Obama, and towards the safer - more status quo friendly - Hilary.

----------------

"The curse of poverty has no justification in our age. It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

"Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are."
Benjamin Franklin

"There is nothing in your world, either alive or dead, that is worth being agitated about, except the alleviation of suffering." From: "The Boy & the Brothers"; publisher Neville Spearman, London,UK

"When we harm another we only harm ourselves.... When a soldier dies in Bosnia, part of us is slain. We are both the assailant and the assailed." Dr. Stylianos Atteshilis, also known as Daskalos

"Feed your brothers. Remember that mankind is One, children of the One Father. Make over in trust, the goods of the Earth to all who are in need. Do this now and save the world." The World Teacher

"The illusion that we are separate from one another is an optical delusion of our consciousness." Albert Einstein

RE: It's not "personal corruption" he's after, either, as he said he considers the current Democratic Congress to be one of the least corrupt in history.

Seems that the American history I got with my Saturday morning cartoons glossed over that point. For the record, Sir John A MacDonald was the first Prime Minister of Canada - and the first PM to get himself involved in a corruption scandal (involving railway contracts).

Remember PM Brian Mulroney and Ronald Reagan? This is what Pat Martin has to say about the era (and explains much of my previous support for John Edwards and my reason for believing what Obama says about NAFTA):

Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I will serve notice at the beginning of my speech that I will be sharing my time with the member for Windsor—Tecumseh.

As the vice-chair of the ethics committee, I have spent the last three months totally immersed in a very dark and troubling period of Canadian history. It seems there was a time when our great country was hijacked by some very bad people, people who abused the power of their office for their own self-interest and benefit, who would break faith with the Canadian people by abusing the checks, balances and rules that we put in place to preclude such a thing from ever happening.

We have been studying an era of Canadian politics where corporate lobbyists were running roughshod over everything that was good and decent about Canadian politics and our democratic institutions. We have been studying an era where corrupt politicians abused the power of their office to line their own pockets. We have been researching a period of history where there were mandatory 5% minimum kickbacks on public works projects.

These are facts. These are not theories before our committee. Some of those corrupt politicians were caught, tried and convicted in subsequent years. Some continue to enjoy the spoils of their malfeasance and their abuse of our system. Some of the key actors in fact of this era continue to operate unmolested in exactly the same way today.

This might be one of the most disturbing things that we realized as committee members. Some of the very key actors in this, the darkest period of recent Canadian history, continue to operate in the same modus operandi that so offended the sensibilities of Canadians at the time and in subsequent generations.

The question as to whether there was political interference in the Airbus purchase for Air Canada has taken us on a long circuitous journey, a journey where we have learned of a parcel of rogues perhaps unparalleled in Canadian history. We have witnessed the dark underbelly of Ottawa, some place that I never care to go again, some place frankly that nauseates me as a Canadian, as it would offend the sensibilities of all good people in our country who expect better from their public office-holders.

Our research took us back to a disturbing period in Canadian history where foreign money undertook a silent coup in Canada. Franz Josef Strauss, premier of Bavaria, a man who the media in his country calls an unrepentant Nazi, and also the CEO of Airbus, rigged the 1983 Conservative convention to unseat Joe Clark and six months later put in place Brian Mulroney. That alone should have been enough to horrify Canadians. They should have taken to the rooftops to scream their derision over this political interference by foreign powers, an unrepentant Nazi from a foreign country running roughshod over our democratic process in Canada.

This was orchestrated by the team that put Brian Mulroney in place: Walter Wolf, Karl Heinz-Schreiber, Frank Moore, Gary Ouellet and the Doucet brothers. Yet Brian Mulroney claimed he had absolutely nothing to do with the Airbus purchase. However, as soon as he was in power, put in place by this dirty money from an unrepentant Nazi, one of the first things he did was fire 13 of the 15 members of the board of directors of Air Canada and put in place 13 Conservative allies, one of whom was Frank Moores, the chief lobbyist for Airbus.

We also took note that the CEO of Air Canada at the time was Pierre Jeanniot. Where did he retire to? As soon as the Airbus purchase was officially announced in 1988, Mr. Jeanniot retired to Toulouse, France, home of Airbus. It was an odd choice, coincidence, I suppose.

These are the things with which we have been dealing. That is where the story started.

We now move on to the issue of the $2.1 million that Canada paid out in the defamation lawsuit that Brian Mulroney filed against the Government of Canada. Brian Mulroney filed a lawsuit for $50 million to sue the people of Canada because they implied that he took money from Karlheinz Schreiber. We now know that he did take money from Karlheinz Schreiber in the most shady of circumstances. This phantom lobbying where he claims that he earned the $300,000, he admits that it was a mistake, but now he would have us believe he earned that money legitimately.

Let me say at the outset of this particular section that no amount of bafflegab will ever take the stink off the image that is tattooed, that is emblazoned on people's minds of a former prime minister of Canada taking sacks full of cash from an arms dealer in secret hotel room meetings. We could have studies for years and explanations by hired mouthpieces on behalf of Brian Mulroney for years. Nobody will ever forget that image and we are horrified even as we speak of it today.

The reason I say "phantom lobbying" is because the very company he says that he was lobbying for, ThyssenKrupp, the arms of Krupp, did not know that Brian Mulroney was on its payroll. We have all read our history books on the second world war. Those are the guys who armed the Nazis and they now own one of the largest companies in the world in terms of arms dealers. How Brian Mulroney could be lobbying for such a huge international corporation and how a huge corporation like that did not know that a former head of state of a G-7 nation was on its payroll, defies credulity, and some of us on the committee simply cannot accept that without some more proof.

We asked Mr. Mulroney to please present some documentation to prove that he did meet with the leaders of China, Russia and France to earn the $300,000 he was given. Some of us think that was awfully rich compensation for three brief meetings with three heads of state, but it also begs the question as to why Mr. Mulroney would he be trying to sell tanks to China right after Tiananmen Square when he was so outraged and we had international agreements to not arm those Communist countries at that time. The story simply begs for further investigation and validation.

Our committee was wrestling with a number of issues that time does not permit me to go through, but let me know say that as of 12:10 today, the chair of our committee introduced the third report of the Standing Committee on Ethics which clearly states that the work of our committee is now concluded. We are not hearing anymore witnesses. I am proud of the work that our committee did. I would be happy to debate any of the armchair quarterbacks who have criticized the work that we did, mostly Conservative Party members in the country who do not like this era of Canadian history being dredged up.

We did a great deal in a short period of time at no cost to the taxpayers because, I remind colleagues, that our committee meets every Tuesday and Thursday whether we have Brian Mulroney as our witness or anybody else. It was at no cost to the taxpayer and we moved the puck down the ice a great deal in the struggle to shed some light on this dark era. It is now time to pass the puck to those best able to put it in the net and that means the public inquiry should begin without delay. This is the subject of our opposition day motion we are debating today. The Liberals are trying to change the channel from the humiliation of having to vote in favour of the Conservative budget, so they want us to talk about Schreiber-Mulroney, which is fine, we have this opportunity.

The Prime Minister of Canada and the justice minister have both stood in their place promising Canadians that there would be a full public inquiry. They said, "let's wait until the ethics committee finishes hearing witnesses". We are finished. All some of us want to do is go home, take a shower and pretend it never happened, but we now are passing the files, passing the baton over to the public inquiry. It should be implemented and begun without delay. We understand that it takes some time to set up a full public inquiry but that process should begin today.

**********

Mr. Pat Martin: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's knowledge and his flushing out of some of the details about the Airbus sale which added to the debate.

I will simply say that Mr. Bouchard's name has come up a number of times in our inquiry. We do not know the extent of his involvement but I too would be very interested to learn what influence he may have exerted as the ambassador to France. I have no doubt that he was involved or included in this process in some way.

I did not have time in my speech to deal with where the money went but there were millions of dollars of grease money. It was not unusual for European companies at that time to realize that in order to grease the wheels of commerce for a sale of that size they had to sprinkle some money around. In this case it was $20 million, about $10 million on the European side and $10 million on the Canadian side. We do not know who the beneficiaries were of that grease money.

We have a better idea of where the commissions went. They went to Frank Moores and GCI. Some have alleged that GCI was a lobby firm set up by Brian Mulroney's closest associates to act as a piggy bank, to hold the loot until such time as the smoke cleared and the beneficiaries could avail themselves of the loot. There were foreign bank accounts.

It is extremely complex, which this is why a public inquiry may be able to put the puck in the net where we can only move the puck down the ice.

ruscle: "It leaves us with only one choice people. Obama."

Bull crap! Stick your neck out there like ALL progressives should and vote Independent or Green! We're going to end up with an asshole in the W.H. anyway, so why not use your ballot to make a statement. Of course, if most alleged Progressives are willing to settle for the lesser of evils instead of organizing against the two-party corruption, then that will be just another sell-out and NOTHING WILL CHANGE!!!

vaudree: You ever heard of LINKS?

This is important. Also important is that Big Money has always found a way to subvert the democratic process. As long as it has access to 500 lawmakers in the Federal government and to a few state and local lawmakers, it is a matter of finding ways to corrupt and threaten these politicians.

This is the reason that Obama should pick Senator Gravel as his running mate:

Senator Gravel's National Initiative for Democracy allows We the People to make the laws through the referendum, bypassing politicians.

This is not a popular issue for politicians not wanting to give up their power to the people, nor to financial interests who are now able to bribe politicians with campaign "donations" in order to get billions in subsidies, giveaways, tax exemptions and exemptions from environmental laws contrary to the public will and benefit. Or even intimidate politicians into doing their dirty work. The National Initiative for Democracy would insulate and exempt decision makers from character or even actual assassination from decisions against the powers that be.

Over 95% of all campaign "contributions" now come from corporations. This must change.

A binding referendum on Iraq would have taken us out of there. One on lobbyists and campaign reform would have given us fair elections. One on energy would have diverted federal funds to green alternatives instead of to Big Fossil and Nukes. One on mandatory food labeling would have given us the choice of safe foods. One would have ended the War on Drugs/private prison complex. One would have prevented media monopolies. One on the military budget would have cut the pork. One would have ended private armies. One would have ended the embargo against the Cuban people. One would have ended NAFTA and the WTO. One would have prosecuted Bush and his cronies. One would have set term limits for Supreme Court Justices. One would have given us single payer healthcare. One would have given us free schooling and universities and so on.

It is plain to see why media, war profiteers and other corporations and financial institutions killed Senator Gravel's popular candidacy ASAP. They saw the threat to their dominance and reacted accordingly in their undemocratic and dictatorial fashion.

The referendum not only lets the people participate in their democracy, but gives politicians a way to remain uncommitted and safe when controversial issues like immigration, Israel/Palestine, progressive taxation, etc. are concerned.

The referendum has given the Swiss the highest per capita income in the world despite having few natural resources, no wars in over 150 years despite being surrounded by warring nations, no boom and bust economy, no War on Drugs and no drug problem, no immigration problems, the best healthcare and education, a healthy environment and no discrimination.

With the help of modern communications and information, We the People would be able to participate in ongoing referendums at the town, city, state, federal and global levels and become the lawmakers, like the Swiss people do.

What better way to show politician's oft touted trust in the people's judgement than to actually let all the people make the final decisions on the issues?

Candidate Stew

Hussein, Hillary and Johnny Mc stew
what's good for me is good for you

do the beans and the blessings for the few
do the first lady beans with the nuclear count
seven six five four three two one
hurray it's awesome
greed & get it on
for profit Armageddon is number one

Do the beans

do the first beans want ta bees and end beens too
grab an ist or two to improve the brew
heathenist corporatist or monopolist will do
add some hanging chad and some cluster leaves too

for bombs and bread go hand in hand
just like Apartheid in the Holy land

Do the bean count

Do the mammon bean count
no cooks are needed for this mammoth faire
for markets need marks for the body tally
for what's good for me is good for you
in the Hussein, Hillary & Johnny Mac stew

Looking to Washington for change before the collapse is in my opinion misguided. Since money is now speech, stop consuming and send your message. When one cuts through all of the complexity and obfuscation the answer is clear, stop spending. Then make your preparations to survive for six months. Food, water, and medicines will be necessary. The American people are asleep and will not awaken until they are flat on their backs and in pain. That time is near.

I propose that all office holders in the United States must wear the logos of thier sponsors on thier suits,along with thier flag pins,like NASCAR drivers.This would allow voters to know who thier"representitives" really represent!Of course the weight of all those patches and pins would require strong fibers like Hemp incorporated into the fabric!But while we watched C-span at least we would know the corporate sponsors' identities without an internet search(thanks Mr. Obama)or a lenthy investigative probe.While the opponents of public financing raised "free speech" issues,we could raise expensive speech issues and boil the speech down to dollars per word! peace

If an elite owns the means of production, that same elite will conspire against the common good. Dealing with this fact is the only cure for what ails us, and without it other cures are cover stories.

Cat here...

you can help...make your children's toys don't buy them....grow a garden of clean food to feed them...And when the suits come to barter bread for paper debt show them how to plant...and when they insist you buy their insurance...show them your family and neighbors and say..."Here is my assurance" No leaders NO followers

M. Lessig is into "intellectual property" law. He should go after the capitalist's relentless violation of Jefferson's Copyright Clause in the US Constitution that specifices legal protect of copyrights "for limited times". The purpose of "limited times" is to nip power abuse in the bud. Jefferson foresaw the rise of Microsoft, the master monopolist. The corporation that made capitalists giddy with excitement long before the Imperial Chimp offered tax breaks to make them blush with embarassment.

Proper copyright time limits would have put Microsoft's flagship products into the public domain fifteen years ago to help form a competitive and productive industry of small independent software companies building on a public domain base of open standards and interoperable open-source software applications with "limited time" protection for proprietary additions.

kloro: If an elite owns the means of production, that same elite will conspire against the common good. Dealing with this fact is the only cure for what ails us, and without it other cures are cover stories.

Amen to that. The way for individuals to deal with the problem of elite control over production is to help shift the production to the local level, by shifting individual exchange/association to the local level. It has to be the action of individuals because the elites hold the government hostage. Americans pay a 25 hour per week ransom, week after week, year after year, and they never get the government back!

When American corporations declared themselves 'citizens' in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company [118 U.S. 394 (1886)] the Fascist takeover of our nation was assured. How can finite flesh and blood humans ever prevail against the immortal omnipotency of a corporation? These 'artifical' citizens must be returned to Pandora's box with or without a wooden stake in their hearts for humanity to live and not just barely survive.

Here in Ohio, our first state Constitution gave the people the rigth to decide how long a corporation could last, what business it could pursue, and forbade them from buying other corporations. Of course, late 19th century giving of personhood turned the whole control of the people on its head, and now corporations write our laws, decide our foreign policy, and control our elections.

This blind belief in capitalism run amok is strangling the earth and all we humans touch, and until some politicians have the guts to face the corps head-on (or we have the smarts to vote ones in who believe people should set the perameters), we will be lemmings clumisly dragging the unnecessary baggage of materialistic greed right over the cliff.

johnny hempseed you're a genius

" Cat March 21st, 2008 4:47 pm

cat here!
Doom and Gloom you have a point…...
It isn't scary or fear filled to depend on yourself and your neighbors…it's fun…My neighbor loved to put food by I like to grow food…she canned what I grew we shared…I made wine we shared..no money…Hey Washington…want your taxes…I'll pay you in home brew, ...."

JUST DON'T LET THE IRS FIND OUT about that bartering. From what I've learned, years ago, bartering is taxed and I believe both in the US and Canada.

It's another example of them hating our freedom, and our right to LIFE.

" whatfools March 21st, 2008 6:34 pm

When American corporations declared themselves 'citizens' in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company [118 U.S. 394 (1886)] the Fascist takeover of our nation was assured."

CORPORATIST, not fascist. See Mussolini.

It's fitting to make the distinction, for pure, strict(ly) fascism isn't corporate-related and may severely impact corporations; it won't be a form of state rule for the benefit of corporations or businesses, which in turn, we know, since we have it before our very eyes, profits politicians, and without benefiting the govt the politicians are members of. It may profit the political parties these politicians are members of, but won't particularly profit the overall govt when it's a multi-party kind.

Something of that sort of order anyway is what I've understood so far; about corporatism and fascism.

Most remarkable is the fact that Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company [118 U.S. 394 (1886) did NOT give corporations personhood. A Supreme Court clerk wrote a synopsis for this decision which erroneously asserted that. Then later courts' decisons based on the false synopsis carried it forward. So could the legal machine at this point bring into question all ensuing decisions based upon this law clerk's error? I have great confidence in Dr. Lessig's views as a defender of democracy and a strong proponent of internet neutrality. I got a kick out of his being written into "The West Wing" several years ago as the man with intellect equal to that of the lead character, President Bartlett.

Me too also a Realist —
"The Truth is that the 'revolution' in Iran in 1979 was as rigged by the CIA for American/'nearby'-Interests as the BS there in 1953. Iran was 'selected/groomed' as a "rationalization and replacement for the 'commies' as our new cold-warrior Enemy" to justify all the other crap we intend to do a-r-o-u-n-d Iran"
I don't think so—-Look at who benefitted—- In the UK at the time, unemploynment was at over 20%— The country had borrowed all the world would lend it—-Oil was at $8/bbl and the UK had just finished all the development expenditures for the first segment of North Sea Oil— The Ayatolla Ruholla Komenhi was in France, but had been supported for many years by a stipend from the British secret service. Britain was our Ally, and we saw an opportunity to okay what they wanted to do. The Shah was fully armed (bought from us) and was beginning to frighten some of the rest of the oil producers in the area (read SA) The only way for the Brits to benefit from their North Sea Oil was for prices to rise—- Someone said OK. Do it. within weeks Iran was flooded with (the then state of the art information transfer– cassette tapes— Who could have done this? Certainly not komehni) but British Diplomats???? Immune from examination???? The only way for Oil prices to rise was for a major producer to come off line— It happened—- in the confusion of the Revolution— Iranian production fell by more than 2/3. The first "oil shock" hit the West—- prices for crude more than tripled—North Sea Oil became a valuable commodity— and the British economy was re-floated and stabilized— The Shah got his come-uppance and we moved right into the more recent Mid east era—-This may even explain why the Blair government supported the Chimp in Charge in the Iraq debacle.—- a favor owed.

"A number of congressional Republicans have been rallying for an earmark freeze."

Oh, how enchanting! Are they trying to portray themselves as "sacrificial lambs" after they have robbed the treasury for insane projects to please their constitutents while simultaneously being supported by and passing legislation that supports the corporate elite?
It would seem that the more important question to ask is: are Republicans willing to put a freeze on "corporate contributions"?

The answer appears to be "NO".

If corporations are legally people, then can directors and executive managers be executed for killing the company?

If Bear Sterns management were executed would other companies managers work on profits rather than bonus packages for themselves?

fas·cism (fshzm)
n.
1. often Fascism
a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control

Noun 1. corporatism - control of a state or organization by large interest groups; "individualism is in danger of being swamped by a kind of corporatism"

A number of points here:

Referendums: most Western countries have them and they work exceedingly well even if they are underutilized.

Okay, I'm an Australian.

Why does the USA resist mandatory voting? The argument I've heard is that if you make those who don't really care, vote, then the result will be likened to the flip of a coin and from my experience, it just doesn't happen that way.

Firstly, about 10% vote informally. That means they get the satisfaction of writing foul expletives across the page or they vote for Mickey Mouse and they are allowed to do so. The law says they must attend the ballot, have their name ruled out as having voted from the electoral roll and submit a voting form. Everyone votes something.

Lazy people are lazy but it is rare to find someone without an opinion and even those who aren't really sure of who they want in power, they usually know who they don't want. When people know that they don't have to vote and will not be fined $1000 if they don't, then they have no reason to become involved in the political process. However, when they find out that they can't renew their driver's licences until they pay the $1000 fine, they vote. When they are faced with the prospect that their vote could be the one that puts satan into power they become politically interested.

What this process does is to stop the fanatics from being the voting force. It stops organisations with their own agendas from filling voting booths with their own people but most importantly, it will remove the power of conservatism from USA politics. The left is individualistic and far less likely to vote than the duty bound conservatives.

I had to look up the 14th Amendment to make sure it was the one I thought it was. It was. I looked it up on Wikipedia and lo and behold, the word 'corporation' or the argument of 'corporate identity and liability' was not mentioned.

And, here begins the problem:

The 14th Amendment was an amendment to the USA constitution that was used by corporate lawyers to say, "But corporations are people too," even if they do exhibit all the qualities of a psychopath - no guilt, no compassion, no remorse just the compulsion for self interest regardless of consequences to others - a psychopath.

So the USA's constitution is fine with creating psychopaths and letting them rule the nation. However, the 14th Amendment isn't my law since I'm an Australian where the USA constitution doesn't apply. So, the American government acting as the whores of the multi-nationals established treaties with other nations and nation blocks to establish the corporate agenda within the 14th Amendment as a treaty obligation or law for every nation on the planet.

It's time the psychopaths were dissolved and imprisoned and that won't happen until activism for fairness and 'a fair go' goes global.

djwolf:"Lazy people are lazy but it is rare to find someone without an opinion and even those who aren't really sure of who they want in power" - I would go further than this, and say that very often, the most vocal and extremist lazy people, are the ones who will go down the pub or watch the TV, rather than go to the polling booth. I agree that people should be forced to vote, just as people are required by law to be on the electoral list.

Good message Mr. Lessig.

Would that Barack Obama would listen to you. Unfortunately he is massively backed by corporate America and his policies and proposals reflect their priorities over the people's.

Btw: Obama broke his lobbyist pledge before he even made it. Would progressives endorsing that guy actually read.

Here's one of many articles about this by the fine money reporter, Pam Martens
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16601

Notice how the mainstream does not allow this meme into its reporting thereby exposing its bias in favor of Obama? In contrast Edwards was beat over head because he said he was for the poor (in contrast to Obama he actually is) but had worked for that hedge fund, got expensive hair cuts, and owned a large home? The media couldn't wait to put one of those three attacks (or all three) into most articles they wrote about JRE. But every time they mention Obama doesn't take lobbyist money, that phony claim is met with no response.

The Government cannot tax kindness or compassion. Bartering is exchanging something you have for something you need. Kindness is giving something you have. There is no exchange in kindness and therefore it is not taxable. Giving gives people and communities life. It allows everyone to live. It is the opposite of greed and therefore challenges corporatism. It is done locally. Caring gives hope where there was none before. Give goods and services to others. The less money we have to touch the cleaner we are.

Surrender,

If all you want to do is make a statement, than vote for the Greens.

We make statements here on line and thousands can read them and comment and make there own. However, a vote for a Green at this point will not get counted like whispering to yourself in a dark closet.

This election is the most vital and Obama is the closest to the Good Ideas and goals of Lessig in this article.

Obama is the closest we will come to a peaceful revolution and our last chance for one.

If you want to make a statement that will be ignored in this two party system than vote for a Green (Whoever that is).

If you want real progressive change, If anybody can, Obama is the man.

If I turn out to be wrong, I wont support the Dems next time... I'll give us one more shot before it is too late.

I've been thinking of a way to cut down on corporate crime and a great idea hit me. How about a three strikes law for corporations? Commit three serious crimes and kiss your charter good bye. Apparently the idea was already proposed in California to complement their existing three strikes law for individuals. Read about it here: http://www.citizenworks.org/corp/fact/3strikes.pdf

If a law like this was implemented, fines would no longer be a mere cost of doing business for corporations. There would be real consequences for violating the law. If Lessig wants to eliminate corporate influence on our government, he should consider a change like this.

Congressional term limits would be a great idea too if Lessig wants to reform Congress. No more career politicians.

And most importantly, Lessig should consider Mike Gravel's National Initiative for Democracy: http://ni4d.us/

dwolf, I agree. Voting could be a pre-requisite for renewing a drivers license, license plate, and obtaining any kind of government assistance. It would actually force the lazy to learn a bit about who they vote for and why.

Duopoly politicians do not want that however. They would say it interferes with people's freedom of choice. In reality, it gives people more freedom of choice. But that would take away a party's power to swing elections. U.S. politicians and their plutocrat owners do not want the people here to govern.

Just read today in Business Week ( I like to know what the rich capitalists are saying) that people aged 20-34 spend on average about 10 minutes a day reading voluntarily. I am not so sure those people should be forced to vote, as they are probably going to base their opinion on who else is jumping on some bandwagon. Many already rely only on what some group like the NRA, or the religious right tells them and do not take time to figure out what is the best course of action. People over 65 spend about five times as long reading as the younger group so might be better informed on issues. If people do not want to vote, better leave them alone.

In many countries, our campaign finance system is punishable as criminal bribery. Elections must be publicly financed if we want politicians to represent the people and not corporations. Use our public airwaves to give everyone equal time to state their case -- do not drag the election process out over years. Establish rules about the role of the media -- that they must give equal time and space to all, and no push-polling horse race punditry, just the facts. It is ubsurd and disgusting that hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on elections in this country!

urthsong March 21st, 2008 8:59 pm

The Supreme Court Clerk that fabricated the brief was a retired Railroad President.

Mike Corbeil March 21st, 2008 8:56 pm

As far as CORPORATIST vs. FASCIST it's like the difference between hemlock and hanging - same outcome for mankind.

Ezeflyer-

If all you're asking is that I write in "Daffy Duck for President" before I can start my car...no sweat. Just exactly how does that help?

We have to get Big Business off of Government'
s back!

These corporate dictatorships lobby to privatize important public assets; then these lobbys "persuade" the government to deregulate these newly acquired assets that they've bought for pennies on the dollar or were given to them by our government(public airwaves).

Of course, these lobbyists go to the next level; they "persuade" the government to sponser corporate monopolization of these and other assets.

Eventually, when these privatized and/or deregulated industries eventually experience business difficulties, of course, the US government is there to bail them out using our past, present and future tax monies.

Many time these business difficulties were a consequence of corporate-sponsered privatization and deregulation and, last but not least, the heavy-handed private bureaucracies that emerged from the constant mergers of corporations.

RE: ALL progressives should and vote Independent or Green!

If you vote Green in Canada, you end up with Ron Paul.

RE: - vaudree: You ever heard of LINKS?

Sorry, was planning to add it but forgot - the link is to the main page (calendar at bottom) because if I put it for the date it stretches the page.

Same date, different quote on corruption from the person Pat Martin was sharing his time with:

Friday, February 29, 2008

Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (snipped) - We saw the same thing here. Excellent work, as I saw it, by the ethics committee, as far as it could go. But we saw with Mr. Mulroney his refusal to give documentation to back up what was a fairly incredible story. However, the one that really got me was when he claimed that his income tax returns were sacred.

My relationship with my wife is sacred. My relationship with my children is sacred. I want to be very clear to this House that my relationship with my accountant and the Revenue Canada office is not sacred, and neither should Mr. Mulroney's be.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/housechamberbusiness/chambersittings.aspx?View=H&Parl=39&Ses=2&Language=E&Mode=1

(for other party comments, it starts at Opposition Motion — Public Inquiry into the Mulroney-Schreiber Affair)

RE: - Also important is that Big Money has always found a way to subvert the democratic process.

Now you are getting to the part of Joe Co's speech that I left out. It is not just, as you say, that Big Money has always found a way to corrupt politicians but, regardless as to whether you are talking Liberal/Dems or Conservatives/Repugs - each seems to look at such scandals in the other as a means of scoring points with the voter rather than as an opportunity to figure out how to prevent further episodes of corruption in the future. Seems that this is the only small hesitation that Joe Co has over the idea of an inquiry (and this one is apt to be an how to guide on how to corrupt the political process - along with occurring during the creation of FTA/NAFTA).

The major deterrent in getting corruption out of American politics is the enormous amount of money it takes to launch a campaign. When the winner for Mayor of New York spends more than the winning Federal party in Canada then the great potential for corruption with you guys.

Gravel is one of many good names. Would like to see Edwards or Dean. That woman who is for gun control, can't remember her name right now, sounds really good.

RE: - Over 95% of all campaign "contributions" now come from corporations. This must change.

Such donations are banned altogether in Manitoba and Quebec. Federally, I think they have placed superficial limits on it recently. Reminds me of Jo Co asking Mulroney what he thought they wanted in return for the money - the whole thing is very theatrical (video)!

Mulroney's testimony on Thursday December 13:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071212/mulroney_testifies_071213/20071213/

Big Money does what it can to influence referendums.

RE: - When American corporations declared themselves 'citizens' in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company [118 U.S. 394 (1886)] the Fascist takeover of our nation was assured.

The way you said "declared themselves" makes me think you've read Thom's book. The judge never actually ruled it that way but, since subsequent cases have acted on the assumption that he had, now those subsequent cases can, themselves, be used as precedent.

Speaking of corporate personhood, how come we are not hearing anything about that SPP meeting in New Orleans in April! And why the location, in your opinion?

RE: - If corporations are legally people, then can directors and executive managers be executed for killing the company?

I think that one of the things Lord Conrad Black was charged with was robbing a company - along with the company's shareholders. Black did not think it possible because it was HIS company - or so he thought.

RE: - Why does the USA resist mandatory voting?

Because it is too confusing to figure out who is eligible to vote in the US so one would not figure out whether one is breaking the law by not voting or by trying to vote. In Canada, one Marijuana party candidate visited the local jail to deliver pamphlets because convicts can vote - it is considered part of their rehab.

One reason people don't vote is that there seems to be a disconnect between paying taxes and getting services - as government give bigger and bigger breaks to corporations and privatize more and more government services.

One other solution is lowering the voting age to 15 so that the kids can learn how to find the information on the local candidates and where to vote before they leave home where it gets more difficult to find the polling station.

More later, post starting to get slightly long.

MacJr said:
"Ezeflyer-

If all you're asking is that I write in "Daffy Duck for President" before I can start my car…no sweat. Just exactly how does that help?"

Maybe it would make you do a little research on Daffy and make a more intelligent decision. He could have been blowing Porky.

"Big Money does what it can to influence referendums."

No doubt. But what would be easier for Big Money to do, bribe 500 legislators or 304 million people?

"RE: - When American corporations declared themselves 'citizens' in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company [118 U.S. 394 (1886)] the Fascist takeover of our nation was assured."

I would request a referendum on removing the corporate citizen designation.

We could learn from the ancient Athenians about methods to ensure direct democracy.

For example, citizens can be elected for office at the local, metropolitan, regional, state and federal levels via lotteries.

Each elected citizen would hold office for one to two years. If employed at the time of selection, they would be guaranteed the job would be available to them after their term of office.

They would be paid the average state or national wage rate. Additional allotments would be added if the selected citizen had a larger family than average, etc.

There would be no bids on government contracts. Instead, companies that specialize in the type of service, production, etc. needed by the governing body would be placed in a lottery mixer and rolled. Some added weight would be given to businesses owned by women, minorities, newer businesses, etc.

Last, if a corporation gained a benefit from its association with a governing body, it would have to accept more citizen-oriented regulations and it would have to include lottery-selected citizens on its board of directors.

In addition, corporations would have to have elected/selected CEOs and each would have to send lottery-selected representatives to an economic assembly in order to hammer out national economic policies.

If the corporations are international, they will have to include lottery-selected representatives from each foreign nations's community groups, peasant organizations, human rights organizations, free trade unions, and environmental NGOs.

On the new tax forms will be a block of 25 or so choices of where the tax payer authorises his/her/its money to be spent. Mark 15 categories and Congress then has the job of allocating the authorised amounts given to each category according to the usual rules. Technology exists now to have direct Democracy. The lobbyists would then have a different clientel. Special interests would have to bribe and cajole the people. The government would be of, by and for the people. And lots of piggys would be out of a job.