

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
As we protest authoritarianism this Saturday—and legitimately condemn the many anti-democratic and unjust actions of Trump—let us also remember the tyranny of our corporate overlords who have been—perhaps more quietly but not less aggressively—eroding our democracy.
The “No Kings Day” mass rallies and marches this Saturday across the country will be, hopefully, a political and cultural affirmation of the democratic vision that we should be a self-governing people, a vision that has never been fully realized. The events must not only reject the reemergence and expansion of authoritarianism of Trump from his previous administration. They should also acknowledge the much longer tyranny and authoritarianism of corporate rule.
Speeches, signs, chants, and petitions will undoubtedly address the numerous authoritarian actions by the Trump administration since the election. These include pardons and immunities for loyalists, the use of federal agencies against political opponents, use of disinformation and threats against elected officials, mass deportations and family separation, executive orders that trump local and state governments, government loyalty purges, crackdown on the media and dissent, and militarized response to protests – such as the overreacting deployment of the Marines in response to the largely peaceful protests against ICE immigration raids in Los Angeles.
As we protest authoritarianism this Saturday—and legitimately condemn the many anti-democratic and unjust actions of Trump—let us also remember that tyranny has many symbols. One is a red hat. The other is a corporate logo.
The No Kings Day actions are just the latest and important public resistance to Trump’s tyrannical actions that have included other nationwide demonstrations and civil disobedience, legal challenges, whistleblowers and leaks, mutual aid, sanctuary networks, state and local government pushback, worker and union actions, and campus resistance.
Yet the reality is that Trump and his Project 2025 playbook represent one form of authoritarianism that, while distinct in some respects, intersects with another deeply entrenched form: corporate domination.
Unlike Trump’s style of blatant and unapologetic brute force, intimidation, and open defiance of the rule of law, corporate rule has been a slow, legalistic, never ending, and largely invisible seizure of power — not by individuals, but by artificial legal entities with little public accountability.
Corporations today define nearly every aspect of our lives:
How did this happen? The sword and shield of corporate rule is the U.S. Constitution. Despite corporate entities being originally created and defined by the government as a public tool to provide goods and services, the Supreme Court declared them to be private institutions, out of bounds to public definition and control. What had originally been the state providing mere “privileges” via the granting of charters or licences that could be withdrawn via the revoking of charters that violated the law became constitutional rights deemed beyond the reach of legislatures or individuals.
The Supremes have anointed corporations the constitutional rights of natural persons for more that a century, including:
Corporate “personhood” is an absurdity, yet humanly, environmentally, and democratically lethal.
While there have been frequent mass actions over single corporate abuses, we don’t see mass protests in the streets about the totality of corporate rule. Why does corporate tyranny go unchallenged?
Corporate rule has been normalized. It is:
Move to Amend exists to expose and abolish corporate constitutional rights and the doctrine of money as speech through the We the People Amendment (HJR54). This is not about regulating corporations better. It’s about breaking the illegitimate foundation of their power and declaring that we should have the power and right to define corporate actions.
As we protest authoritarianism this Saturday—and legitimately condemn the many anti-democratic and unjust actions of Trump—let us also remember that tyranny has many symbols. One is a red hat. The other is a corporate logo.
So let us all turn out on No Kings Day not only to oppose authoritarian rule, but also as an opportunity to oppose corporate rule, which will remain long after Trump is gone."In every election cycle since the disastrous Citizens United decision, we have seen more and more special interest dark money poured into campaigns across the country," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal.
With the impact of the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case becoming clearer by the day as billionaire megadonor Elon Musk spearheads the reshaping of the federal government, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal on Thursday led more than two dozen Democratic lawmakers in introducing a constitutional amendment that would reverse the pivotal ruling.
The Washington Democrat has introduced the We the People Amendment in previous years, but she noted that this year she is proposing the measure after "a billionaire [paid] millions to buy a seat as Shadow President," referring to the more than $270 million Musk spent on President Donald Trump's campaign last year—an effort that promptly made him $170 billion richer and has resulted in new government contracts for his companies and his leadership of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
"Corporations are not people and money is not speech," said Jayapal. "In every election cycle since the disastrous Citizens United decision, we have seen more and more special interest dark money poured into campaigns across the country... My We the People Amendment hands power back to the people by finally ending corporate constitutional rights, reversing Citizens United, and ensuring that our democracy is truly of the people, by the people, and for the people—not corporations."
The ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission struck down long-held rules on corporate "independent" spending that doesn't go directly to a candidate or political party, eliminating restrictions for money that flows to campaigns through super political action committees (PACs) which purport to be separate from candidates.
The We the People Amendment—which is not supported by any Republican lawmakers—would specify that constitutional rights apply to people, not corporations, "and that artificial entities have no constitutional rights," said Jayapal's office.
It would also mandate that federal, state, and local governments require public disclosure of all political contributions and expenditures.
As Brendan Fischer wrote at Rolling Stone last month, Musk's "astonishing influence over Trump and the Republican Party is not merely a function of his wealth, his celebrity, or his ownership of the social media platform X (formerly Twitter). It is attributable to his pouring of at least $277 million into super PACs last year, which purchased enormous influence."
Cole Bennett, legislative co-director of the advocacy group Move to Amend, applauded Jayapal's understanding "that the changes she and many of her colleagues support to advance healthcare, expand economic justice, ensure a livable world, and promote real democracy are incredibly difficult but necessary."
"This is especially true given the unjustifiable Supreme Court decisions declaring corporations as entities with many of the same constitutional rights as human persons and that money spent in elections is equivalent to First Amendment-protected free speech," said Bennett. "The exponential growth of corporate power and corrupting political influence from huge sums of money flooding elections can only be solved with a systemic solution that is equivalent in scale to these systemic problems—the We the People Amendment, which will end all corporate constitutional rights and money as free speech."
Most Americans don't realize it, but the United States didn't always have a President. From 1781 to 1789, the nation was governed by the Articles of Confederation, which due to fears about creating another king put all the power in the hands of the states. This quickly became unworkable, so the states called for the Philadelphia Convention, where they disposed of the Articles of Confederation and drafted the Constitution of the United States.
Yet the new document included a provision, Article V, stating that if two-thirds of the state legislatures agree, they can call another Constitutional Convention, where, like the original Philadelphia Convention, they can meet-up and create a new constitution.
That would be a hard sell to most Americans, but what if the convention was narrowly sold as a way to force those rascals in Washington, D.C., to live within their means and pass a Balanced Budget Amendment? Who's not concerned about the runaway national debt?
That's pretty much been the pitch of the awkwardly named Center for State-led National Debt Solutions (CSNDS), which in recent years, (thanks to some heavy lifting from the American Legislative Exchange Council), has quietly gotten twenty-eight of the thirty-four states necessary to sign-up under the auspices of passing a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA).
Last week, the group tapped former governor Scott Walker as its new leader.
Of the ten states that CSNDS, which in recent years has merged with the Balanced Budget Amendment Task Force, has targeted in 2019-20 (see map below), Republicans have full control of the state legislatures in five. In other words, the thirty-four-state threshold is very much in grasp.
Scott Rogers, who served as executive director for Task Force for a Balanced Budget Amendment for seven years, says his old organization is actually an elaborate bait-and-switch scheme that is hiding its true intentions, as its pick of Walker makes clear.
"The movement became less about reforming our nation's government, but a vehicle to limit and destroy the power of the federal government."
"Scott Walker isn't working for a balanced budget amendment and neither is the movement," Rogers tells The Progressive. "When I first became involved with the Article V movement, it was much more open to bipartisan efforts, and as a registered Democrat, I felt like I could work across the aisle to ensure a fiscally responsible government. However, as the years went on, the movement took a darker turn. It became less about reforming our nation's government, but a vehicle to limit and destroy the power of the federal government."
According to Rogers, "The movement is about using constitutional change to destroy the power of the federal government in the name of old-fashioned 'states rights.' This is nothing but a polished, media-friendly version of the 'states rights' advocated by southern racists in the 1960s."
Currently serving as the mayor of Charles Town, West Virginia, Rogers believes that once a convention commences, it will "enshrine the doctrines of the Koch Brothers, ALEC, and the religious right" and "endanger the civil rights we all hold dear. One could expect them to pass anti-LGBT amendments, amendments that would limit the ability of African-Americans to vote, the ability of woman to control their own reproductive health, and the list goes on and on."
Rogers says another part of the group's strategy to trigger a convention is to bring in people on the left with promises of a Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and address other campaign-finance -reform concerns. Although campaign-finance-reform groups such as Common Cause and Democracy 21 are strongly opposed to a Constitutional Convention, other groups such as Move to Amend are open to a convention "with reservations," while Wolf PAC, the group founded by progressive activist Cenk Uygur, has voiced strong support.
"There has been a willingness by some of the conservative side to work together to get a Wolf PAC-Balanced Budget Amendment application passed in some states," Rogers said. "The idea is to appeal to liberals and conservatives, however, it disguises the true nature which is to get the BBA to thirty-four states, knowing that the Wolf Pack Citizens United Article V application has no chance to make it to thirty-four."
Wolf PAC, on its website, argues that the need for 75 percent state approval will ensure that only bipartisan and common-sense proposals get through. But Fred Wertheimer, former longtime head of Common Core and currently President of Democracy 21, calls that wishful thinking.
"Any Constitutional convention throws up for grabs all of the Constitutional rights and protections currently afforded to the American people," Wertheimer tells The Progressive. "We share the view of most legal scholars that once a Constitutional convention is called, you cannot limit the issues which the convention can consider."
"Once a Constitutional convention is called, you cannot limit the issues which the convention can consider."
Wertheimer adds that it is "unclear how ratification would work" in a convention setting. "Normally, you would need three-quarters of the states to ratify an amendment," he says. "But the convention could change the ratification rules by amendment and require, for example, a majority of states to ratify the amendments it adopts which, once approved, could supersede the three-quarters requirement."
These concerns echo those of the late Chief Justice Warren Berger, who said, "There is no way to effectively limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda."
Here's the kicker: Just days after Scott Walker announced that he was the new head of CSNDS, he announced that he also would be working for a group whose primary focus is to defend Republican state legislatures that have gerrymandered their states.
In last fall's election in gerrymandered Wisconsin, under the contorted map Walker helped create, Republicans in the Assembly won 64 percent of the seats, despite winning only 46 percent of the votes for those seats.
And like many other gerrymandered states, these rigged legislatures would be the ones sending delegates to a Constitutional Convention. As Rogers aptly puts it, "This a slow-moving coup."