It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Sanders's amendment, S.J.Res. 33, would state that corporations do not have the same constitutional rights as persons, that corporations are subject to regulation, that corporations may not make campaign contributions and that Congress has the power to regulate campaign finance.
Sen. Sanders’ proposed Saving American Democracy amendment states,
SECTION 1. The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons and do not extend to for-profit corporations, limited liability companies, or other private entities established for business purposes or to promote business interests under the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.
SECTION 2. Such corporate and other private entities established under law are subject to regulation by the people through the legislative process so long as such regulations are consistent with the powers of Congress and the States and do not limit the freedom of the press.
SECTION 3. Such corporate and other private entities shall be prohibited from making contributions or expenditures in any election of any candidate for public office or the vote upon any ballot measure submitted to the people.
SECTION 4. Congress and the States shall have the power to regulate and set limits on all election contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own spending, and to authorize the establishment of political committees to receive, spend, and publicly disclose the sources of those contributions and expenditures.
Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by vasaga
It appears they aren't liable for fraud or negligence like people as well. They are just people when it's convenient.
Originally posted by Flatfish
Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by vasaga
It appears they aren't liable for fraud or negligence like people as well. They are just people when it's convenient.
I agree with your post but I also noticed in your signature that you are a Ron Paul supporter. While I agree with many of his positions, his stance on corporate rights and personhood is not one of them. If you think that Ron Paul has any intention of limiting corporate rights, you have another "think" coming. He has clearly stated that he supports removing federal regulations and enforcement thereof. He has publicly stated that if a corporation harms an individual and/or his property, it's up to that individual to hold them accountable, (I presume in a court of law). I ask; "How many individuals here in America have the financial resources to stand alone against a corporate legal team in a court battle?" NONE!
If Ron Paul were elected, corporations would be free to trample the individual rights of "people" into non-existence forever. Therefore, if you truly believe that the SCOTUS has overstepped it's bounds in passing the "Citizen's United" decision and that corporations are not people, you should know that Ron Paul is NOT the man to change that decision.edit on 5-2-2012 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)
§ 1. Words denoting number, gender, and so forth
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise—
words importing the singular include and apply to several persons, parties, or things;
words importing the plural include the singular;
words importing the masculine gender include the feminine as well;
words used in the present tense include the future as well as the present;
the words “insane” and “insane person” and “lunatic” shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis;
the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;
“officer” includes any person authorized by law to perform the duties of the office;
“signature” or “subscription” includes a mark when the person making the same intended it as such;
“oath” includes affirmation, and “sworn” includes affirmed;
“writing” includes printing and typewriting and reproductions of visual symbols by photographing, multigraphing, mimeographing, manifolding, or otherwise.