Corporate “Citizens”

Anyone who has ever founded a corporation knows that the entity exists only on paper. It’s a legal agreement between the shareholders and the government. Incorporation is designed to encourage the creation of jobs by offering legal protection to the shareholders in the event the corporation defaults on its financial liabilities. That’s it. It’s a legal “veil” of financial protection. Yet the current Supreme Court has disregarded long-established legal precedents to give corporations the same rights as individuals with regard to freedom of speech.

For the Court to make this ruling, it had to re-write the Consitution in two regards. One is that, according to the Court, money is now the equivalent of free speech. Two is that corporations are equal to individual citizens. If protecting a woman’s right to make decisions with respect to her own body is evidence of “activist” justices, what do these rulings represent? Super activism?

But now that conservatives on the Court have created this quagmire, I suggest they take it a step farther.

Why not rule that corporate “citizens” are subject to the same criminal codes as individuals? After all, aren’t conservatives always reminding us that rights must be accompanied by responsibilities?

So if a young male is sentenced to 5-10 years for robbing a convenience store, why shouldn’t the CEO of a corporate giant get at least that many years if that corporation defrauds millions from customers? If an undocumented immigrant is jailed and deported when found working in a meat-packing house, doesn’t it stand to reason that the corporation’s CEO be subject to penalties, including jail time, for hiring that immigrant? If a teenager is imprisoned for vandalizing public property, why shouldn’t BP executives get a prison sentence for causing the Gulf catastrophe?

Wouldn’t it be satisfying to see BP executives (and their government regulators) handcuffed and forced to do a perp walk in front of the national media? And once they’ve been imprisoned, maybe we should put them on a diet of water and seafood from the Gulf.

The Republican Playbook.

If you’ve ever been directly involved with a state or national political campaign, you may know that the people operating the campaigns are generally law school and political science graduates who view political campaigns in the same way most people view sports. It’s all about winning – often at any cost. That stated, it seems that Republicans take this philosophy to a completely different level.

Following is the Republican checklist for getting candidates elected:

1 – Create a variety of “think tanks” to “study” political issues. These groups are generally labeled with patriotic sounding names. A few examples are American Enterprise Institute, Cato Institute, Center for Individual Freedom, Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Coalitions for America, F.A.I.R., FreedomWorks, Heritage Foundation, Leadership Institute, National Taxpayers Union, Club for Growth, Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, American Center for Law and Justice, Family Research Council, Catholics United for the Faith, National Right to Life Committee, Center for Military Readiness, United Seniors Association, United States Border Control, American Civil Rights Institute, Media Research Center, Students for Academic Freedom… (Are you ready to salute, yet?).

The organizations bill themselves as independent and they generate lots of studies that are used to attack Democratic values. They also generate many of the Republican-sponsored bills that are introduced in Congress or in state legislatures. For example, the NRA wrote the liberal “Conceal and Carry” laws that have been passed in many states. And Kansas-based F.A.I.R. wrote the ill-conceived immigration bill recently passed in Arizona.

2 – Control the discussion. Ever wonder why Republican pundits on news programs never shut up? By controlling the discussion, they hope to control the agenda. They want the public to view each issue through a Republican lens. If Democrats bring up an issue first, Republicans do everything possible to re-frame the issue in a way that benefits them.  So Democrat-sponsored financial reform becomes a “government takeover” of banks.

3 – The big lie. The bigger the lie, the better. For example, a provision in the health reform bill designed to help people create living wills, became “death panels to pull the plug on Granny.” T.A.R.P., which was passed by the Bush administration to avoid worldwide financial collapse, is suddenly an example of Obama-inspired “Socialism”. And gays are an abomination under God, except for the ones Republicans sleep with.

4 – Names that disguise the reality of legislation. Bush’s “Clear Skies Initiative” was designed to weaken environmental protections. And “No Child Left Behind” was designed, not to improve education, but to punish impoverished schools with the most problematic enrollments.

5 – Wealth redistribution. You know how Republicans are always talking about Democrats wanting to redistribute wealth from the top down? (See #3) For 40 years, Republicans have been redistributing wealth upward.

6 – Small government. By repeating this mantra, Republicans have succeeded tapping into people’s dislike and distrust of bureaucracy. But it’s really just a cover for deregulation of stock markets, commodities, pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, etc. Republicans abhor anything that stands in the way of corporate profits, even if it prevents calamities such the BP oil geyser in the Gulf. Funny how Republicans never seem to mind big military and big Homeland Security.

7 – Fear. The Bogeyman is going to get you unless you vote Republican. Only Republicans can save you from terrorists, communists, socialists, fascists, secularists, gay marriages, gays in the military, immigrants, drug lords, etc., etc.

8 – Unity and payback. You’re either with us or “agin” us. Compromise is a dirty word. So is bipartisanship.

9 – Activist judges. You’ve heard all about the evils of activist judges who rule on behalf of civil rights and the woman’s right to choose. But have you heard about the activist judges who decide the outcomes of elections and give corporations the rights of individuals, including the right to donate millions to Republican candidates?

10 – Media whores. Namely Fox News Channel and Rush Limbaugh who can be counted on to repeat Republican talking points without question.

11 – Obstruct Democrats in every way possible, then blame Democrats for the delays.  Just look at the current situation in Washington.  Republicans have invoked the filibuster rule more times this session than any other time in history to “stop Obama’s socialist agenda.”

12 – Repetition, repetition, repetition. This goes hand in hand with the big lie.  If they keep repeating a lie long enough, people begin to think it must be true.

Small government = Big fraud

In 1980, Ronald Reagan declared that the government is the enemy of business and our citizens.  And led by the “Great Communicator”, Republicans set about down-sizing government by eliminating “red tape” and regulations; an effort that continues to this day.  It’s a tantalizing argument.  After all, who wants their taxes to go toward unnecessary bureaucracy? 

Unfortunately, that argument neglects one very important fact:  For a government or, for that matter, any organization to operate efficiently, it must have some way to enforce its rules.  Without enforcement, the criminals, the unscrupulous and the greedy will prosper at the expense of the law-abiding.  By gutting Government regulation, Republicans have encouraged runaway greed. 

Want a few examples?

The financial collapse of 2008 and current recession were the direct result of gutting the Glass-Steagall Act which created firewalls between financial investment institutions, insurance companies and banks of deposit.  The housing crisis was the result of a lack of oversight with regard to mortgage lending.  The estimated $80 billion in Medicare fraud is made possible by the fact that there are precious few regulators.  The run-up in oil prices in 2007 was the direct result of Republican deregulation of the commodity markets.  And the rampant fraud in military and construction projects in Iraq and Afghanistan was the result of no-bid contracts with little to no oversight.

The list could go on and on. 

Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, conservatives continue to push for more deregulaltion.  Why?  For some conservative legislators, it may be a misguided and misinformed philosophical decision.  However, the cynic in me is more likely to believe that our representatives are paid to push for deregulation by the large corporations which contribute to their campaigns.

What else could explain why the conservatives in Congress continue to fight regulation of our “too big to fail” financial institutions even after their misadventures nearly led to the collapse of the world economy?

The New Definition of Conservative.

Upon listening to Republican economists and some of the speakers at the CPAC convention, I think I better understand their vision for America. In a word, it’s bleak. 

These people not only want to prevent health care reform and reduce national debt. They want to block any further government programs to save or create jobs. They want to allow market forces to “correct” the economy. Of course, they want to eliminate even more regulation, cut taxes and shrink government. Finally, they want to eliminate “entitlement” programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

Imagine what their vision would do for most Americans!

By most estimates, unemployment would rise to more than 15 percent. Of course, there would be no safety nets to help those without jobs or homes. Large corporations would continue to grow by swallowing weaker ones. And since corporations would be unregulated, they would not only influence Congress. They would virtually own it.

Hmmm, I always thought the definition of conservative is to preserve, save and protect. But to these people, it seems to mean quite the opposite.

What kind of country do Republicans envision?

Given the Republican response to President Obama’s initiatives, one has to wonder exactly what the Republican vision for our nation actually is.  To try to determine that, let’s look at recent events.  If Republicans had prevailed on their opposition to the TARP bailouts of Wall Street banks, most economists believe that the entire world economy would have collapsed and we would be in the midst of a 2nd Great Depression.  Republicans argued against bailouts to General Motors and Chrysler which likely would have forced both into bankruptcy putting up to 10 million workers on unemployment.  Republicans fought the stimulus plan which, by even the most conservative estimates, has saved or created up to 2 million jobs.  And they have continued to whine about the growing deficits under Obama while lionizing Reagan for tripling our national debt.

The Republican alternative to Obama’s attempts to save our economy?  Tax cuts for the wealthy despite the fact that most economists believe such cuts would do nothing to alleviate our situation.  In fact, many feel that the tax cuts could make things worse!

Republicans have fought any form of banking regulation.  They have voted to keep the status quo on an unsustainable health care system that results in 33,000 deaths each year for lack of access.  They have voted against increasing benefits for military veterans.  Republicans refuse to allow the federal government to negotiate lower prices for pharmaceuticals as Canada and many other nations have done.  They are opposed to spending money to encourage the development of reasonable alternatives to fossil fuels.  They dismiss the international scientific community’s warnings of global climate change.  They have long stated their disdain for “entitlements” such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.  They are vehemently opposed to labor unions.  They are opposed to social services for the poor, saying that they should be the responsibility of faith-based organizations.  Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices voted to corrupt our election process by permitting corporations (even those based overseas) to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of candidates who favor their positions. 

Under the Bush/Cheney regime, Republicans started two wars with no clear plan on how to win them, and no plan to pay for them.  (Indeed, they intentionally obscured the actual cost of the wars – in terms of dollars and lives.)  And they awarded billions to Halliburton and other corporations through no-bid contracts. 

The Democratic Congress has shown a decided lack of unity and will.  But based on the Republican record, why would anyone want to return the Republican Party to power?  Or their even less-pleasant brethren – the members of the Tea Party?

The Ghosts of George W. Bush and Richard (The Dick) Cheney.

On January 20, 2009, you probably thought the Bush/Cheney administration had come to an ignominious end.  You were wrong.  The problems generated by these goons still haunt us.  The war in Iraq may be winding down (although we can’t be certain), but the war in Afghanistan is growing.  The oil companies and Big Pharma are still holding a gun to our collective heads.  The Wall Street tycoons are still gambling with our money and paying themselves six to eight figure bonuses.  The corporations and utilities are still spewing poisons into our atmosphere.  The gun lobby is still rewriting laws to permit more weaponry.  Health insurance companies are still hauling in record profits while denying care to millions. 

Don’t blame Obama.  These issues all began or at least ballooned under Bush/Cheney and it will take years to change them. 

But these issues are the least of our problems.  Seriously!  The most problematic legacy of the Bush years is a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives who liberally support big corporations while denying rights for individuals.

And now that the Roberts Court has over-reached by over-turning 103 years of established law to allow unlimited funding for candidates by large corporations, what Senators or Congressional representatives will dare to vote against corporate interests when those corporations can spend millions, maybe billions, to defeat them in the next election?  What Gubernatorial or Legislative candidate will be able to raise enough money to compete with a corporate-sponsored foe?  The majority opinion of the Court says it ruled to erase limits on free speech.  The effect will be very much the opposite. 

The next big crisis facing Democrats.

For 30 years, the Grand Old Party of Corporations has fought to end welfare for the poor (although corporate welfare is just dandy), labor unions, workers’ compensation programs, public schools, and entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security.  And recent events have presented Republicans a golden opportunity to permanently undo 80 years of progressive initiatives. 

State income has plummeted as a result of the Republican-created financial collapse.  Now those states controlled by right-wing conservative legislatures are capitalizing on the recession by slashing budgets for public education, health care for at-risk children, and pensions.  And you can bet the wingnuts are going to blame it all on President Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress. 

In my state of Arizona, a Republican-controlled legislature has slashed millions from an education system that already ranks 49th in the nation.  (Following the Republican philosophy of wresting control away from government, the state offers huge subsidies for private and parochial schools.  Of course, those subsidies are unaffected by budget cuts.)  The legislature is also closing state parks even though they are a necessary part of the state’s 2nd largest industry – tourism.  The legislature is even considering selling all state-owned buildings and leasing them back as part of long-term agreements which will pay the purchasers billions of taxpayer dollars.  But, according to Republicans, they’re only doing what Democrats won’t – balance the budget. 

Never mind that, for years, Republicans have cut taxes for the wealthy.  Never mind that the legislature refused to allow the Republican governor to place a temporary sales tax increase on the ballot.  It’s a perfect political climate for Republicans to orchestrate this charade. 

I hope voters are informed enough to make Republicans pay for it by voting for progressive candidates.  But since many rely on the Faux News Channel for information, they’re more likely to make matters worse by voting for the Tea Party, instead.

The Most Activist Court Ever!

For years, conservatives and the religious right have decried what they considered “activist” Justices on Supreme Court.  They howled about the Roe v. Wade decision on abortion.  Indeed, they screamed about any decision that restrained anti-abortionists.  They whined about any decision that protected the rights of gays and racial minorities.  And they went ballistic over decisions that affirmed separation of church and state.  On radio and television, some evangelists even prayed (or should I say preyed) for liberal Justices to die so that George W. Bush could nominate more conservative Justices.

Today, the conservative Supreme Court committed its most activist action ever. 

By undoing decades of prior decisions that limited the role of corporations in political campaign, the conservative Court gave a blank check to corporate intervention in our elections.  More precisely, they created an environment that will provide blank checks to candidates who are willing to legislate on behalf of corporations.

Let’s say the financial industry wants to fight regulation (and it does) it may now take all of those billions of dollars in bonuses and spend them on advertising for candidates who are opposed to financial regulation.  Or, let’s say the insurance industry wants to fight health care reform.  The insurance companies may now spend billions on candidates who will fight for the status quo.

If you think those prospects are chilling, imagine the impact on candidates themselves.  Will any candidate or elected representative be willing to make decisions that could be perceived negatively by large corporations?  Doubtful.  It’s almost a certainty that our Congressional Representatives, already unduly influenced by corporate lobbyists, will obediently pander to those with the money and influence to affect their political future.

How will independent individuals compete?  The short answer is they won’t be able to.  Thanks to Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Scalia, Justice Kennedy, Justice Alito and Justice Thomas, corporations and organizations now enjoy free speech and, soon, you will not.  From this day forward, it will be a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations.

What are we fighting for?

I recently watched a documentary about the Civil War.  In discussing the events leading up to the war, the narrator stated, “For the Confederacy, it was dependent upon wealthy plantation owners convincing the poor to fight for them.” 

I could scarcely believe the openness and honesty of that statement! 

But isn’t that almost always the case?  True, many Union soldiers volunteered to join the battle as a fight against slavery.  And, in WWII, most U.S. soldiers joined the battle as retaliation for Pearl Harbor and to stop world domination by the Axis powers.  But most wars wouldn’t have happened if the rich hadn’t been able to manipulate the poor into fighting for them.

Many years ago, I found myself sitting next to the CBS bureau chief for Central and South America.  I told him I was confused about the situation in Nicaragua and El Salvador.  “Who are the good guys?” I asked.  He turned to me and laughed.  “There are no good guys.  Like most Americans, you’re under the false impression that U.S. foreign policy is about right and wrong.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  The U.S. simply supports whoever is friendliest to our corporations,” he said. 

Since that conversation, I’ve examined conflicts with his words in mind.  Almost always, I’ve realized that our soldiers are ordered to fight to preserve corporate interests.  For example, the Afghan War was not only the result of the Taliban providing sanctuary for Al Qaeda.  Bush, Cheney and their oil buddies had long wanted to build a pipeline across that country.  The Iraq War was sold as a pre-emptive strike against Saddam’s alleged weapons of mass destruction.  But it was likely more about the oil reserves Saddam controlled.  And, according to a professor at Northern Arizona University who studies the origins and results of conflicts, our war in Bosnia was more about demonstrating the continued need for NATO following the fall of the Soviet Union than it was about the so-called genocide. 

Indeed, if the U.S. entered wars only to protect our homeland or American citizens, we likely wouldn’t have participated in the Opium War with China, the Spanish-American War, WWI, Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Lebanon, Kuwait, Bosnia and Iraq.  Moreover, we wouldn’t need to have our military stationed around the world in Germany, Japan, Okinawa, Bosnia, Turkey, Kuwait, Iraq, etc.

And if we entered wars solely for human rights abuses and the prevention of genocide, we likely would have sent troops to Tibet, Cambodia, Chile, East Timor, Sudan and dozens of other nations. 

So the next time you hear a politician start talking about the need to send our military halfway around the globe to protect “American interests,” ask yourself.  What interests does he or she really want to protect?  Those of our large, greedy corporations?  Or those of our citizenry? 

The Corporatization of America.

Those on the political right incessantly condemn government while, at the same time, promoting “privatization” – another word for corporatization.  What they want is to eliminate all forms of public regulation and turn all of our government affairs over to large corporations. 

They have a good start.

In the U.S., our health care and pharmaceutical industries have long been privately-owned and controlled.  This despite the fact that taxpayers provide large research grants to these companies to help them develop their products.  And over the past 30 years, we’ve seen increased privatization and control of the food chain, schools, prisons, even the military.  The mercenary company, Blackwater (aka Xe), has become a household word for its role in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Indeed, some reports state that there are as many mercenaries working for the U.S. in those wars as there are government troops.  We’ve even seen our government award patents (and the resulting control) to corporations for genetic discoveries, including plant hybrids even though they were often subsidized by our government.  Perhaps the greatest threat of this privatization nonsense is to our water supplies. 

Appearing on Christiane Amanpour’s CNN program, Robert Kennedy, Jr. stated that this is becoming a very big concern throughout the world.  He stated that water is one of the biggest bargaining issues for peace between Israelis and the Arab world.  And, according to Kennedy, the issue we’re seeing in the Middle East is now becoming a very big issue in the western U.S.  For example, as the result of urban and irrigation pressures, the Colorado River now runs dry before it hits the ocean.  Lake Powell, which provides water for Las Vegas, is projected to be dry in 20-50 years.  In addition, much of the prime farmland in California now lacks water for irrigation because of the demand on reservoirs.  Of course, some suggest that the solution is to give control of water supplies to private corporations. 

This is a very bad idea.

This privatization stupidity has gone so far that some want corporations to take over public lands, public parks and public buildings.  In the state of Arizona, the Republican-controlled legislature has already cut millions from education, tourism and public safety in its attempts to balance the budget while simultaneously cutting taxes.  Yet those measures haven’t been sufficient.   So the Republicans are actually promoting legislation that would force the state to sell all state-owned public buildings to individuals or corporations and lease them back.  The result would be to literally hand billions to the buyers at the expense of the taxpayers who paid to build them.

If the choice is between a well-regulated government and greedy corporations (think AIG, Goldman-Sachs, BankofAmerica, et al), which would you want to control your fate?