I appreciated the reprinting Jan. 10 of the Chico Enterprise-Record editorial “Money shapes vicious election.” It was filled with good information, and an informed electorate is a strong electorate.
The Citizen”s United v. The Federal Elections Commission 5-4 ruling reveals a sharply divided Court. Justice J. Stevens wrote in his dissenting opinion,” In the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They can not vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by non-residents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respect with the interests of eligible voters.” (www.supremecourt.gov)
The problem is the legal assumption that a corporation equals a person. A timeline of the long and convoluted series of decisions to corporate personhood exposes the fact that “people get their rights primarily by constitutional amendment (the Bill of Rights being the first 10 amendments) and corporations get rights by Supreme Court rulings.” (Jan Edwards, www.movetoamend.org).
The Oxford English Dictionary defines the key words as follows: Corporation: a body of people that has been given legal existence distinct from the individuals who compose it; a fictitious person; a large industrial company. Person: an individual human being.
Can a corporation love? Or procreate another human being? Does a corporation have an immortal soul? Think about it; after all, we are people.
Kate Schmidt-Hopper
Hidden Valley Lake
