Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Servant Corps]

A old 1907 law that bans corporations from giving any campaign contributions to politicians* is still in effect after the Supreme Court refused to take up a case arguing that this 1907 law was unconstitutional according to Citizens United. The Supreme Court did not give a reason why they refuse to take up the case.

This leaves the decision of the Fourth Court of Appeals standing. A previous federal judge argued that the 1907 law was unconstitutional, judging that "if a $2,500 contribution given by an individual was not a source of corruption, then a similar $2,500 contribution given by a corporation could also not be a source of corruption." The Fourth Court of Appeals disagreed though, stating that any precedent that had not been overturned by Citizens United still is in effect. Since the Supreme Court refused to rule on the issue, the end result is that corporations are still legally barred from giving money to politicians.

One may wonder why this law still exist when current campaign finance law allow corporations to partake in the political process anyway through setting up Super PACs, but there it is. This law, by the way, is called the Tillman Act of 1907, if you are interested.

*Note that individuals, partnerships, and limited liability companies are allowed to donate money to politicians, up to a maximum of $2,500. Corporations, on the other hand, cannot donate any money whatsoever without violating federal law.

[Graknorke]

But an individual giving a donation can be a source of corruption.
Who decided otherwise?

[Urist Imiknorris]

The problem is that corporations are people.

[Il Palazzo]

America is so confusing. I thought soylent green was people.

[Flying Dice]

The problem is that corporations are people.

It can't really be put in simpler terms than this. We do not need a legal decision allowing corporations to buy politicians, we need one overturning their status as people. It has never been anything but a loophole, and it does not need to be made larger.

[Korbac]

*NAIVE WARNING*

When I was young, I believed if you established a company. you were it's head for life. The way it actually works is that you are likely to sit as a very high position on the company board and get payments, but in reality the CEO and company board changes hands semi - regularly... I think?

I know almost nothing about this field as people in Britain don't tend to be as anti - corp as Americans, but then again you don't really hear about Brit corps being that evil. Screwing people over, yes, but actively being evil? Nah. *digression warning* Whoops! So please, inform me if otherwise.

[Loud Whispers]

I know almost nothing about this field as people in Britain don't tend to be as anti - corp as Americans, but then again you don't really hear about Brit corps being that evil. Screwing people over, yes, but actively being evil? Nah. *digression warning* Whoops! So please, inform me if otherwise.

I would give you a very odd digital smiley denoting indignation, but words suffice.

[Korbac]

I'd rather you gave me information!

[Loud Whispers]

I'd rather you gave me information!

We don't like corporations and doesn't afraid of anything (except the sea turning us into Atlantis).

[Glowcat]

I know almost nothing about this field as people in Britain don't tend to be as anti - corp as Americans, but then again you don't really hear about Brit corps being that evil. Screwing people over, yes, but actively being evil? Nah. *digression warning* Whoops! So please, inform me if otherwise.

There's British Petroleum who were born in the exploitation of the middle-east.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

*NAIVE WARNING*

When I was young, I believed if you established a company. you were it's head for life. The way it actually works is that you are likely to sit as a very high position on the company board and get payments, but in reality the CEO and company board changes hands semi - regularly... I think?

If you establish a company as a sole enterprise, you are its head for life, but it also ceases to exist when you die. If you incorporate your company you risk losing power, but it becomes unattached to your life. This is most promenant in publicly traded companies since anyone can buy your stock and control you with it. Privately traded companies are more stable in who holds the power. Gabe Newell owns most of Valve's stock at all times, for example.

[Zangi]

I know almost nothing about this field as people in Britain don't tend to be as anti - corp as Americans, but then again you don't really hear about Brit corps being that evil. Screwing people over, yes, but actively being evil? Nah. *digression warning* Whoops! So please, inform me if otherwise.

There's British Petroleum who were born in the exploitation of the middle-east.

Totally Uninformed Observation: Maybe British corporations did better for the British then the American counterparts did for America?

Ya know, since the Brits historically exported their shittiness to foreign populations/outside of Britain for profit and loot... while American ones really had a lot of free reign to be shitty to their own people for profit and loot?

[Truean]

Are you doing this for some sort of class or something?

Corporations absolutely do give money to politicians every day, it's just through a complicated endrun system.

Are you aware of what PACs (Political Action Committees) are? How about SuperPACs? How about "sponsoring" events, which happen to have political things attached to them? If a corporation wants to give money to a politician, then they pretty much are going to find a way.

Also corporations are only considered "people" when it is in their favor. You can't jail one. You can't force non dischargable debt onto them. They can be effectively immortal or die at will (whichever is more to their favor).

I imagine the courts thought the issue was a non issue except in academic circles where practicality has no place.

[Pnx]

I know almost nothing about this field as people in Britain don't tend to be as anti - corp as Americans, but then again you don't really hear about Brit corps being that evil. Screwing people over, yes, but actively being evil? Nah. *digression warning* Whoops! So please, inform me if otherwise.

There's British Petroleum who were born in the exploitation of the middle-east.

Totally Uninformed Observation: Maybe British corporations did better for the British then the American counterparts did for America?

Ya know, since the Brits historically exported their shittiness to foreign populations/outside of Britain for profit and loot... while American ones really had a lot of free reign to be shitty to their own people for profit and loot?

Well there's the whole thing where historically a lot of major corporations in the UK were established by, or run with oversight by the government. Companies like BP, the BBC, the National Coal Board, most of them are privatised these days though, mostly thanks to Thatcher.

[mainiac]

I think the supreme court realized they screwed up.  They thought that people wouldn't see elections as a corrupt as a result of citizens united.  Two elections later, they realized how dumb that was.  Of course for 3 or 4 of them that was the goal but Kennedy probably has changed his mind.