L.A. and Occupy L.A. Agree: It’s Time to End Corporate Personhood | NationofChange

Published: Wednesday 7 December 2011

“What’s the issue that unites the occupiers and the city they’re occupying? Getting corporate money out of politics.

On De­cem­ber 3, just two days be­fore Oc­cupy L.A. was evicted by po­lice, the Gen­eral As­sem­bly of the oc­cu­pa­tion passed a unan­i­mous res­o­lu­tion call­ing for a con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment to end cor­po­rate per­son­hood.
Today, the City Coun­cil of Los An­ge­les also voted, also unan­i­mously, for a res­o­lu­tion mak­ing the same ap­peal, be­com­ing the first major city in the na­tion to do so.
So what’s the issue that unites the oc­cu­piers and the city they’re oc­cu­py­ing? Cor­po­rate per­son­hood, the legal con­cept that un­der­pins rul­ings like the Supreme Court's 2010 de­ci­sion in Cit­i­zens United v the Fed­eral Elec­tion Com­mis­sion, means that cor­po­ra­tions are con­sid­ered peo­ple under the law, with the con­sti­tu­tional right of free speech. Since the courts have also de­fined money as speech, the up­shot is that cor­po­ra­tions are em­pow­ered to spend un­lim­ited amounts of money try­ing to in­flu­ence the po­lit­i­cal process.

Na­tionofChange is a 501(c)3 non­profit funded di­rectly by our read­ers. Please make a small do­na­tion to sup­port our work.

It’s lit­tle sur­prise that Oc­cupy, a move­ment that wants our na­tion’s de­ci­sions to be made by the 99% in­stead of the 1%, sup­ports a con­sti­tu­tional fix for the prob­lem of cor­po­rate in­flu­ence on pol­i­tics. In its first of­fi­cial state­ment, the flag­ship oc­cu­pa­tion in New York’s Zuc­cotti Park de­clared, “no true democ­racy is at­tain­able when the process is de­ter­mined by eco­nomic power.” The as­sem­bly in­cluded in a list of griev­ances the fact that cor­po­ra­tions “have in­flu­enced the courts to achieve the same rights as peo­ple, with none of the cul­pa­bil­ity or re­spon­si­bil­ity.” Other Oc­cupy sites have also called for con­sti­tu­tional checks on cor­po­rate power, and slo­gans call­ing for the end of cor­po­rate per­son­hood and Cit­i­zens United are com­mon sights on pro­test­ers’ signs.
But when L.A. and Oc­cupy L.A. are mak­ing the same unan­i­mous de­mand, it’s clear that the de­sire to take on cor­po­rate power in pol­i­tics is gain­ing trac­tion.
In­deed, though Los An­ge­les is the largest city to date to join the call for a con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment tak­ing on cor­po­rate per­son­hood, it’s not the first. So far this year, vot­ers in Boul­der, Colo.; Mis­soula, Mont.; Madi­son, Wisc.; and Dane County, Wisc., have all passed bal­lot ini­tia­tives mak­ing the same ap­peal, with sup­port rang­ing from 75 % to 84%. Other cities, in­clud­ing Pitts­burgh, Penn., have gone so far as to elim­i­nate the rights of “per­son­hood” for cor­po­ra­tions seek­ing to per­form cer­tain ac­tiv­i­ties (such as nat­ural gas drilling in Pitts­burgh) within their bor­ders.
“Local res­o­lu­tion cam­paigns are an op­por­tu­nity for cit­i­zens to speak up and let it be known that we won’t ac­cept the cor­po­rate takeover of our gov­ern­ment,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belk­nap, a spokesper­son for Move to Amend. The group was cre­ated in the wake of Cit­i­zens United to ad­vo­cate for a con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment that would over­rule the de­ci­sion; a local chap­ter pressed for pas­sage of the res­o­lu­tion by the L.A. City Coun­cil. Move to Amend hopes that 50 cities and towns will put the same res­o­lu­tion on bal­lots next No­vem­ber. “Our plan is build a move­ment that will drive this issue into Con­gress from the grass­roots,” said Sopoci-Belk­nap.
Ap­prox­i­mately 100 peo­ple came to the L.A. coun­cil meet­ing to sup­port the res­o­lu­tion, many of them re­port­edly mem­bers of Oc­cupy L.A.
The Los An­ge­les Times re­ported only one dis­senter: a man in a top hat, with fake money pour­ing out of the pock­ets of his suit, who said he had come to speak for the wealthy. He im­plored the coun­cil not to pass the res­o­lu­tion.
Brooke Jarvis wrote this ar­ti­cle for YES! Mag­a­zine, a na­tional, non­profit media or­ga­ni­za­tion that fuses pow­er­ful ideas with prac­ti­cal ac­tions. Brooke Jarvis is YES! Mag­a­zine's web ed­i­tor.

Post a Com­ment

Re­size Text + | - | R

Plain Text

Print

SHARE

Email

On De­cem­ber 3, just two days be­fore Oc­cupy L.A. was evicted by po­lice, the Gen­eral As­sem­bly of the oc­cu­pa­tion passed a unan­i­mous res­o­lu­tion call­ing for a con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment to end cor­po­rate per­son­hood.
Today, the City Coun­cil of Los An­ge­les also voted, also unan­i­mously, for a res­o­lu­tion mak­ing the same ap­peal, be­com­ing the first major city in the na­tion to do so.
So what’s the issue that unites the oc­cu­piers and the city they’re oc­cu­py­ing? Cor­po­rate per­son­hood, the legal con­cept that un­der­pins rul­ings like the Supreme Court's 2010 de­ci­sion in Cit­i­zens United v the Fed­eral Elec­tion Com­mis­sion, means that cor­po­ra­tions are con­sid­ered peo­ple under the law, with the con­sti­tu­tional right of free speech. Since the courts have also de­fined money as speech, the up­shot is that cor­po­ra­tions are em­pow­ered to spend un­lim­ited amounts of money try­ing to in­flu­ence the po­lit­i­cal process.

Na­tionofChange is a 501(c)3 non­profit funded di­rectly by our read­ers. Please make a small do­na­tion to sup­port our work.

It’s lit­tle sur­prise that Oc­cupy, a move­ment that wants our na­tion’s de­ci­sions to be made by the 99% in­stead of the 1%, sup­ports a con­sti­tu­tional fix for the prob­lem of cor­po­rate in­flu­ence on pol­i­tics. In its first of­fi­cial state­ment, the flag­ship oc­cu­pa­tion in New York’s Zuc­cotti Park de­clared, “no true democ­racy is at­tain­able when the process is de­ter­mined by eco­nomic power.” The as­sem­bly in­cluded in a list of griev­ances the fact that cor­po­ra­tions “have in­flu­enced the courts to achieve the same rights as peo­ple, with none of the cul­pa­bil­ity or re­spon­si­bil­ity.” Other Oc­cupy sites have also called for con­sti­tu­tional checks on cor­po­rate power, and slo­gans call­ing for the end of cor­po­rate per­son­hood and Cit­i­zens United are com­mon sights on pro­test­ers’ signs.
But when L.A. and Oc­cupy L.A. are mak­ing the same unan­i­mous de­mand, it’s clear that the de­sire to take on cor­po­rate power in pol­i­tics is gain­ing trac­tion.
In­deed, though Los An­ge­les is the largest city to date to join the call for a con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment tak­ing on cor­po­rate per­son­hood, it’s not the first. So far this year, vot­ers in Boul­der, Colo.; Mis­soula, Mont.; Madi­son, Wisc.; and Dane County, Wisc., have all passed bal­lot ini­tia­tives mak­ing the same ap­peal, with sup­port rang­ing from 75 % to 84%. Other cities, in­clud­ing Pitts­burgh, Penn., have gone so far as to elim­i­nate the rights of “per­son­hood” for cor­po­ra­tions seek­ing to per­form cer­tain ac­tiv­i­ties (such as nat­ural gas drilling in Pitts­burgh) within their bor­ders.
“Local res­o­lu­tion cam­paigns are an op­por­tu­nity for cit­i­zens to speak up and let it be known that we won’t ac­cept the cor­po­rate takeover of our gov­ern­ment,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belk­nap, a spokesper­son for Move to Amend. The group was cre­ated in the wake of Cit­i­zens United to ad­vo­cate for a con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment that would over­rule the de­ci­sion; a local chap­ter pressed for pas­sage of the res­o­lu­tion by the L.A. City Coun­cil. Move to Amend hopes that 50 cities and towns will put the same res­o­lu­tion on bal­lots next No­vem­ber. “Our plan is build a move­ment that will drive this issue into Con­gress from the grass­roots,” said Sopoci-Belk­nap.
Ap­prox­i­mately 100 peo­ple came to the L.A. coun­cil meet­ing to sup­port the res­o­lu­tion, many of them re­port­edly mem­bers of Oc­cupy L.A.
The Los An­ge­les Times re­ported only one dis­senter: a man in a top hat, with fake money pour­ing out of the pock­ets of his suit, who said he had come to speak for the wealthy. He im­plored the coun­cil not to pass the res­o­lu­tion.
Brooke Jarvis wrote this ar­ti­cle for YES! Mag­a­zine, a na­tional, non­profit media or­ga­ni­za­tion that fuses pow­er­ful ideas with prac­ti­cal ac­tions. Brooke Jarvis is YES! Mag­a­zine's web ed­i­tor.

NationofChange is a 501(c)3 nonprofit funded directly by our readers. Please make a small donation to support our work.

On December 3, just two days before Occupy L.A. was evicted by police, the General Assembly of the occupation passed a unanimous resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood.
Today, the City Council of Los Angeles also voted, also unanimously, for a resolution making the same appeal, becoming the first major city in the nation to do so.
So what’s the issue that unites the occupiers and the city they’re occupying? Corporate personhood, the legal concept that underpins rulings like the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Citizens United v the Federal Election Commission, means that corporations are considered people under the law, with the constitutional right of free speech. Since the courts have also defined money as speech, the upshot is that corporations are empowered to spend unlimited amounts of money trying to influence the political process.

NationofChange is a 501(c)3 nonprofit funded directly by our readers. Please make a small donation to support our work.

It’s little surprise that Occupy, a movement that wants our nation’s decisions to be made by the 99% instead of the 1%, supports a constitutional fix for the problem of corporate influence on politics. In its first official statement, the flagship occupation in New York’s Zuccotti Park declared, “no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power.” The assembly included in a list of grievances the fact that corporations “have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.” Other Occupy sites have also called for constitutional checks on corporate power, and slogans calling for the end of corporate personhood and Citizens United are common sights on protesters’ signs.
But when L.A. and Occupy L.A. are making the same unanimous demand, it’s clear that the desire to take on corporate power in politics is gaining traction.
Indeed, though Los Angeles is the largest city to date to join the call for a constitutional amendment taking on corporate personhood, it’s not the first. So far this year, voters in Boulder, Colo.; Missoula, Mont.; Madison, Wisc.; and Dane County, Wisc., have all passed ballot initiatives making the same appeal, with support ranging from 75 % to 84%. Other cities, including Pittsburgh, Penn., have gone so far as to eliminate the rights of “personhood” for corporations seeking to perform certain activities (such as natural gas drilling in Pittsburgh) within their borders.
“Local resolution campaigns are an opportunity for citizens to speak up and let it be known that we won’t accept the corporate takeover of our government,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, a spokesperson for Move to Amend. The group was created in the wake of Citizens United to advocate for a constitutional amendment that would overrule the decision; a local chapter pressed for passage of the resolution by the L.A. City Council. Move to Amend hopes that 50 cities and towns will put the same resolution on ballots next November. “Our plan is build a movement that will drive this issue into Congress from the grassroots,” said Sopoci-Belknap.
Approximately 100 people came to the L.A. council meeting to support the resolution, many of them reportedly members of Occupy L.A.
The Los Angeles Times reported only one dissenter: a man in a top hat, with fake money pouring out of the pockets of his suit, who said he had come to speak for the wealthy. He implored the council not to pass the resolution.
Brooke Jarvis wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Brooke Jarvis is YES! Magazine's web editor.

On December 3, just two days before Occupy L.A. was evicted by police, the General Assembly of the occupation passed a unanimous resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood.
Today, the City Council of Los Angeles also voted, also unanimously, for a resolution making the same appeal, becoming the first major city in the nation to do so.
So what’s the issue that unites the occupiers and the city they’re occupying? Corporate personhood, the legal concept that underpins rulings like the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Citizens United v the Federal Election Commission, means that corporations are considered people under the law, with the constitutional right of free speech. Since the courts have also defined money as speech, the upshot is that corporations are empowered to spend unlimited amounts of money trying to influence the political process.

NationofChange is a 501(c)3 nonprofit funded directly by our readers. Please make a small donation to support our work.

It’s little surprise that Occupy, a movement that wants our nation’s decisions to be made by the 99% instead of the 1%, supports a constitutional fix for the problem of corporate influence on politics. In its first official statement, the flagship occupation in New York’s Zuccotti Park declared, “no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power.” The assembly included in a list of grievances the fact that corporations “have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.” Other Occupy sites have also called for constitutional checks on corporate power, and slogans calling for the end of corporate personhood and Citizens United are common sights on protesters’ signs.
But when L.A. and Occupy L.A. are making the same unanimous demand, it’s clear that the desire to take on corporate power in politics is gaining traction.
Indeed, though Los Angeles is the largest city to date to join the call for a constitutional amendment taking on corporate personhood, it’s not the first. So far this year, voters in Boulder, Colo.; Missoula, Mont.; Madison, Wisc.; and Dane County, Wisc., have all passed ballot initiatives making the same appeal, with support ranging from 75 % to 84%. Other cities, including Pittsburgh, Penn., have gone so far as to eliminate the rights of “personhood” for corporations seeking to perform certain activities (such as natural gas drilling in Pittsburgh) within their borders.
“Local resolution campaigns are an opportunity for citizens to speak up and let it be known that we won’t accept the corporate takeover of our government,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, a spokesperson for Move to Amend. The group was created in the wake of Citizens United to advocate for a constitutional amendment that would overrule the decision; a local chapter pressed for passage of the resolution by the L.A. City Council. Move to Amend hopes that 50 cities and towns will put the same resolution on ballots next November. “Our plan is build a movement that will drive this issue into Congress from the grassroots,” said Sopoci-Belknap.
Approximately 100 people came to the L.A. council meeting to support the resolution, many of them reportedly members of Occupy L.A.
The Los Angeles Times reported only one dissenter: a man in a top hat, with fake money pouring out of the pockets of his suit, who said he had come to speak for the wealthy. He implored the council not to pass the resolution.
Brooke Jarvis wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Brooke Jarvis is YES! Magazine's web editor.

It’s little surprise that Occupy, a movement that wants our nation’s decisions to be made by the 99% instead of the 1%, supports a constitutional fix for the problem of corporate influence on politics. In its first official statement, the flagship occupation in New York’s Zuccotti Park declared, “no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power.” The assembly included in a list of grievances the fact that corporations “have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.” Other Occupy sites have also called for constitutional checks on corporate power, and slogans calling for the end of corporate personhood and Citizens United are common sights on protesters’ signs.
But when L.A. and Occupy L.A. are making the same unanimous demand, it’s clear that the desire to take on corporate power in politics is gaining traction.
Indeed, though Los Angeles is the largest city to date to join the call for a constitutional amendment taking on corporate personhood, it’s not the first. So far this year, voters in Boulder, Colo.; Missoula, Mont.; Madison, Wisc.; and Dane County, Wisc., have all passed ballot initiatives making the same appeal, with support ranging from 75 % to 84%. Other cities, including Pittsburgh, Penn., have gone so far as to eliminate the rights of “personhood” for corporations seeking to perform certain activities (such as natural gas drilling in Pittsburgh) within their borders.
“Local resolution campaigns are an opportunity for citizens to speak up and let it be known that we won’t accept the corporate takeover of our government,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, a spokesperson for Move to Amend. The group was created in the wake of Citizens United to advocate for a constitutional amendment that would overrule the decision; a local chapter pressed for passage of the resolution by the L.A. City Council. Move to Amend hopes that 50 cities and towns will put the same resolution on ballots next November. “Our plan is build a movement that will drive this issue into Congress from the grassroots,” said Sopoci-Belknap.
Approximately 100 people came to the L.A. council meeting to support the resolution, many of them reportedly members of Occupy L.A.
The Los Angeles Times reported only one dissenter: a man in a top hat, with fake money pouring out of the pockets of his suit, who said he had come to speak for the wealthy. He implored the council not to pass the resolution.
Brooke Jarvis wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Brooke Jarvis is YES! Magazine's web editor.

On December 3, just two days before Occupy L.A. was evicted by police, the General Assembly of the occupation passed a unanimous resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood.
Today, the City Council of Los Angeles also voted, also unanimously, for a resolution making the same appeal, becoming the first major city in the nation to do so.
So what’s the issue that unites the occupiers and the city they’re occupying? Corporate personhood, the legal concept that underpins rulings like the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Citizens United v the Federal Election Commission, means that corporations are considered people under the law, with the constitutional right of free speech. Since the courts have also defined money as speech, the upshot is that corporations are empowered to spend unlimited amounts of money trying to influence the political process.

NationofChange is a 501(c)3 nonprofit funded directly by our readers. Please make a small donation to support our work.

It’s little surprise that Occupy, a movement that wants our nation’s decisions to be made by the 99% instead of the 1%, supports a constitutional fix for the problem of corporate influence on politics. In its first official statement, the flagship occupation in New York’s Zuccotti Park declared, “no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power.” The assembly included in a list of grievances the fact that corporations “have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.” Other Occupy sites have also called for constitutional checks on corporate power, and slogans calling for the end of corporate personhood and Citizens United are common sights on protesters’ signs.
But when L.A. and Occupy L.A. are making the same unanimous demand, it’s clear that the desire to take on corporate power in politics is gaining traction.
Indeed, though Los Angeles is the largest city to date to join the call for a constitutional amendment taking on corporate personhood, it’s not the first. So far this year, voters in Boulder, Colo.; Missoula, Mont.; Madison, Wisc.; and Dane County, Wisc., have all passed ballot initiatives making the same appeal, with support ranging from 75 % to 84%. Other cities, including Pittsburgh, Penn., have gone so far as to eliminate the rights of “personhood” for corporations seeking to perform certain activities (such as natural gas drilling in Pittsburgh) within their borders.
“Local resolution campaigns are an opportunity for citizens to speak up and let it be known that we won’t accept the corporate takeover of our government,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, a spokesperson for Move to Amend. The group was created in the wake of Citizens United to advocate for a constitutional amendment that would overrule the decision; a local chapter pressed for passage of the resolution by the L.A. City Council. Move to Amend hopes that 50 cities and towns will put the same resolution on ballots next November. “Our plan is build a movement that will drive this issue into Congress from the grassroots,” said Sopoci-Belknap.
Approximately 100 people came to the L.A. council meeting to support the resolution, many of them reportedly members of Occupy L.A.
The Los Angeles Times reported only one dissenter: a man in a top hat, with fake money pouring out of the pockets of his suit, who said he had come to speak for the wealthy. He implored the council not to pass the resolution.
Brooke Jarvis wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Brooke Jarvis is YES! Magazine's web edi

L.A. and Occupy L.A. Agree: It’s Time to End Corporate Personhood | NationofChange