New Constitutional Ammendment

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by mike beev, Jun 16, 2011.

  1. mike beev
    Offline

    mike beev mike b

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2011
    Messages:
    72
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    los angeles
    Ratings:
    +17
    Do we need this new constitutional ammendment: "Corporations are not citizens and money is not speech"?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
  2. dblack
    Online

    dblack Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2011
    Messages:
    20,118
    Thanks Received:
    2,006
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,766
    "money is not speech" seems like a loaded phrase, but I'm in agreement that some of the fundamental rules of corporate charter need to be changed - in particular the nature of 'limited liability'. The people who profit from a corporation's misdeeds (investors) need to be held accountable for what their company is doing.
     
  3. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    I like it mike.

    But you have to learn to spell Amendment.:eusa_angel:
     
  4. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,932
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,868
    Heavens, no – super bad idea.
     
  5. Avatar4321
    Online

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,526
    Thanks Received:
    8,157
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,145
    If you really want to stop people from being able to sue corporations, go right ahead...
     
  6. Flopper
    Offline

    Flopper Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,185
    Thanks Received:
    2,695
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Washington
    Ratings:
    +5,270
    Sounds good to me, however no constitutional amendment is going to be ratified in this political climate. The last major constitutional amendment to be ratified was the 26th amendment, ratified 40 years ago. It changed the voting age to 18.
     
  7. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    That wouldn't happen.
     
  8. MaggieMae
    Offline

    MaggieMae Reality bits

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    24,043
    Thanks Received:
    1,599
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    I wish someone would try to set a new Constitutional Convention to consolidate all the modern issues that fall within the ambiguous purview of certain antiquated clauses in the Constitution that everyone squabbles over endlessly. The convention method works in reverse of the amendment process generated by Congress. A majorty of states together call for a convention to add various amendments, and thereafter the request is sent to Congress for approval. These days, waiting for Congress to initiate anything productive is laughable.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Flopper
    Offline

    Flopper Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,185
    Thanks Received:
    2,695
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Washington
    Ratings:
    +5,270
    That makes sense only if the red and blue states can agree on anything. As court interpretations of the constitution grows, the people have less and less voice on how their government is run. The constitution needs to be looked at as a living document that changes as times change. IMHO, if the founding fathers were writing the constitution today, if would look quite different.
     
  10. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    Who is saying corporations are citizens? I have never seen anyone argue that corporations have the right to vote.

    I will also point out that no one is saying money is speech. What the courts have rules is that money facilitates speech. The reason for that is, up until recently, it took millions of dollars to get something you said to an audience large enough to make a difference. You had to buy TV time, make an ad, get a camera, etc. That is changing now that people are able to use the internet and social media to get what they want to say out there, but money does still make it easier to be heard.

    I guess that means that the answer to your question is no.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page