Businesses are People, too?
Published in the Boulder Daily Camera, August 7, 2011
Boy, with all the fuss around town about getting Boulder’s City Council to resolve that “corporations aren’t people,” you might think that some 65 year-old local company had applied for Social Security benefits. Can they? Didn’t the Supreme Court Citizens United vs. FEC decision, on the road to eliminating corporate limits on political spending, tell us that corporations were, essentially, people and, therefore, had all the same rights as us humans? What’s next? Corporations suing difficult customers for “emotional distress?”
It certainly would be outlandish to think that corporations are persons and, therefore, deserve the same rights that we humans have. But, before anyone gets worried that the Supreme Court has come completely unglued, you might first look at the actual Citizens United decision at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf. “Corporations are people, too” is not what they said at all. As part of this ruling, the Court affirmed that corporations are protected by the First Amendment – the right to free speech – but this idea is nothing new. Over twenty previous Court decisions dating back to 1952 have reinforced the principle that corporations have First Amendment rights and, as far back as 1936, the Court made clear that this free speech for organizations (not just companies) extends to political speech as well. Here is the quote from the Citizens United ruling that has caused the uproar:
“The Court has thus rejected the argument that political speech of corporations or other associations should be treated differently under the First Amendment simply because such associations are not “natural persons.”
Okay, the Court said clearly that corporations are not real people. Whew. I was getting worried.
Actually, what the Supreme Court said sounds pretty reasonable to me. In our democracy that cherishes the freedom to speak our mind, I hope that most of us agree that groups of people working towards a common goal, whatever that may be, deserve the right to publicly express their ideas and beliefs. Corporations, trade unions, and all kinds of public and private organizations are formed for the benefit of some large or small segment of society. As long as their actions are legal, why would we want stop them from speaking? I’m concerned about the environment, so I want to hear what the Natural Resources Defense Council has to say. I’m also concerned about the economy and jobs, so I want to hear what American industry and labor have to say. I want everyone to talk to me, and I, along with my fellow Americans, will sort out what to listen to and believe. Americans have a good history of separating the wheat from the chaff. Trust us.
Of course, the problems began when the Supremes started to see “spending money to get the word out” as part of our free speech guarantee. I have long been an advocate of limiting money spent on political campaigns, though lately my TiVo’s fast forward button has made this less of a concern. However, the more I’ve thought about it, the harder it has been to justify prohibiting people or organizations from printing flyers, sending mailings, or running ads as part of getting out their message. Those activities sound a lot like “free speech” to me, and they take money.
Why be upset about corporations in particular? Maybe it’s all that money they have. Well, we’ve all seen in recent years that you don’t need to be a corporation to spend a lot of money on politics. Some corporate money that used to go to lobbyists may now go elsewhere, but corporations have far more important things to do than elect politicians; like make products and keep customers. It makes no sense to assume that businesses will open their treasuries wide to influence elections at the expense of marketing and product development. But, if government actions are affecting their business, they should have the right to make their case to the public.
I built and ran a corporation for about 23 years where I learned that companies are, indeed, living things. They’re certainly not human, but companies have personalities, relationships, friends, enemies, core values and beliefs, and a desire to stay alive and healthy. Plus, all of those things emerge from the real live human people that make up the company – from the board room to the shop floor. The same is true for unions, non-profits, and other organizations. I say that we give equal treatment to all and let them speak freely.
Boy, with all the fuss around town about getting Boulder’s City Council to resolve that “corporations aren’t people,” you might think that some 65 year-old local company had applied for Social Security benefits. Can they? Didn’t the Supreme Court Citizens United vs. FEC decision, on the road to eliminating corporate limits on political spending, tell us that corporations were, essentially, people and, therefore, had all the same rights as us humans? What’s next? Corporations suing difficult customers for “emotional distress?”
It certainly would be outlandish to think that corporations are persons and, therefore, deserve the same rights that we humans have. But, before anyone gets worried that the Supreme Court has come completely unglued, you might first look at the actual Citizens United decision at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf. “Corporations are people, too” is not what they said at all. As part of this ruling, the Court affirmed that corporations are protected by the First Amendment – the right to free speech – but this idea is nothing new. Over twenty previous Court decisions dating back to 1952 have reinforced the principle that corporations have First Amendment rights and, as far back as 1936, the Court made clear that this free speech for organizations (not just companies) extends to political speech as well. Here is the quote from the Citizens United ruling that has caused the uproar:
“The Court has thus rejected the argument that political speech of corporations or other associations should be treated differently under the First Amendment simply because such associations are not “natural persons.”
Okay, the Court said clearly that corporations are not real people. Whew. I was getting worried.
Actually, what the Supreme Court said sounds pretty reasonable to me. In our democracy that cherishes the freedom to speak our mind, I hope that most of us agree that groups of people working towards a common goal, whatever that may be, deserve the right to publicly express their ideas and beliefs. Corporations, trade unions, and all kinds of public and private organizations are formed for the benefit of some large or small segment of society. As long as their actions are legal, why would we want stop them from speaking? I’m concerned about the environment, so I want to hear what the Natural Resources Defense Council has to say. I’m also concerned about the economy and jobs, so I want to hear what American industry and labor have to say. I want everyone to talk to me, and I, along with my fellow Americans, will sort out what to listen to and believe. Americans have a good history of separating the wheat from the chaff. Trust us.
Of course, the problems began when the Supremes started to see “spending money to get the word out” as part of our free speech guarantee. I have long been an advocate of limiting money spent on political campaigns, though lately my TiVo’s fast forward button has made this less of a concern. However, the more I’ve thought about it, the harder it has been to justify prohibiting people or organizations from printing flyers, sending mailings, or running ads as part of getting out their message. Those activities sound a lot like “free speech” to me, and they take money.
Why be upset about corporations in particular? Maybe it’s all that money they have. Well, we’ve all seen in recent years that you don’t need to be a corporation to spend a lot of money on politics. Some corporate money that used to go to lobbyists may now go elsewhere, but corporations have far more important things to do than elect politicians; like make products and keep customers. It makes no sense to assume that businesses will open their treasuries wide to influence elections at the expense of marketing and product development. But, if government actions are affecting their business, they should have the right to make their case to the public.
I built and ran a corporation for about 23 years where I learned that companies are, indeed, living things. They’re certainly not human, but companies have personalities, relationships, friends, enemies, core values and beliefs, and a desire to stay alive and healthy. Plus, all of those things emerge from the real live human people that make up the company – from the board room to the shop floor. The same is true for unions, non-profits, and other organizations. I say that we give equal treatment to all and let them speak freely.
