Liberty
Americans love liberty. Political, economic, or religious liberty motivated most settlers to come to America in the 17th and 18th centuries. Even today, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are the cornerstones of our “American Dream”. So Americans love liberty. Or do we? According to William Hazlitt in his Political Essays, “the love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves”. As I observe the actions of our government on the local, state, and national levels, I have to ask myself—Do their actions demonstrate a love of liberty or a love of power?
Consider the recent US Supreme Court ruling Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In this historical 5-4 decision, the high court overturned precedent to grant corporations the same power as individuals to influence elections. The case originated during the 2008 Presidential campaign when Citizens United, a conservative group funded by corporations, attempted to show a film in theaters and on-demand cable channels critical of Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The group wanted to use corporate funds to broadcast and promote the film. The FEC ruled that only disclosed contributions, which are limited by campaign law, could be used in the promotion of the film. This ruling significantly limited the influence of corporate America from using its enormous financial resources to influence voters and the political process. A lower federal court upheld that ruling. The US Supreme Court this week overturned the lower court ruling. Why? If you listen to Justice Anthony Kennedy, the author of the court’s majority opinion, the decision is rooted in liberty. He states, “No governmental interest justifies limits on the political speech of non-profit or for profit corporations.” In other words, to the conservative majority of the court, this case is about liberty—precisely the First Amendment. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky), Senate minority leader concurs by adding, “For too long, some in this country have been deprived of full participation in the political process. With today’s ruling, the Supreme Court took an important step in restoring the First Amendment rights of these groups by ruling that the Constitution protects their right to express themselves about political candidates and issues until Election Day.” This ruling doesn’t restore the Constitutional rights to groups to express themselves. Rather it further increases the power of corporate America over the ordinary American citizens. Corporations do not necessarily have the interests of America at the heart of their decisions. In fact many corporations are multinational. The corporation is most concerned about profit. They pursue an agenda that best promotes their “bottom line”. Giving that group additional influence over the electorate process seriously jeopardizes American democracy. Corporations are made up by private citizens. Their voices should be heard only when they are speaking as citizens, loyal to American democracy. I am not concerned about limiting corporate America rights—because I am not sure the First Amendment applies to such bodies. Treating corporations as individuals, who have Constitutional rights like freedom of speech, will result in a loss of influence and power of the people. That loss of liberty does concern me. Conservatives and liberals should all agree on that. In fact John McCain stated that he was, “disappointed by the decision”. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) called it a “terrible mistake”.
Those who support this ruling “love power”. This decision will allow corporations to use the power of its money to influence public opinion and public policy. Corporations are motivated by profit—self-interest or William Hazlitt said, the “love of self”. If Americans truly cherish liberty we will show our “love for others” by demanding Congress limit the encroaching power of corporate America. Any politician ,who supports this recent Supreme Court ruling, cannot love LIBERTY.
Americans love liberty. Political, economic, or religious liberty motivated most settlers to come to America in the 17th and 18th centuries. Even today, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are the cornerstones of our “American Dream”. So Americans love liberty. Or do we? According to William Hazlitt in his Political Essays, “the love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves”. As I observe the actions of our government on the local, state, and national levels, I have to ask myself—Do their actions demonstrate a love of liberty or a love of power?
Consider the recent US Supreme Court ruling Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In this historical 5-4 decision, the high court overturned precedent to grant corporations the same power as individuals to influence elections. The case originated during the 2008 Presidential campaign when Citizens United, a conservative group funded by corporations, attempted to show a film in theaters and on-demand cable channels critical of Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The group wanted to use corporate funds to broadcast and promote the film. The FEC ruled that only disclosed contributions, which are limited by campaign law, could be used in the promotion of the film. This ruling significantly limited the influence of corporate America from using its enormous financial resources to influence voters and the political process. A lower federal court upheld that ruling. The US Supreme Court this week overturned the lower court ruling. Why? If you listen to Justice Anthony Kennedy, the author of the court’s majority opinion, the decision is rooted in liberty. He states, “No governmental interest justifies limits on the political speech of non-profit or for profit corporations.” In other words, to the conservative majority of the court, this case is about liberty—precisely the First Amendment. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky), Senate minority leader concurs by adding, “For too long, some in this country have been deprived of full participation in the political process. With today’s ruling, the Supreme Court took an important step in restoring the First Amendment rights of these groups by ruling that the Constitution protects their right to express themselves about political candidates and issues until Election Day.” This ruling doesn’t restore the Constitutional rights to groups to express themselves. Rather it further increases the power of corporate America over the ordinary American citizens. Corporations do not necessarily have the interests of America at the heart of their decisions. In fact many corporations are multinational. The corporation is most concerned about profit. They pursue an agenda that best promotes their “bottom line”. Giving that group additional influence over the electorate process seriously jeopardizes American democracy. Corporations are made up by private citizens. Their voices should be heard only when they are speaking as citizens, loyal to American democracy. I am not concerned about limiting corporate America rights—because I am not sure the First Amendment applies to such bodies. Treating corporations as individuals, who have Constitutional rights like freedom of speech, will result in a loss of influence and power of the people. That loss of liberty does concern me. Conservatives and liberals should all agree on that. In fact John McCain stated that he was, “disappointed by the decision”. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) called it a “terrible mistake”.
Those who support this ruling “love power”. This decision will allow corporations to use the power of its money to influence public opinion and public policy. Corporations are motivated by profit—self-interest or William Hazlitt said, the “love of self”. If Americans truly cherish liberty we will show our “love for others” by demanding Congress limit the encroaching power of corporate America. Any politician ,who supports this recent Supreme Court ruling, cannot love LIBERTY.
8 comments:
In my opinion the country should be in power by the president without corporate influence on the decisions being made. The money being donated toward the election buys what the corporation wants and is not necessarily in favor of what the people want, it's just increasing their profits. I think it influences the decision of political leaders because they probably feel obligated to make decisions in the coorporations favor because they supplied money for their compaign.
Freedom of speech is not a simple concept, contrary to popular belief. However, we cannot FULLY shut for profit corporations out of the loop, because they do deserve the right to voice their opinion. As you point out, they have far more power than any single being, and likely more than any nonprofit organization. Thus, they can be far more forceful about their points of view. This is wrong. There should be far more limits on the input corporations are allowed to have. Big business can make their concerns known, but they should not have the influence that they have today. This government is about helping the general population, not the people who give the most money to a campaign.
I disagree with unc_shorty23, I think that corporations should be able to voice it's opinion. Yes, corporations probably don't have the good of the people in mind most of the time, but that shouldn't be the reason to limit their freedom of speech. I think that the president may help the corporations that donate money to their campaign, but not to the extent that it would hurt the people of the country that they govern.
Sierra,
It's not limiting their speech--it's limiting how much money they can contribute. Read the blog.
It is not far that these big corperations are able to alter and influence the ideas of government through money. Money is something that is diffrent between people. One person may have more money than another person. This influence of money and this decision allows money to do the talking instead of honest and decisive discussion of the people or the politions. Influence is big when it comes to decisions in our government and any passing of bills or laws can alter the society we live in a major way. By allowing these major coorperations to influence our government with money they are takeing the freedoms of every american citizan away. These freedoms are due to the fact that we can voice them in a equal environment where only intellect and common knowledge makes one decision better than another. The decisions in our government is what allows us as americans to have our freedoms limited or remain free. Don't get me wrong contributing to what you believe in is great but limiting others voices of common americans by money is not (it defeats the purpose of a democracy)!
i think that the ability for large corporations to fund campaignes takes away from our democracy. It allows the wealthy corrupt officals, and lead to their own benefits, not the benefits of the nation. This, in fact, does take away from our liberty. If we elect people to run our country then we are counting on them to preserve our liberty but if our leaders are corrupt then this will lead to our nation being corrupt; our liberty being corrupt
I comepletely agree with Mohunter. Corporations basically run American economy and have most of the money. It seems that now elections are going to be a lot about who can win over the companies rather than who can win over the citizens.
I think the coopartions should be able to voice their opinon. Its their right in the constitution to have freedom of speech. I might not agree how they voice it but its the right and there liberity to voice in anyway they please. We the people are allowed to voice are opinons so should they.
Post a Comment