Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

PenOnBeadedChain -> Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:00:59 PM)

In the wake of the conservative Supreme Court's ruling opening the floodgates to even more corporate money corrupting our government, a PR firm in Maryland is now running for Congress in the Republican primary. They have a "designated human" who put in the paperwork, but as a figurehead his name isn't important. Their website boldly states that they will rely on robo-calls and astroturf campaigns to get out the vote.

Apparently, the Constitution doesn't explicitly say that a candidate must be a person. Perhaps the Founders simply assumed we would have the common sense not to grant corporations with the rights of people. They were mistaken.

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2010/02/murray_hill_inc_for_congress.php

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/corporation-says-it-will-run-for-congress/

http://murrayhillweb.com/pr-012510.html



tazzygirl -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:06:10 PM)

They would have to be residents of the state. In some states, there may be age restrictions. Wow, this could get tricky... but.. Wal-Mart for Senator could be a distinct possibility.



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:09:40 PM)

This is brilliant. Utterly brilliant. I'm going to love watching this one.



PenOnBeadedChain -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:11:42 PM)

Actually one of those news links describes the hurdles. It's a little muddy, with the minimum age (25) as you point out being the biggest hurdle. It may well be that running for Congress as a corporation (without the tedious middleman of contributions and other forms of bribes) will be limited to well-established companies like Exxon and the like.

I wonder when our first Corporation will be elected president (minimum age 35 years, please). Thank you, Republicans and George Bush, for making this happen.



mnottertail -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:14:47 PM)

well, I dont know that the argument couldnt sucessfully be put forth that if the responsible officers of the incorporation are 25 or more years of age...........



tazzygirl -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:16:15 PM)

Would it be the officers that had to be 25, Master Ron? or the company itself?



PenOnBeadedChain -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:17:25 PM)

You can buy mugs and t-shirts on their website to support their campaign. Strange though, they don't have bumper stickers for sale yet. I will have one on my car just as soon as they do.

I've seen the "designated human" face for the campaign (forgot his name but as I said it's not important since he's flesh and blood) interviewed on MSNBC and he's been on the radio show of Fox's Colmes (sp?). He's a little clumsy, but hopefully will get smoother with practice.

I think this has great potential.



mnottertail -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:19:50 PM)

well, the issue here is legalistic.

MHI was incorporated in 2005, but the responsible officers are of the age that they can enter into and negotiate legal binding contracts.......so...., the court will decide (maybe or not) why the age is 25. If the law was made for reasons of maturity........

Thats the fucked up part of giving corporations life in the law.



tazzygirl -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:19:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PenOnBeadedChain

Actually one of those news links describes the hurdles. It's a little muddy, with the minimum age (25) as you point out being the biggest hurdle. It may well be that running for Congress as a corporation (without the tedious middleman of contributions and other forms of bribes) will be limited to well-established companies like Exxon and the like.

I wonder when our first Corporation will be elected president (minimum age 35 years, please). Thank you, Republicans and George Bush, for making this happen.


Im confused... well.. not really... but i thought the Supreme Court made all this possible. What does Bush or the Republicans ... or the Dems before someone else starts... have to do with this?



mnottertail -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:20:59 PM)

it is a heavily Bush appointed court, is what he is driving at, I'm thinking.

Ron



tazzygirl -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:22:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

well, the issue here is legalistic.

MHI was incorporated in 2005, but the responsible officers are of the age that they can enter into and negotiate legal binding contracts.......so...., the court will decide (maybe or not) why the age is 25. If the law was made for reasons of maturity........

Thats the fucked up part of giving corporations life in the law.


So is it the company that holds the seat, or the officer? and what happens if the officer is fired from the company, and the company holds the seat?

man, this could get real messy.



mnottertail -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:24:26 PM)

yes, rather sticky indeed, rather like the trinity in christianity.........

or e pluribus unum

or



PenOnBeadedChain -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:26:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

it is a heavily Bush appointed court, is what he is driving at, I'm thinking.

Ron


Exactly. Led by Bush's conservative wunderkind, John Roberts. The dissenters in the 5-4 ruling were the liberals.

Actually it looks like demonstrating that the corporation is eligible to vote may be the real roadblock, but that's just because of Maryland's primary registration process. They may need to run as a write-in candidate. The Constitution probably can be skirted around, as noted in the Atlantic piece:

quote:

But there may be a loophole: the Constitution phrases all its office-holder requirements with the phrase "No person shall be a [Senator or] Representative who..."--meaning the requirements, linguistically, wouldn't apply to a corporation.



EbonyWood -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:33:55 PM)

I want my President to be a CGI hologram.
 
Pre programmed with every voters issue stance.
 
Acting for the will of the people...
 
Nah, too crazy. Isn't it? Hmmm.



philosophy -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:34:37 PM)

FR

Quite frankly i've been waiting for something like this.

So, Sanity, how about coming on this thread and explaining how this is a good thing and that those of us who think it stupid are trying to be anti-demiocratic or sommat? After all, as the primary defendent on these fora of allowing corporations the same right to free speech as individuals, it's logical that you'd equally support this inevitabler end point of declaring corporations as people under the law.....to whit, that Walmart has the same right to run for President as anyone else.



Archer -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:35:38 PM)

A protest campaign where the liberal group is trying to register a corporation as a candidate on the republican primary ticket.
It's an interesting attempt to make them look bad, but it falls way short.

The decission didn't do what the fear mongers like to say it did.

It opened up ISSUE ads to unlimited spending, they still can't contribute directly more than the limited amount allowed to anyone else to a candidate's campaign or put out ads for specific candidates or parties according to the decision text.

It's a publicity stunt, nothing more.




philosophy -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:38:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer


The decission didn't do what the fear mongers like to say it did.





....but Archer, the basis of that decision was that corporations must be treated in the same way as individuals under the law. A corp running for office is the inevitable endpoint of that insane principle.



Archer -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:43:18 PM)

I would contend that it is only when carried to it's insane endpoint. The right to run ads about issues that impact the company is a far far far far cry from a company running for an office.




mnottertail -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:43:57 PM)

how so?



PenOnBeadedChain -> RE: Corporation to run for Congress in Maryland (2/3/2010 1:44:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

It's a publicity stunt, nothing more.



It's a publicity stunt, but a damn on point one. If the founders envisioned corporations having the same rights as people, why shouldn't one be allowed to run for office?



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.882813E-02