I’m not the right guy to argue this matter, but I do believe that corporations don’t just get a voice, but at this time they get a super-voice. Their pockets are deep and their ability to squash individual concerns is real.
While I do believe corporation’s concerns are concerns on behalf of the public who own parcels of that corporation, I still think there are some valid questions of just how much power corporations have, vs Joe Citizen.
I believe folks like Carry Okie would be able to explain this far better than I can.
I’m not a big fan of SoSo, so don’t get me wrong. I’m going to oppose her constantly over the upcoming decades. Still, in this instance, there may be ‘some’ validity to her reasoning.
How much is not for me to say.
I don’t disagree that corporations have a “super-voice”, but then again they may represent the interests of millions of shareholders, and that is a very large voice.
Free speech for corporations isn’t the problem, but a political-economic system designed for corruption is. A government obsessed with regulation beyond assuring a free market economy is going to attract the attention and interest of those they attempt to regulate. That such a government can grant privileges or inflict restraints by its very nature creates lobbyists. That the same government can award massive contracts also attracts lobbyists, and why shouldn’t it. The pile of money doled out of Washington and extra-constitutional regulations magnify the level of corruption.
If government had little or nothing to sell, the number of lobbyists would shrink as would the money flowing to politicians. But this government has everything to sell and wants people to believe that it is the businessman that is the problem, and not the politician.
The RNC, DNC, ACORN, most churches and a host of other organizations attempting to influence government are also incorporated. Should we silence them too because they are “corporations”? The corporation is not the problem.