West Seattleite ahead of the curve in “corporate personhood” fray

By Charla Mustard-Foote
Reporting for West Seattle Blog

The U.S. Supreme Court decision to allow corporations (and unions) to make unlimited contributions on behalf of political campaigns has a direct effect on the efforts of a West Seattle political legend to organize against the idea of “corporate personhood: It pushed the issue to a front burner of local political discussion.

Six months ago, Georgie Bright Kunkel convened a group of West Seattleites to study the issue and to recruit and train speakers who could educate the community about the effects of a set of seemingly obscure court decisions that essentially gave corporations the same constitutional rights as individuals. And they’re getting ready to meet again.

Since the Thursday morning decision was announced, Kunkel has been deluged with queries and she and her group are ready for them. Kunkel says, “I’ve always been a little bit ahead of my time.”

(WSB photo of Georgie Bright Kunkel at West Seattle Democratic Women meeting last May)
Kunkel’s interest began with her concern about prescription-drug advertisements and what she saw as the negative effects those ads can have on the health of Americans by creating an artificial demand for unneeded medication.

She soon realized that the idea that corporations are people was frequently used to stifle any attempts to regulate corporate actions, including product and political advertisements. (“Corporate personhood” was introduced by the courts around 1886; before that corporations had been chartered by the individual states to operate in the public interest.)

After the 34th District Democrats declined to endorse Kunkel’s proposal to bar pharmaceutical advertisements, in part based on 1st Amendment concerns, a core group of half a dozen community activists began to research the history of the expanded rights of corporations.

Now Kunkel and other group members are ready to take on speaking engagements to encourage the community to expand the discussion. She points out that the legitimate concern expressed by citizens of all political persuasions about the amount of money poured into campaigns can only be addressed by changing the idea that corporations have the same rights as people.

Kunkel and her group are meeting this Wednesday (January 27) to continue their work. West Seattle organizations and individuals interested in learning more or getting involved can contact her at gkunkel@comcast.net.

Share This

5 Replies to "West Seattleite ahead of the curve in "corporate personhood" fray"

old timer January 24, 2010 (4:24 pm)

Of all the threats to the American Myth I grew up believing,
the idea of ‘corporate personhood’ may be the most insidious.
The idea of taking an individual’s constitutional rights and applying them to a deathless and soulless entity is just wrong.
I hope Ms. Kunkle’s group gains some serious traction
Our Supreme Court is now basically corporate built.
Is there any heart left in it?
I hope there may be a chance to rectify this gross misapplication of creator endowed inalienable rights.

meg January 24, 2010 (11:19 pm)

What is a corporation? A corporation is a machine… a machine for profit-making. When given the status and rights of personhood, together with the privileges accorded to corporations, that machine becomes a super-colossal “citizen” in the worst sense.

“The Corporation” is a great film:
http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=2

GingerRodgers January 25, 2010 (11:18 am)

“When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought . . . This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.”

– Justice Kennedy

I strongly urge you to read up on the First Amendment issues in this case, as this is NOT just about protecting for-profit entities’ speech rights. This is about Congress’ apparent belief that we, as a nation, are too stupid to decide for ourselves what messages to believe, and its attempt to “protect” us from certain messages for our own good. Corporate spending limits may be a good idea, but this particular law sets an extremely dangerous precedent of allowing the government to decide what messages we can handle hearing, and what messages will lead our little pea-brains astray.

JoB January 27, 2010 (9:48 pm)

Ginger

it isn’t the government who is deciding what our little pea brains can hear.. it’s corporate America.

this notion of right to free speech has been used to cover a multitude of sins.. including the right of news organization to tell deliberate untruths..

if you have the ear of the media.. you can sell the public anything.

when corporations have access to unlimited airtime… our political candidates are little more than products… easily sold.

time to rewrite the constitution.. we the corporations, by the corporations… for the corporations

great division of labor..
corporations get the rights
we the people get the responsibilities