Speech to Lincoln MA Town Meeting March 24, 2012 in support of constitutional amendment to eliminate the right of corporations to the rights in the Constitution that belong to "the people."

1. Town
of
Lincoln
Warrant
Article
39
Town
Meeting
March
24,
2012
Citizens
United
Presentation
by
Peter
Pease
I
love
our
town
for
its
long
history
of
thinking
deeply
about
issues
of
national
and
global
importance,
and
occasionally,
as
today,
putting
significant
issues
before
the
town
for
a
vote.
This
article
proposes
that
Lincoln
join
in
a
nationwide
effort
to
amend
the
US
Constitution,
to
show
our
support
for
Rep.
Jim
McGovern’s
proposal
filed
in
the
House,
and
urge
the
Commonwealth
to
pass
the
bills
filed
by
Rep.
Cory
Atkins
and
Sen.
Jamie
Eldridge.
The
language
in
the
salmon
sheets
is
the
same
as
Rep.
McGovern’s.
Many
thanks
to
Joanna
Hopkins
for
her
tireless
work
on
this
issue
and
preparation
of
the
Warrant
Article
we
will
vote
on
today.
We
are
indebted
to
Jeff
Clements
of
Concord
and
his
organization
Free
Speech
for
People.
They
have
been
working
tirelessly
to
educate
us
all
on
this
topic,
and
leading
the
effort
to
amend
the
Constitution.
This
is
necessary
because
the
Supreme
Court
has
recently
championed
the
right
of
corporations
to
enjoy
the
protection
of
the
rights
in
the
U.S.
Constitution
that
belong
“to
the
people.”
The
Supreme
Court
held
in
Citizens
United
v.
Federal
Election
Commission
that
the
FEC
may
not
enforce
the
law
against
corporations
running
ads
to
influence
an
election
during
certain
time
periods
before
primary
and
general
elections.
(slide)
You’ll
probably
remember
the
campaign
by
persons
other
than
Barack
Obama
against
Hillary
Clinton
in
2008.
The
FEC
prohibited
“Citizens
United”
from
televising
its
production
Hillary:
The
Movie,
because
the
plan
was
to
televise
it
during
the
last
30
days
before
the
primary.
Any
other
time
was
fine,
allowed
by
the
law.
The
rule
had
been
enacted
into
law
in
a
bipartisan
effort
led
by
Senators
McCain
and
Feingold.
Remember
bipartisanship?
But
the
Supreme
Court
slapped
down
this
minor
rule
–
no
corporate
electioneering
in
the
last
30
days
before
a
primary,
or
60
days
before
a
general
election.
The
5-­‐4
decision
overruled
two
very
recent
Supreme
Court
decisions
upholding
McCain/Feingold,
one
of
which
was
joined
in
by
none
other
than
Chief
Justice
Rehnquist.
The
Supremes
based
the
ruling
on
their
view
that
corporations
have
a
Constitutional
right
of
freedom
of
speech.
McCain/Feingold
is
invalid
on
its
face,
even
though
1

2. Citizens
United
expressly
disclaimed
this
argument,
and
no
one
can
restrict
corporate
political
speech.
Wow.
The
floodgates
are
open,
and
money
has
been
blasting
into
the
political
process.
Are
the
corporations
multinationals?
This
Supreme
Court
doesn’t
care.
On
the
national
and
the
state
level,
corporations
are
now
free
to
spend
whatever
they
want,
however
they
want,
to
influence
elections
of
our
national
and
local
leaders.
This
includes
judges
in
most
states.
I
am
sure
that
any
judge,
like
for
example
the
West
Virginia
Supreme
Court
Justice
who
received
massive
campaign
contributions
from
coal
mining
company
Massey
Energy’s
President
Blankenship,
I’m
sure
that
he
disclosed
the
conflict
of
interest
and
recused
himself
from
any
case
involving
Massey,
didn’t
he?
(He
didn't)
Why
should
we,
the
people,
not
give
corporations
the
constitutional
rights
granted
to
people?
A
corporation
is
an
artificial
entity
that
is
allowed
to
exist
by
the
permission
of
the
government.
It
allows
people
to
act
without
being
fully
accountable
for
the
acts
of
the
corporation.
The
corporation
can
avoid
liability
for
the
corporation’s
wrongdoing
for
any
amounts
greater
than
the
assets
in
the
corporation.
So
can
the
company’s
officers,
directors
and
shareholders.
There
are
many
good
reasons
to
allow
corporations
to
be
formed
and
do
business.
They
have
gathered
the
capital
and
talent
necessary
to
create
wonderful
products,
industries,
jobs,
and
our
generally
vibrant
and
productive
economy.
But
they
are
not
“people.”
You
can’t
put
a
corporation
in
jail.
What
about
“3
strikes
and
you’re
out?”
If
the
many
states
that
have
enacted
“3
strikes
and
you’re
out”
laws
could
apply
them
to
corporations,
most
of
the
Wall
Street
financial
firms
would
be
rotting
in
the
clink.
BP
would
have
been
locked
away
long
before
the
Horizon
disaster.
Instead,
corporations
can
commit
the
same
crimes
over
and
over,
and
get
slapped
on
the
wrist
by
the
authorities.
Typically
the
settlements
allow
the
corporation
to
make
no
statement
about
whether
the
bad
acts
occurred,
to
pay
a
fine,
and
sign
a
statement
saying
they’ll
never
do
it
again.
The
fine,
which
sometimes
includes
compensation
to
the
injured
parties,
is
generally
a
small
fraction
of
the
injury
suffered,
and
an
even
smaller
fraction
of
the
amount
gained
or
the
expense
avoided
by
the
corporation.
And
why
do
some
corporations
keep
doing
bad
things,
breaking
the
law?
Because,
to
many,
“greed
is
good.”
The
primary
duty
of
the
corporation
is
to
itself,
to
its
financial
success,
to
make
as
much
money
as
it
can.
2

3.
It
is
not
too
hard
to
calculate
the
benefit
of
a
particular
action,
the
risk
of
getting
caught
if
it
is
illegal,
and
the
cost
of
settling
the
case,
if
you
get
caught,
and
cannot
delay,
deny
and
successfully
avoid
the
plaintiff.
If
you
add
it
all
up,
it
often
pays,
and
pays
very
well,
to
do
the
wrong
thing.
Some
even
go
so
far
as
to
say
that
it
is
the
duty
of
the
corporation
to
maximize
its
profit,
through
any
means
that
do
not
risk
the
continued
existence
of
the
corporation.
Even
when
we
are
not
talking
about
wrong-­‐doing,
it
is
clear
that
there
is
an
enormous
amount
of
corporate
money
that
is
being
used
to
influence,
and
often
create
government
policy,
and
to
secure
direct
infusions
of
your
tax
dollars.
(slide)
Over
the
13
year
period
of
1998-­‐2010,
the
publicly
disclosed
top
20
spenders
in
Washington
spent
nearly
$4B.
The
top
3
contributors
to
the
Chamber
of
Commerce
are
unknown.
I
just
can’t
think
of
any
good
reason
why
we
should
know
what
companies
they
are,
can
you?
Hmmm
.
.
.
I
see
820
million
reasons
why
its
so
hard
to
make
any
changes
in
our
amazingly
expensive
and
amazingly
inefficient
health
care
system.
If
you
add
up
all
the
totals
spent
lobbying
by
industry,
the
numbers
are
absolutely
terrifying.
(slide)
We’re
talking
TRILLIONS
of
dollars
now
–
nearly
30
trillion
dollars
over
the
same
13
year
time
period.
There
at
the
bottom
you
can
see
the
plaintiffs’
lawyers
–
nearly
$350
million.
Some
of
that
was
my
money,
trying
to
preserve
shareholders’
rights.
Now
who
do
you
think
got
the
better
part
of
that
argument?
Now
why
would
these
corporations
spend
so
much
of
their
hard-­‐earned
profits
lobbying
in
Washington?
(slide)
The
financial
guys
got
Glass/Steagall
repealed,
which
allowed
them
to
eliminate
the
wall
between
banking
and
investment
bank
risk-­‐taking
for
their
own
benefit.
Glass/Steagall
was
enacted
following
the
Great
Depression,
and
protected
us
from
the
same
result,
until
a
few
years
ago.
And
guess
what,
we
still
haven’t
restored
that
sensible
and
necessary
rule.
3

4.
The
financial
guys
also
kept
the
Commodity
Future
Trading
Commission
from
regulating
derivatives.
So
we
let
the
big
boys
play
–
they
know
best.
There
has
been
an
amazingly
successful
effort
to
stop
the
EPA
from
making
and
enforcing
the
law.
Mercury
and
the
coal
industry
are
prime
examples.
There
is
a
continuing
and
shocking
procession
of
elected
and
appointed
officials
who
leave
the
government
and
the
areas
they
regulated
to
take
positions
in
the
industries
they
regulated.
Billy
Tauzin
is
one
of
my
favorites.
After
creating
Medicare
“Part
D”
prescription
drug
coverage,
and
putting
rules
in
place
that
make
it
illegal
for
the
government
to
negotiate
drug
prices,
he
takes
a
job,
a
few
months
later,
as
President
of
PhRMA,
the
Pharmaceutical
Research
and
Manufacturers
of
America.
Salary
–
more
than
$2M.
There
is
an
ancient
Greek
saying
–
“the
fish
rots
from
the
head.”
The
culture
of
a
corporation
is
created
by
the
CEO
and
senior
management.
If
they
do
not
make
it
very
clear
that
employees
should
do
the
right
thing,
even
when
it
will
diminish
profits,
there
is
no
chance
that
this
will
happen.
Typically,
employees
who
“blow
the
whistle”
like
Sherron
Watkins
at
Enron,
will
be
blackballed
in
the
industry
and
find
themselves
unemployable.
There
are
countless
tales
that
can
be
told,
from
the
customer
“muppets”
of
Goldman
Sachs,
eyeballs
waiting
to
be
gouged,
to
the
falsification
of
mortgage
and
foreclosure
documents,
to
accounting
tricks
and
lies
through
special
purpose
entities
–
it
goes
on
forever.
Today’s
executives
are
paid
hundreds
of
times
the
salaries
of
their
base
rate
employees.
It
was
about
475
times
a
few
years
ago,
and
is
now
about
300.
Compare
that
with
a
multiplier
of
about
40
in
the
1960’s.
The
leaders
have
never
had
more
incentive
to
maximize
profits
and
take
home
fabulous
wealth.
Officers
and
directors
sit
on
each
others’
boards,
and
approve
each
others’
salaries.
Shareholders
have
minimal,
if
any,
control
over
any
actions
taken
by
the
corporation.
It
is
very
common
for
executives
who
are
forced
to
resign
in
disgrace
to
leave
with
multi-­‐million
dollar
compensation
packages.
So,
corporations
are
not
people.
They
do
not
think
like
people,
they
cannot
be
punished
like
people,
and
they
are
allowed
by
law
to
amass
tremendous
wealth.
It
is
our
task,
we,
the
people,
to
set
the
rules
that
govern
the
corporations,
to
do
our
best
to
make
sure
they
behave
responsibly,
abide
by
the
law,
and
do
not
damage
our
citizens,
our
country
and
our
precious
Earth.
4

5. If
fair
and
just
laws
and
regulations
are
enforced,
then
the
leaders
of
our
corporations
will
have
much
greater
ability
to
create
and
maintain
cultures
of
respect
for
the
law
and
good
business
practices,
knowing
that
those
corporations
that
take
illegal
shortcuts
will
suffer
consequences.
If
corporations
are
allowed
the
rights
of
the
people
under
our
Constitution,
they
can,
will,
and
have
already
avoided
and
evaded
our
proper
efforts
to
govern
their
conduct.
Let
me
provide
a
few
examples.
(slide)
In
First
National
Bank
of
Boston
v.
Bellotti,
corporations
were
able
to
prevent
Massachusetts
from
enforcing
a
law
banning
corporate
spending
to
influence
the
outcome
of
a
citizen’s
referendum.
The
vote
was
on
whether
the
Commonwealth
should
have
a
graduated
income
tax.
Corporations
hate
that,
I
guess,
or
at
least
their
CEOs.
In
the
Central
Hudson
Gas
case,
the
Supremes
decided
that
NY
could
not
stop
the
utilities
from
promoting
the
consumption
of
energy.
In
Lorillard,
the
Supremes
decided
that
MA
could
not
enforce
rules
preventing
cigarette
companies
from
advertising
Joe
Camel
near
schools
to
get
the
attention
of
“replacement
smokers.”
That’s
the
language
the
tobacco
guys
were
using
in-­‐house.
They
knew
they
had
to
get
kids
going
with
cigarettes
early,
because
if
you
get
too
old
before
you
start,
there’s
a
much
better
chance
that
you’ll
be
able
to
quit,
and
avoid
being
a
lifetime
addict,
before
you
die
of
lung
cancer.
In
Amestoy,
the
2d
Circuit
held
that
the
State
of
Vermont
could
not
require
sellers
of
milk
to
disclose
whether
their
milk
was
from
cows
that
had
been
treated
with
recombinant
DNA
bovine
growth
hormone.
A
simple
yes
or
no.
Can’t
do
it.
The
corporations
have
a
Constitutional
RIGHT
NOT
TO
SPEAK.
Here’s
another
good
one.
Just
last
Fall
the
D.C
Circuit
decided
that
corporations
cannot
be
required
to
include
information
about
directors
nominated
by
the
shareholders,
because
it
infringes
on
the
corporations’
freedom
of
speech
rights.
So,
the
rule
promulgated
by
the
SEC
was
held
to
be
unconstitutional.
I
can’t
take
any
more
of
this,
so
I’ll
stop
talking.
Please
join
me
in
voting
for
this
resolution,
to
support
the
efforts
underway
in
Massachusetts,
in
Washington
and
throughout
the
nation
to
amend
the
Constitution
and
restore
balance
to
our
society.
5