"Corporations are people, my friend"

  1. 5
    This link might make some members break out in a rash. If you're one of them, take a benadryl and some tylenol and give it a read anyhow.

    I would love to understand the thinking behind this:
    A bill introduced by Montana state Rep. Steve Lavin would give corporations the right to vote in municipal elections:
    Provision for vote by corporate property owner.

    (1) Subject to subsection (2), if a firm, partnership, company, or corporation owns real property within the municipality, the president, vice president, secretary, or other designee of the entity is eligible to vote in a municipal election as provided in [section 1].

    (2) The individual who is designated to vote by the entity is subject to the provisions of [section 1] and shall also provide to the election administrator documentation of the entity’s registration with the secretary of state under 35-1-217 and proof of the individual’s designation to vote on behalf of the entity.
    ...In fairness to Lavin’s fellow lawmakers, this bill was tabled shortly after it came before a legislative committee, so it is unlikely to become law. A phone call to Lavin was not returned as of this writing.

    According to the Center for Media and Democracy, Lavin was a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council’s (ALEC) now defunct Public Safety and Elections Task Force. Last year, pressure from progressive groups forced ALEC to disband this task force, which, among other things, pushed voter suppression laws.
    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...right-to-vote/

    Hard to articulate my own reaction without devolving into a rant. At the moment, having just read it myself, I'm still dealing with a visceral reaction that's making the hairs stand up on the back of my neck.

    Last edit by heron on Feb 25, '13 : Reason: left out the link
  2. Get our hottest nursing topics delivered to your inbox.

  3. 2,100 Visits
    Find Similar Topics
  4. 64 Comments so far...

  5. 3
    Since we're all either liberal or (if you're a conservative) pre-medicated, here's a few more gems from the "small-government" set (heavily edited):

    http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/creationism_ayn_rand_and_gun_control_six_terrible_ state_laws_proposed_this_month

    "1. Let corporations vote!
    In Montana, state Rep. Steve Lavin introduced a bill that would allow corporations to vote in local elections, taking the idea that “corporations are people” to new heights...

    2. Criminalize gun control!
    In Missouri, state Rep. Mike Leara believes even proposing gun control should be illegal. So he has proposed legislation that would make it a felony for “any member of the general assembly who proposes a piece of legislation that further restricts the right of an individual to bear arms, as set forth under the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States.” ...

    3. Birth control is poison
    The full state Senate in Oklahoma will take up a measure to allow companies to strip birth control and abortion coverage from employer healthcare plans under a bill that unanimously cleared the committee level last week.

    ...The state senator who proposed the bill said the idea came from one of his constituents, identified as Dr. Dominic Pedulla.

    ...“Part of (women’s) identity is the potential to be a mother,” Pedulla said. “They are being asked to suppress and radically contradict part of their own identity, and if that wasn’t bad enough, they are being asked to poison their bodies.”...

    4. Read Ayn Rand or stay in high school
    The chairman of the education committee in Idaho’s Senate introduced a bill earlier this month that would make students read — and pass a test — on “Atlas Shrugged” as a requirement for a high school diploma.

    ...Why that book? It “made my son a Republican,” he said, then adding, “well, he’s not a practicing Republican. But it certainly made him a conservative.”...

    5. Meanwhile, make the teachers question science
    In Kansas, the state Board of Education will vote on new science standards this year, so the legislative jockeying has begun. A bill before the House Education Committee would make schools include evidence against climate change in science classes.

    ...If the bill becomes law, it would make it illegal for biology teachers to fail students who write papers against evolution, climate change and other theories with near 100 percent approval in the scientific community..."
    Last edit by heron on Feb 24, '13
    BCgradnurse, herring_RN, and tewdles like this.
  6. 0
    I am thinking your first sentence borders on being offensive.
  7. 1
    Quote from tntrn
    I am thinking your first sentence borders on being offensive.
    I find the proposed legislation offensive...
    SmilingBluEyes likes this.
  8. 5
    Quote from tntrn
    I am thinking your first sentence borders on being offensive.
    Sorry ... didn't mean to offend. It was a clumsy attempt to joke about our collective tendency to attack others' sources rather than address the reasoning presented by those sources.

    Various posts over the years have mentioned how the poster "can't stand" to read, listen to or watch one talking head or another ... regardless of whether that talking head has anything reasonable to say.

    There are certainly some sites that I feel are too compromised - breitbart.com and WorldNetDaily come immediately to mind - to ever be used as a source for reasonable conservative thinking. I'm sure that conservatives can name quite a few left-wing sources they abhor, as well.

    But ... if I never listen to a conservative view, rationally stated, how will I ever decide whether I agree or not?
  9. 2
    Quote from tewdles
    I find the proposed legislation offensive...
    Bad jokes aside ... I agree and that's why I posted them. I'm still very interested in hearing the thinking behind such proposals as forcing science teachers to teach junk science then forbidding them to fail students who insist that junk science is legitimate.

    A bit like forcing a math teacher to pass a student who can't add or subtract.
    BCgradnurse and aknottedyarn like this.
  10. 5
    I am always amazed at the signs for government reduction by party members as they demand smaller government. And then, like magic we see all the legislation to control more and more and educate less and less. We see more and more state legislation being suggested that is bordering on practicing medicine without a license. Demands that physicians lie to patients, support for fracking that requires absolute secrecy about the chemicals used. Physicians are not to be allowed to know what they are treating. This is not less intrusive government at all.

    We are seeing more evidence of McCarthyism sprouting up. The fear mongerers continue to preach the need for guns and forget that the Second Amendment specifically identifies the need for "Well Regulated". Anyone who objects to the current status is labelled in not so pleasant terms.

    Educators know how and what to teach. Physicians know how to doctor. Those who propose these crazy laws are not knowledgeable in the subjects they want to control. Yet this does not stop them. They lock step into territory they have no business in. This is not helping to get our youth competitive in the world market. This is not treating families in a positive way. This ignoring of boundaries is role modeling really bad behaviors. Aggressive acts by corporations are rewarded but we cannot see a relationship between this aggression and that of gun toting, knife carrying, thugs and thieves. It is role modeled by Wall street and Washington DC on a daily basis.

    One of the most damaging things we currently have is the notion that corporations are people. I don't see corporations dying on battle fields. None are killed by a stray bullet. Legislatures protect corporations more than the citizens they are hired to support. I don't see legislators trying to control business. In fact it is just the opposite. Business tells legislators what they will write laws about. What products are to be protected, and what loopholes will remain. I don't think that any person should be allowed 2 votes. One vote is done for yourself but another is a company vote. One man - one vote has been our standard since the 14th Amendment and included women later on. If corporations can vote I suspect man will considered 3/5ths of a vote eventually as we become more easily identified as slaves to companies.

    I need more that Tylenol and Benadryl. I need bug spray to chase the blood suckers out of DC and many capitol cities and back into the swamps where they belong. Corporations need not get a vote. Education requires educators as medicine and surgery require doctors. Legislators need to do the work for the people.
  11. 0
    Do you believe that a teacher should be able to fail a student who writes a paper questioning man-made global warming?
  12. 3
    Quote from Jolie
    Do you believe that a teacher should be able to fail a student who writes a paper questioning man-made global warming?
    No of course not.
    BCgradnurse, tewdles, and tntrn like this.
  13. 3
    Quote from Jolie
    Do you believe that a teacher should be able to fail a student who writes a paper questioning man-made global warming?
    I believe that any student who writes any scientific paper needs to be judged on their use of appropriate reference sources, ability to convey true and current information, and use writing skills appropriate to age and grade.


    I think it is wonderful that students question everything. Then they need to follow up these questions with use of real science, and scientific method to find the answers.
    BCgradnurse, tewdles, and herring_RN like this.


Top