A Message from The Healthcare Advocacy and Leadership Organization (HALO) JULIE GRIMSTAD TESTIFIES AGAINSTTEXAS’ DEADLY 10-DAY RULE On April 14, 2021, HALO’s President, Julie Grimstad, was in Austin to testify in favor of Texas House Bill 2609 (HB 2609)—the companion bill to Texas Senate Bill 917 (SB 917). Both bills would end the 10-Day […]HALO Testifies Against Deadly 10-Day Rule — Deacon John’s Space
Tribulation TimesApril 21, 2021 (Psa 139:14-16) I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your […]Abortion is Never a Human Right — Deacon John’s Space
The defence of Julian Assange, the publisher of WikiLeaks is inseparable from the struggle of millions of people around the world who oppose imperialism from whichever country is generated. That force of greed that writes with people’s blood the history … Continue reading →A smack in the face of Imperialists! Journalism is not a crime #FreeAssange on Imperial Road, Fulham, London — WISE Up Action – A Solidarity Network for Manning and Assange
When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country’s founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.
Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end. The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these*:
- Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
- Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
- Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
- Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
- Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
- Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.
For 100 years after the American Revolution, legislators maintained tight control of the corporate chartering process. Because of widespread public opposition, early legislators granted very few corporate charters, and only after debate. Citizens governed corporations by detailing operating conditions not just in charters but also in state constitutions and state laws. Incorporated businesses were prohibited from taking any action that legislators did not specifically allow.
States also limited corporate charters to a set number of years. Unless a legislature renewed an expiring charter, the corporation was dissolved and its assets were divided among shareholders. Citizen authority clauses limited capitalization, debts, land holdings, and sometimes, even profits. They required a company’s accounting books to be turned over to a legislature upon request. The power of large shareholders was limited by scaled voting, so that large and small investors had equal voting rights. Interlocking directorates were outlawed. Shareholders had the right to remove directors at will. CONTINUE https://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-history-corporations-us/
Move to Amend’s Proposed 28th Amendment to the Constitution
House Joint Resolution 48 introduced February 22, 2019
Click here for most up to date list of co-sponsors
(Mouse over the links below for background information and explanation for why we have chosen these particular terms or language)
Section 1. [Artificial Entities Such as Corporations Do Not Have Constitutional Rights]
The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only.
Artificial entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law.
Section 2. [Money is Not Free Speech]
Federal, State, and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process, and that no person gains, as a result of their money, substantially more access or ability to influence in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.
Nothing in this amendment shall be construed to abridge freedom of the press.
Send a message to your U.S. House Representative urging them to co-sponsor the #WeThePeopleAmendment. If the widget doesn’t load below, CLICK HERE.
Don’t let your U.S. Senators off the hook! Send them a message urging them to introduce a companion bill in the Senate. If the widget doesn’t load below, CLICK HERE.
Examples of Corporate Rule
How does Corporate Rule affect my life?
This is a place where you can read concrete examples of how corporate rule (particularly the false legal doctrines of corporate constitutional rights and money as political free speech) is affecting people’s self-governance on the ground where they live. This page is not for explaining the macro view of the larger issues (e.g. corporate privatization of public education), but rather a micro view of specific impacts of corporate power in a town, city, or county that denies the rights of local democracy (e.g. a public school that was closed and then opened as a for-profit charter school).
Do you have an example of Corporate Rule to share? Click here for submission guidelines…
Corporate Rule Stories
More support for health concerns with wearing masks has been uncovered. This report was published and presented at the CDC website in June 2020. It was brought to our attention today, that a report was published at the Hayride in March that is similar to our report from yesterday noted below: Stanford Study Results:… […]TWITTER NOW SUPPRESSING EVIDENCE THAT WEARING MASKS ARE DANGEROUS: Stanford Study Noting Ineffectiveness and Harm of Masks Is Censored on Twitter But Now a Second Study Published on the CDC’s Website Confirms Masks Cause Serious Side Effects — Evans News Report
By Paul Homewood Another one sided report from Harrabin: Radical new climate change commitments will set the UK on course to cut carbon emissions by 78% by 2035, the UK government has announced. Hitting the targets would require more electric cars, low-carbon heating, renewable electricity and, for many, cutting down on […]Climate change: UK to speed up target to cut carbon emissions — Iowa Climate Science Education