Home > Free Speech, SD 2014 Ballot, South Dakota > Rick Weiland kicks off Senate run by attacking 1st Amendment

Rick Weiland kicks off Senate run by attacking 1st Amendment

June 24, 2013

GroupSince the Rick Weiland candidacy was announced I’ve seen it as a non-issue for any liberty-loving individuals. Who cares if the South Dakota Democrats pick a Senate candidate chosen by Daschle? No matter who they choose the seat is likely to go the Republican Party. There are possible paths to a Weiland win; however those paths are few and very unlikely. Instead of finding one of those winning paths, Weiland has come out the gate as an anti-liberty candidate attacking the First Amendment.

Here is an excerpt of an article at the Yankton Daily:

Weiland said one of his first acts in the Senate would be to support a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision. It extended First Amendment rights to corporations, allowing those entities and unions to spend unlimited sums of money on political campaigns so long as they remain independent from candidates and political parties.

Really Mr Weiland? This is your big move? Attacking the First Amendment!

This stance is nothing new. Since the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee decision many high-profile Democrats have traced almost every problem in the country to “Citizen United”. Since that time there have been many proposed bills and constitutional amendments stating money is not speech and that corporations are not people. Last fall during Free Speech Week I posted about why money IS a tool of a free speech. Now it is time to let individuals such as Mr Weiland know why a constitutional amendment stating “corporations are not people” is a bad idea.

The basis for corporations having the rights of people is simple: groups of people who come together for a purpose are able to collectively use their rights as part of that organization. This is not a new concept. It has been around for centuries (long before the US was even discovered). In US history it was decided by the Supreme Court in 1819 that corporations have the same rights as individuals in contract law. From that time on the Supreme Court has upheld other individual rights can be collectively used in organizations. Any attempt to remove the rights of organizations will also remove the rights of individuals to organize.

I’ve heard some anti-Citizens Democrats say “but our amendment would only restrict corporations”. There are a few problems with that.

  1. From the federal government perspective a “Corporation” is a tax status. To get around this amendment corporations would simply disband and reorganize as an Limited-Liability Partnership. Since a non-incorporated LLP files taxes using Form 1065 it would not be a “corporation”. (Corporations file Form 1120, Sub-S Corporations file Form 1120-S).
  2. Unions often organize as a corporations. Any attempt to take the rights away from corporations would also remove the rights of Unions.
  3. Newspapers organize as corporations. This takes away newspapers right to free speech and freedom of press.
  4. Non-profits are corporations. Do we really want the rights of non-profits to be taken away?

I could actually keep going with the list showing problems with the “corporations are not people” amendment. However these few examples are more than ample to show how un-wise such an amendment would be.

At its heart the “corporations are not people” and anti-Citizens attitude from certain segments of the left has been all about hate. There is so much pure hatred for “the rich” and “evil corporations” that these segments of the Democrat Party are willing to take rights away from all organizations of people to ‘punish’ their target. Sadly the only Democrat to step forward in the race for Senator in South Dakota has been one of these hate-filled anti-free-speech individuals.

Due to Weiland’s anti-free-speech approach I no longer see him as a “non-issue” in the Senate race. Instead Mr Weiland is now moved to the “must-defeat” group. It’s too bad, that brings the current Senate race back to a one-horse-race with no actual alternative to Rounds.

  1. Drew Dennert
    June 24, 2013 at 11:42 pm

    Ken,
    You are 100% right on this one Rick Weiland MUST be defeated

    • Ken Santema
      June 25, 2013 at 3:06 pm

      I’m just shaking my head on him taking this stance right away. You would think in South Dakota the Democrat running would try to find an issue that would take conservative votes.

  1. July 13, 2013 at 11:11 am
  2. August 12, 2013 at 7:52 pm
  3. August 15, 2013 at 12:15 pm
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: