A Corporation’s a Corporation, No Matter How Small

Proposed Mississippi Personhood Amendment:

"The term 'person' or 'persons' shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof."

But if we believe that a corporation is a person…

Mississippi Voters Reject Corporate Personhood Amendment

Special to MSRP
November 9, 2011

By a resounding majority, the proposed so-called Mississippi Corporate Personhood Amendment was defeated last night. The controversial amendment was designed to define corporate personhood as beginning at incorporation, regardless of its’ future viability. If the measure had passed, it would have conferred all corporate personhood rights onto a business entity from the conception of the idea through its natural demise in the economic cycle.

The amendment was seen by legislators as a way to circumvent laws that allow Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the state. Proponents argued that the new clarification of corporate personhood would prevent immoral regulators from closing down any company that it deemed “defective” or terminate the charter of any business it did not consider viable. They believed that as more businesses were allowed to incubate for a full 3 business quarters, the resulting corporate persons would be of tremendous benefit to the state over the long term.

“Most businesses in Mississippi die within the first 3 quarters after incorporation,” explained Richie Percenter, leading advocate for the pro-business measure. “It is a death by a thousand regulatory cuts.  These businesses are being indiscriminatingly snuffed out by overzealous regulators without regard for the unique corporate person.”

Proponents of the new law argued unsuccessfully that it would begin a new era of job creation and job protections in Mississippi that would be the envy of the world.

“Had this measure become law, Mississippi would have offered the strongest start up business protections in the nation. The jobs created in our great state would ignite an economic revival unseen in our history. It’s simple – we believe that every business model, no matter how flawed, deserves a chance. You never know. I mean, who could have predicted Silly Bandz?”

Opponents of corporate personhood said that the state could not support an unlimited number of new fledgling businesses, many of which it claimed would require far too much government support over their lifespan.

“It would be irresponsible to bring some of these business plans to full term. I mean, do we really need another home based jewelry design business? Those efforts are a drain on resources, resources better directed towards healthy, growing businesses.”

Defenders of the fight to defeat the measure warned of unintended consequences if the amendment had passed. “Look, home businesses are incorporated every day without the consent of the spouse. After several months, the impact of the business begins to show – boxes of inventory in the garage, refrigerator magnets with a website address, evenings away at ‘house parties’ – and then it’s too late. You are stuck caring for a multi-level business that you never planned for or wanted. Shouldn’t a reasonable spouse be able to stop that business in its tracks before real damage is done?”

Pro-business supporters vowed to continue the fight.

‘A business is a business, no matter how small,” mused Percenter.

John Marshall, the nation’s longest serving and arguably most influential chief justice, wrote that a corporation is “an artificial being, invisible, intangible…Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it, either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence.”

The Party's Over

Barack Obama is the first President in the history of the nation to serve during a period without functioning political parties.  Political parties, for all their faults, allowed government to function for centuries, and for that reason, they will be missed.  Dysfunctional government will now rule until a party system is reignited, although it is difficult to see when that might happen, if ever.

Party politics did not die yesterday.  It’s been a long, slow death.  In 1999, Fareed Zakaria asked ABC commentator George Stephanopolous if the Democratic Party would nominate Al Gore in 2000.  Stephanopolous responded with “There is no Democratic Party.”  He went on to tell Zakaria that Gore would run if he could raise the money and build an organization.  He further commented that the concept of “party elders” impacting the choice of nominee was anachronistic.  The nominating process was fully democratized.  There was no Democratic Party.  There was only a loose affiliation of people who sometimes voted for Democrats.

Isn’t this what we are seeing in the 2012 Republican nominating process?  Mitt Romney, the begrudging choice of the party elders who see him as the only hope to defeat Obama, is being rejected and weakened by the vocal base.  Reinus Preibus, chairperson of the Republican National Committee, is not a kingmaker – he is an afterthought.  The candidates can raise money and elevate their own professional profiles without a national committee.  They just need a book publisher, a slick website and a social media outreach program to win elections.  Attention to party politics has given way to attention to voter preference polling data.

(Sarah Palin has started her own political party, with an assist from Facebook.)

The democratization of our formerly republican system of government has been happening for a number of years.  The direct election of Senators, enacted in 1913, was one of the first steps towards putting more power directly into the hands of the people, usurping a power formerly delegated to state legislatures.  In the 1970s, Prop 13 passed in California, placing a cap on the power of elected officials to set property tax rates in the state.  By referendum, the power to address state needs through property tax changes was eliminated.  The people were beginning to wrest power from legislators.  Today, California is run by referendum, and the power of the legislature has been neutered.  85% of the California state budget is already spoken for – by mandatory publicly voted referendums.  Legislators are trying to fix the California budget mess while having control over only 15% of it.  I fear that the people in their rush for direct power over the government forgot to wrest accountability at the same time, or perhaps were just unwilling to assume it.  Accountability is not much of an aphrodisiac. 

 

In a functioning society, the people and individuals will have competing needs and wants.  We elect and empower a government to balance those interests as best it can.  Majority rule leads to win-lose situations.  Elected representatives should be charged with finding the win-win solutions when at all possible.  Political parties funnel these individual needs and wants into a cohesive governing philosophy, and thereby allow real work to be done and real progress to be made. 

    

The movement away from institutional power and towards individual empowerment has only just begun.   Occupy Wall Street and Tea Party share distrust of large institutions, and to a large degree a greater faith in individual choices and decision-making.   Unleash the individual and society as a whole will benefit, they say.  Think about the growth of micro-financing, Angie’s List, Craigslist, individual blogging versus institutional journalism.  By demystifying investing, information gathering, retail, society can and has flourished – to a point.  The downside is we are becoming a virtual Wild, Wild West, where anything goes.  Don’t we still need a few sheriffs so the entire community can expand and grow?  And if we find some sheriffs, don’t we owe it to them to arm them? 

 

With great power comes great responsibility, so said gentle Uncle Ben to Peter Parker.  Now that people have more power, where’s our collective sense of responsibility?  Yes, I mean voting, but not just voting.  I mean accepting accountability for lousy results.  If we as a public demand the right to make all of these decisions, we shouldn’t blame the government if these choices fail.

The democratization of America (and the world) will mean less centralized structure, more chaos, and maybe in some cases, better individual outcomes.  But we need large, structural institutions to keep order and insist upon protections for the benefit of all.  Everyone can play in this new world order, but collectively we need formal institutions with the power to build field with fences and foul poles and employ umpires.  Political parties, for all their faults, at least had the ability to consolidate the disparate views of its members and work to compromise with the opposing party (or parties) so the nation could move forward.  If Stephanopolous is right, those days are over, and we are not better off because of it.

“May you live in interesting times” is a wonderful sentiment.  We sure do.  It is the Age of the Individual, and we have traded institutional control and certainty for self-determination and anarchy.  Hopefully, we live during a time when the proper balance between individual and group, government and people, is struck.  In the meantime, the people will choose a nominee and the people will choose a President after that.

We do live in interesting times, so we should remain interested to protect our interests.  Interesting... 

Holes

Last week, the Associated Press reported that “an 80-year-old man who went to retrieve the morning papers on his lawn sank into an 8-foot hole on New York's Long Island.”  Rescuers arrived after the man’s daughter, who heard his cries for help, called for assistance.  The rescuers had to tie some Spiderman webbing around his torso to pull him out successfully. 

 

I can totally relate to that man’s experience.  The newspaper can be a complete sinkhole for me, particularly on Sunday mornings.  Front page, sports section, style, the magazine, opinions...it is easy to get lost in that world.  I never call for rescuers to save me from my reading, however, but my family finds me anyway.  They usually show up unannounced to pull me out of the newsprint against my will.  The kids will call my name, but I can only be extracted from the paper by physical taps (read: punches on the leg) that get my attention.  What can I say, I’m focused, and that’s an admirable quality.

Not all sinkholes are bad.

My son has inherited the gene for rabid newspaper reading.  As befits his age and station in life, he begins each morning with the sports section and the comics.  He’ll grow into the op-ed page with the appropriate paternal seasoning.  His newspaper sinkhole does not dip as deeply into his consciousness as mine; however, he has lost track of time and missed his school bus on occasion while studying box scores and standings.  He’s well informed, but the late slips are adding up.

I have thought about cancelling my newspaper subscription.  After all, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free on the Internet?  I can read just about anything that’s delivered to my driveway on paper from a smudge-proof webpage.  “Look, ma, no newsprint fingerprints on the white refrigerator!”  I keep my subscription as an act of charity.  Up to this point, I view my subscription payment as a donation to a vibrant 4^th Estate.  I want serious journalism to survive, and I fantasize that my subscription dollars are going directly to investigative efforts that hold our civic leaders accountable and uncover all manner of societal malfeasance.  My money is buying real professional journalism, not some two-bit hack bloggers interpretation of events.  I am paying for objectivity.

If only.

The Long Island man joked that throughout the ordeal, "I held on to the papers."  I can relate to that guy, with one caveat.  I would have waited to finish the paper before calling for help.  That way I wouldn’t have to fight my son for the sports section and no one would be banging on my leg for attention. 

 

Not all sinkholes are bad.

Another Windmill Down

From The Man of La Mancha:

The Duke:  I invent false information about a country and sell it to others stupid enough to believe it.
Miguel de Cervantes:  Seems a sound proposition. What brought you here?
The Duke:  A lapse of judgment. I told the truth.

Our long national nightmare is over.  The war is over.  Mission accomplished.  The Republican House has fought back against the forces of evil and bravely protected our country from the scourge of atheism that is robbing us of our global economic competitiveness.  Our proper place among the theocracies of the world has been assured. 

 

The House has passed a non-binding resolution reaffirming that "In God We Trust" is the national motto.  Armageddon averted.  Gathering storm clouds dissipated.  Climate change reversed.  Gays chastised.  Jobs created?

“In God We Trust” has been the national motto since 1956.  It’s been printed on U.S. coins since 1864 and on paper currency since 1957.  Yet, despite this long history, and despite the lack of any credible movement to change this, the GOP controlled House felt the issue worthy of floor debate and valuable legislative time.  Thank God (literally) there were no other pressing demands on the time of our duly elected officials to distract them from this Mission.

I have no problem with our national motto.  The fact is no one really did.  It's been in place for half a century, and I think it is a healthy reminder that we are not alone.  This resolution was a waste of taxpayer time to elevate a few lawmakers in the eyes of their congregations.  Perhaps these Congresspeople should be monitoring those gathering “mobs” demanding that the growing income inequality in this country be acknowledged as settled economic science, and preparing funding for the construction of more secure monetary fences around corporate America.  The reaffirmation of a motto that already exists does nothing.

On second thought, maybe it does something, something anti-business.  Isn’t this motto affirmation resolution just another example of the federal government endorsing the over-regulation of free markets?  I mean, it was God after all that supported the most egregious example of over-reach in world history with His signature legislative success, the passage of the Ten Commandments.   Sure, we can all agree that the bans against killing and stealing are reasonable limitations on a civil society, but once ‘coveting’ becomes illegal, we are weakening the vibrant omnipotent hand of our Job Creators.  Gordon Gekko, one of history’s great capitalist innovators, said it best that “Greed is good” and therefore should not be punished with burdensome regulatory oversight.  I think we can agree that the government has gone too far when it threatens eternal damnation in the fires of Hell for mere thoughts on how to negotiate a hostile corporate takeover.

One thing that the national motto does do quite effectively is divert attention away from nefarious human activities and legislative double crosses.  Pay no attention to those lawmakers behind the curtain, and instead, trust that your lot in life is predestined by God directly.  We’re denying you health coverage, but God will provide.  We are releasing the power of the investor class to submit to their own worst instincts, but worry not – it is all part of God’s Plan, if only you trust.  Stop looking to your elected leaders to help or protect you.  In God you should trust.  Wasn’t it Reagan who said, “Trust but verify”?

I am reminded of the classic joke about the man standing on his roof watching flood waters rise all around his home.  A boat comes to save him, but he refuses the boat.  “God will provide.”  A second boat comes to save him as the waters grow higher, but he refuses the help again.  “God will provide.”  As the waters reach him, a helicopter arrives and throws him a rope.  He refuses a final time, saying confidently that “God will provide.”  Eventually, the waters wash him away, and he perishes in the flood.  At the gates of Heaven, the man asks God why He didn’t provide as promised.  God replies, “Who do you think sent the 2 boats and the helicopter?”

At what point do we recognize that we need to help ourselves and hold these GOP knuckleheads more accountable for their actions or lack of actions?  At what point does the Congress address real problems with real solutions instead of imaginary problems with imaginary solutions? 

 

The non-binding resolution was approved 396-9, with 2 abstentions.  There is a rumor that the 2 representatives who abstained from the vote are being burned at the stake this weekend, but that is unconfirmed.

Nonsense 1 – Jobs Agenda 0.

The Herman Cain Mutiny

In my comfortable world of warm cynicism, I knew this would happen eventually.  The only question was who would be the perp and who would be the victim.  We have a political battle for the 2012 GOP nomination pitting 8 major candidates in a steel cage match against reason and accountability (reason and accountability are bleeding profusely and are not expected to survive the bout, by the way).  The only thing missing from this high stakes drama was an allegation of sexual impropriety, and thanks to Politico’s “reporting”, now we have something tawdry to spice interest in the campaign.  Clearly, demagoging on electrified fences and forced vaccinations could not hold the public’s attention.  Advertisers demanded more.

If you haven’t heard, Herman Cain, surging candidate for the GOP nomination, has been accused of having been accused of sexual harassment some 20 years ago.  The story surfaced in Politico, and has metastasized overnight into the blockbuster ratings bonanza every media outlet was hoping for, serious journalistic integrity be damned. 

 

So what if Cain was accused of sexual harassment?  Accusations are free, but defending against them costs money.  Evidence of an employment settlement to those who may have accused Mr. Cain does not represent proof of anything.  It could be proof of extortion, in which case Cain is the victim.  It could be proof of a reasoned business decision.  Sadly, business decisions are made all the time to settle certain claims before determining if there is any basis in truth.  The decision to settle could have been made to avoid unwanted publicity for his association that had issues before Congress.  The decision to settle could have been more cost effective than fighting.  Guilt and innocence are not proven by the existence of a settlement agreement.

Of course, it could be true that he is a serial harasser and unfit for office, but if you voted for Clinton and would again if he were running, take a breath before you pile on and disqualify Cain.  Love him or hate him, Clinton appears to have enjoyed his share of harassments while handling affairs of the state (pun intended).

The story represents the worst of political hackery and soulless journalism.  “Unnamed sources” and “someone with knowledge of the situation” have been trusted enough to approve the printing a story that will upend someone's career and reputation, all in the name of…what?  It’s shameless, and the implication of the story is clear – Cain is a pervert that must be stopped.  Really?  Based on the rumor of an event?  Based on a misunderstanding of what a settlement agreement represents in a matter like this?  I disagree with him politically, but he should not have to spend a minute on this silliness.  He already has plenty of silliness to impart on an adoring vocal minority of a sliver of the electorate.

Be careful, my dear right wing friends.  It is fun to blame your second favorite punching bag, the liberal media, for this imbroglio.  In the end, my cynicism tells me that the source of the story, such as it is, may end up being one of the other campaigns and not the disorganized left wing propaganda machine.  If that liberal machine were organized in any sense, I think the Occupy protesters message wouldn’t be quite so ‘muddled’.  The liberal machine is defined by its messaging incompetence.

The fact is that the rationale to disqualify Herman Cain from holding the Office of the Presidency is so extensive, so well documented, that basing your decision on his fitness for office on this poorly vetted report from Politico would be akin to deciding you disapproved of Charlie Sheen for President because of his role in Hot Shots!  There are so many other reasons Sheen should not be President, and many of them are a mere click away on YouTube.

This alleged settlement is a non-story.  The story is that is a story at all, and until we learn otherwise, this alleged sexual harassment settlement should not be in the public discourse.

Stop the Cain Mutiny!  Don’t abandon the Cain! (At least not because of this story)

In the classic Humphrey Bogart movie, The Caine Mutiny, much effort was spent building a case against Captain Queeg for his alleged incompetence.  We knew from watching the on screen action that he was a flip-flopper at best, a liar at worst.  In the dramatic final courtroom scene, Queeg was ultimately found incapable of command, but not because others testified against him.  The cross examiner just let Queeg talk, and his insanity became apparent. 

 

Better to let Captain Cain just keeping talking.  That should be enough to derail his ambitions.

“…a little roller up along first…BEHIND THE BAG!”

Personally autographed by Ray Knight, 1986 World Series MVP, aka “Melon Head”

Last night, October 25, 2011, marked the 25 year anniversary of the greatest night of my life (except, of course, for my wedding day, birth of the kids, blah, blah, blah).  On October 25, 1986, the New York Mets staged a comeback for the ages that some refer to as the Buckner Game.  For me, and other fanatics like me, it’s just Game 6. 

 

Ah, Game 6.

It is not often that scenes from the greatest night of your life are on television (occasionally on YouTube without your consent, but that’s another story), but ESPN Classic carried the game last night, edited down to a digestible 2 hours of vintage ‘80s baseball.  I watched the entire drama unfolded again.  It was not as good as the first time, but it was darn good reality TV.

There is so much that I have forgotten about the game over the years.  Pre-Roid Rage Roger Clemens had a no hitter through the first 4 innings.  Rubber armed outfielder Mookie Wilson threw out Jim Rice at the plate in the 7^th inning to hold the Sox at 3 runs.  The Mets battled back to tie the game with 2 runs in the 5^th inning.  They tied the game again with one run in the bottom of the 8^th inning.  They blew a perfect opportunity to finish the game in the 9^th before the disaster of the top of the 10^th led to the nirvana of the bottom of the 10^th.

You all know the tale.  Nobody on base, two runs down, two outs, two strikes on Carter, then lightning.  Base hit, base hit, base hit. One run.  Wild pitch.  Tie game.  Through Buckner’s legs, there will be a 7^th Game.

I am exactly the same, but all the characters in this hero’s tale had changed and moved on with their lives.  Roger McDowell, the hard throwing sinkerballer/prankster who was the notorious second spitter from behind the bush on the gravelly road, is now pitching coach with Atlanta.  Davey Johnson, the brash young dugout genius, is now the old seer managing the Nationals.  Carter, Rice and Boggs are enshrined in Cooperstown.  Strawberry and Gooden are cautionary tales on how not to handle stardom.  Times have changed, but the feeling of that night remains the same for me.  I love watching that game as much if not more than Red Sox fans hate being reminded of it. 

 

While the emotional rescue provided by the Mets is unforgettable, some of the actual scenes I had forgotten.  I was struck by a few images:

• All the players sporting the porn mustaches before they were known as porn mustaches (Hernandez, Backman, Buckner, Boggs, Johnson, Santana (Rafael, not Johann), Wilson, Evans, the drunkards in the Shea crowd bundled up in their Members Only jackets…).
• The turf at Shea was no better than my son’s little league field after surviving a game of tackle football in the rain.  The technology of infield lawn care has evolved by leaps and bounds.  I guess we have Carl Spackler and his hybrid research to thank for that. 
• There was a noticeable lack of pitching changes.  Tony LaRussa would have substituted 4 pitchers during the time that Calvin Schiraldi was allowed to remain in the game, long after he was clearly ineffective.
• I smiled when I saw the crazy lady rolling her arms in the front row just to the left of home plate.  Her repetitive rolling motion placed a jinx on the Red Sox’ pitchers as they threw.  Babe Ruth has nothing on this lady.   

What made that night 25 years ago so perfect was the depth of despair I felt before rising suddenly to the peak of joy.  You have to go through hell before you get to heaven, said Steve Miller, and he’s a rock star – he should know.  The 1986 game offers a good life lesson for all of us, even the non-sports fans, although the non-fans probably didn’t make it as far as this paragraph.  To experience winning, you have to know losing (paradoxical unity).

Sports are such an ideal metaphor for life.  Everyone should have one sports memory that touches them the way this game touched me, and if you're lucky, Vin Scully does the commentary.

Maybe for you, my NY/NJ friends, it is this game:

Driven to Tears

“Protest is futile; nothing seems to get through
What's to become of our world, who knows what to do.”

- Driven to Tears, music and lyrics by Sting

I am pretty sure that Sting did not write this song with teaching his daughter how to drive a car in mind, but the process of training my 15 ½ year old to handle 2,200 pound machine capable of traveling at high speed is driving me to tears.

I admittedly approached her training phase a bit naïve, maybe even more so than she was, and that’s saying something.  It was easy for me to overlook the fact that my driving skills and instincts were not as honed 32 years ago as they are now.  In my mind, I always drove with my current level of precision, safety, and innate feel for the road.  When I was 17 (the legal driving age in NJ at the time), I was dropped into the proverbial deep end of the pool, and rehearsed the art of traffic dodging in my 1973 Plymouth Duster on the mean streets of New York City.  In NYC during peak hours, the motto “Hesitation Kills” is not just an empty platitude.  It has real life consequences. 

 

I have some faint memories of my parents teaching me to drive as a teen.  My mom took a laissez-faire approach.  She would toss me the keys, and say, “You drive.”  Not wanting to disappoint her, I would.  We’d talk about all sorts of topics on those long drives, none of which were related to the task of driving that I remember.  It was mostly sports, current events and school.  I never remember her being nervous as she sat in the passenger seat, pre-shoulder strap seat belts and pre-air bag technology.  She probably would have been nervous had she given it any thought, but I was the 5^th student to attend her family driving academy.  My siblings broke her in, and I guess broke her down.

My dad did not spend too much time alone in the car with me behind the wheel.  He must have the survival gene.  He did teach me one lesson I still remember.  He taught me to watch the car in front of the car that was in front of me.  “Look through the back window of the car in front and see what’s coming next through their windshield,” he would tell me in more colorful language than I have provided here.  Driving was all about anticipation, he taught.  That’s true.  Teaching my daughter to drive is all about anticipation…along with a healthy dose of dread and a dollop of trepidation.  That’s what I anticipated.

I went into my daughter’s instructional phase with a sense of calm, a calm that can only come from total resignation and acceptance of the reality of the inevitable.  I was calm because I had no choice.  She would learn to drive with or without me, so I might as well be the one.  It was not going to be my wife coaching her on proper driving techniques, and for obvious reasons, I will not share in this space why she would not be the trainer.  I’ll let you guess.

The first outing started with what I thought would be the most valuable lesson of all.  I would teach her to pump her own gas.  After all, you won’t get far if you can’t put gas in the car. 

    

“I don’t want to learn that,” she said.  I anticipated this objection.  Guess what my answer was? 

 

“Move to New Jersey or get out here and learn.”

She watched with intense disinterest all of the steps – swipe card, raise lever, select grade, remove gas cap, pump.  At least she stood outside of the car while the tank was filled, and we didn’t lose the gas cap.  It was a small victory.

Next I drove to the local church parking lot for a few simple pointers.  For this module of training, she needed to sit in the driver’s seat.  There are a few moments in a man’s life when he comes face to face with his own mortality.  His wedding day; the birth of his children; the day they start school.  Standing outside of the car looking at her in that driver’s seat was one of those moments.  From here, it’s a short trip to soft foods and angioplasties.  But I digress.

We went through the motions.  Adjust the seat, position the mirrors, review the dashboard and switches on the steering column.  I patiently explained the functioning of the intermittent wipers, the headlight high beams and the appropriate usage of the car horn (when you are cut off in traffic or to signal a friend to come over to your car).  Car in park, key turned, and we’re ready to roll.

“Which pedal is the gas?”

Inhale.  Exhale.  Serenity now.  Serenity now.

After 5 minutes of repetitive whiplash, a few panicked jerks of the wheel to prevent the car from drifting into the woods, and other white knuckle inducing moments, Marra felt ready to take the next logical step in her driving education.  After all, she had been driving at a sustained 8 mph for a solid couple of minutes.

“I think I am ready for some music now.”

Inhale.  Exhale.  Serenity now.  Serenity now.  I will teach her the value of preset stations and their role in preventing distracted driving on another day.  On this particular day, even though she was ready for music, I was not.  I needed quiet.  The roar of my life passing before my eyes was deafening.  30 minutes was enough for Lesson #1.

“So, can I try driving on the street next time?” 

If I don’t laugh, I’ll cry, but it’s tears for me either way.  The driver’s ed process may at times drive me to despair, but I am proud of my girl.  She’ll learn it.  She is growing up and getting mobile, and that is good and welcome.  One thing is for certain – she will have to pay for and pump her own gas along the way, at least until she moves to Jersey.