“How many men ever went to a barbecue and would let one man take off the table what’s intended for nine-tenths of the people to eat? The only way you’ll ever be able to feed the balance of the people is to make that man come back and bring back some of that grub that he ain’t got no business with!”
–Louisiana Senator Huey P. Long, 1934
It was August 11, 2011–one year before he would receive the official Republican nomination for President.
Hustling for votes, Mitt Romney was speaking to a crowd of hundreds at the Iowa State Fair. He was being pressed about raising taxes to help cover entitlement spending.
Suddenly, a heckler suggested raising corporate tax rates.
Romney responded: “Corporations are people, my friend. Of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to the people. Where do you think it goes? Whose pockets? Whose pockets? People’s pockets. Human beings, my friend.”
The line earned him a sustained round of applause from the crowd.
If it’s true that corporations are people, then they are exceptionally greedy and selfish people.
A December, 2011 report by Public Campaign, highlighting corporate abuses of the tax laws, makes this all too clear.
Public Campaign is a national nonpartisan organization dedicated to reforming campaign finance laws and holding elected officials accountable.
Summarizing its conclusions, the report’s author writes:
“Amidst a growing federal deficit and widespread economic insecurity for most Americans, some of the largest corporations in the country have avoided paying their fair share in taxes while spending millions to lobby Congress and influence elections.”
Its key findings:
- The thirty big corporations analyzed in this report paid more to lobby Congress than they paid in federal income taxes between 2008 and 2010, despite being profitable.
- Despite making combined profits totaling $164 billion in that three-year period, the 30 companies combined received tax rebates totaling nearly $11 billion.
- Altogether, these companies spent nearly half a billion dollars ($476 million) over three years to lobby Congress. That’s about $400,000 each day, including weekends.
- In the three-year period beginning in 2009 through most of 2011, these large firms spent over $22 million altogether on federal campaigns.
- These corporations have also spent lavishly on compensatng their top executives ($706 million altogether in 2010).
Among those corporations whose tax-dodging and influence-buying were analyzed:
- General Electric
- Verizon
- PG&E
- Wells Fargo
- Duke Energy
- Boeing
- Consolidated Edison
- DuPont
- Honeywell International
- Mattel
- Corning
- FedEx
- Tenet Healthcare
- Wisconsin Energy
- Con-way
The report bluntly cites the growing disparity between the relatively few rich and the vast majority of poor and middle-class citizens:
“Over the past few months, a growing protest movement has shifted the debate about economic inequality in this country.
“The American people wonder why members of Congress suggest cuts to Medicare and Social Security but won’t require millionaires to pay their fair share in taxes.
“They want to know why they are struggling to find jobs and put food on the the table while the country’s largest corporations get tax breaks and sweetheart deals, then use that extra cash to pay bloated bonuses to CEOs or ship jobs overseas.
“….At a time when millions of Americans are still unemployed and millions more make tough choices to get by, these companies are enriching their top executives and spending millions of dollars on Washington lobbyists to stave off higher taxes or regulations.”
Assessing the results of corporate tax-dodging, the report states:
- Using various tax dodging techniques, including stashing profits in overseas tax havens and tax loopholes, 29 out of 30 companies featured in this study succeeded in paying no federal income taxes from 2008 through 2010.
- These 29 companies received tax rebates over those three years, ranging from $4 million for Corning to nearly $5 billion for General Electric and totally nearly $11 billion altogether.
- The only corporation that paid taxes in that three-year period, FedEx, paid a three-year tax rate of 1%, far less than the statutory rate of 35%.
The report bluntly notes the hypocrisy of corporate executives who call themselves “job creators” while enriching themselves by laying off thousands of employees:
“Another area where these corporations have decided to spend lavishly is compensation for their top executives ($706 million altogether in 2010).
“Executives doing particularly well work for General Electric ($76 million in total compensation in 2010), Honeywell International ($54 million), and Wells Fargo ($50 million).
“Executives who have seen the greatest increase work for DuPont (188% increase), Wells Fargo (180% increase) and Verizon (167% increase).
Despite being profitable, some of these corporations have actually laid off workers.
Since 2008, seven of the corporations have reported laying off American workers. The worst offenders are Verizon, which laid off at least 21,308 workers, and Boeing, which fired at least 14,862 employees.
Insisting that “corporations are people” wins applause from the wealthiest 1% and their Right-wing shills. But it does nothing to better the lives of the increasingly squeezed poor and middle-class.
If the nation is to avoid economic and moral bankruptcy, Americans must demand that powerful corporations be held accountable–and punished harshly when they behave irresponsibly.

ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CNN, EMILIZNO ZAPATA, FACEBOOK, FELIPE CALDERON, FRANCISCO "PANCHO" VILLA, ILLEGAL ALIENS, illegal immigration, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, Kamala Harris, MEXICO, NBC NEWS, SERGIO GARCIA, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
CAN LAWBREAKERS BE LAWYERS?
In History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on September 25, 2013 at 12:00 amCan a known lawbreaker act as a lawyer?
Many California legislators are trying to make this possible.
Assembly Bill 1024, which passed the state Legislature in mid-September, 2013, would allow the state Supreme Court to license lawyers, even if they are illegal aliens.
Specifically, the bill states:
This bill would additionally authorize the Supreme Court to admit to the practice of law an applicant who is not lawfully present in the United States, upon certification by the committee that the applicant has fulfilled those requirements for admission, as specified.
The bill has been sent to the desk of Governor Jerry Brown for his signature.
Fittingly, the bill was introduced by a Hispanic–Assembly member Lorena Gonzales (D-San Diego)–on behalf of another Hispanic, Sergio Garcia.
Garcia was born in Mexico and smuggled into the United States by his parents as an infant. He left at age nine and returned when he was 17. He applied for legal residency in the mid-1990s.
He worked his way through college and law school.
But that argument didn’t cut any ice with the Justice Department of Barack Obama.
Federal law bars the state from issuing an attorney’s license to illegal aliens and prohibits them from working as lawyers, the Justice Department said in an August 1, 2012 filing with the California Supreme Court, which had requested its opinion.
The 1996 law denies “public benefits” to illegal aliens. It was drafted to “preclude undocumented aliens from receiving commercial and professional licenses issued by states and the federal government,” Justice Department lawyers told the court.
The State Bar’s Commitee of Bar Examiners and California Attorney Genera Kamala Harris said that Garcia should be admitted to the bar, arguing that federal law leaves such issues up to the states.
Yet legal scholars say no law firm could legally hire him, and his citizenship status could disqualify him from representing some clients.
Many of those supporting Garcia claim he is the victim of racial prejudice. This is the knee-jerk reaction whenever a Hispanic seeks immunity from American jurisprudence.
On May 20, 2010, Mexico’s then-President Felipe Calderon addressed a joint session of the United States Congress–and attacked the Arizona law that allows law enforcement officials to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.
Felipe Calderon
According to Calderon, the law “introduces a terrible idea: using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement.”
Racial profiling? Consider the popular Latino phrase, “La Raza.”
This literally means “the race” or “the people.”
In the United States, it’s sometimes used to describe people of Chicano and Mexican descent as well as other Latin American mestizos who share Native American heritage.
It rarely includes entirely European or African descended Hispanic peoples.
So when Latinos say, “The Race,” they’re not talking about “the human race.” They’re talking strictly about their own.
In his lecture, Calderon condemned the United States for doing what Mexico itself has long done: Strictly enforcing control of its borders.
Yet consider the racial profiling situation in sunny Mexico.
Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:
The law also ensures that:
Calderon also ignored a second well-understood but equally unacknowledged truth: Mexico uses its American border to rid itself of those who might otherwise demand major reforms in the country’s political and economic institutions.
The Mexican Government still remembers the bloody upheaval known as the Mexican Revolution. This lasted ten years (1910-1920) and wiped out an estimated one to two million men, women and children.
Massacres were common on all sides, with men shot by the hundreds in bullrings or hung by the dozen on trees.
A Mexican Revolution firing squad
All of the major leaders of the Revolution–Francisco Madero, Emiliano Zapata, Venustiano Carranza, Francisco “Pancho” Villa, Alvaro Obregon–died in a hail of bullets.
Francisco “Pancho” Villa
Emiliano Zapata
As a result, every successive Mexican Government has lived in the shadow of another such wholesale bloodletting. These officials have thus quietly decided to turn the United States border into a safety valve.
If potential revolutionaries leave Mexico to find a better life in the United States, the Government doesn’t have to fear the rise of another “Pancho” Villa.
On September 2, 2007, Calderon gave away the game when he said in a speech: “I have said that Mexico does not stop at its border, that wherever there is a Mexican, there is Mexico.”
Apparently Mexico has decided to re-conquer North America, by ensuring that “wherever there is a Mexican, there is Mexico.”
Share this: