Letter to the Editor

Artificial entities

CambriaMay 22, 2014 

Mr. Christopher Arend’s Viewpoint argues in favor of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on the Citizens United case and McCutcheon case. He argues that “artificial entities” (read artificial constructs made by people) should have the same rights as natural persons.

I am unaware of any wording in the Constitution equating artificial entities with natural persons. Artificial entities have no conscience, moral or ethical beliefs, feelings or thoughts. If they were equal to natural persons, they would surely carry the diagnosis of antisocial personality and/or psychotic.

My experience has been that, left unregulated, money and power tend to concentrate. The definition of democracy is a government ruled by the people through rule by the majority. If power is concentrated in a relatively few, how can the majority be represented?

In establishing the Constitution, the first paragraph states that the benefit of the Constitution is to promote the general welfare. How can the concentration of power and wealth promote the general welfare? Citizens United clearly enables the powerful and wealthy to become more powerful. The freedom of speech argument is a smoke screen to allow power to be more concentrated than it already is.

Clearly undemocratic!

The Tribune is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service