Corporation running for governor in Oregon

author : Emma Hendrickson topic : corporations | Interview

interview by Emma Hendrickson

Rich CorporateSon, Inc. is a corporation running in this year's gubernatorial race in Oregon. This unusual candidacy, the creation of the Oregon-based End Corporate Personhood (see sidebar, "Behind the Rich CorporateSon, Inc. Candidacy"), highlights the absurdity and dangers of current laws regarding corporate personhood. The campaign website is at http://www.VoteCorporate.org . The following interview is with Rich CorporateSon, Inc.'s campaign manager, Hal Burton.

What is Rich CorporateSon, Inc. and why is it running?

Rich CorporateSon, Inc. is an Oregon chartered corporation (register #35090091) created to take American politics to the next level. As a result of corporate media consolidation, a multibillion dollar a year lobbying industry, and increasingly unregulated campaign finance laws, our government is now run largely by special interests. This is not enough. For the sake of efficiency, we have come together to cut out the middle-man, incorporate, and take direct control of the government. It is our dream to create an empire of, by, and for the shareholders.

Would Oregon taxpayers be considered shareholders of the state?

While we fully support the mantra of running government like a business, a strong line must be drawn between the corporate elite and common tax payers. Taxes are, in our ideal setting, a device by which ordinary people finance the subsidies and kick-backs given to members of the elite class. Stocks are, when part of large corporations, a device by which the elite class gain control of the world's resources and further increase the wealth gap. Because the people who hold large shares of corporate stock (only 50% of American households hold any corporate stock) are generally wealthier than average tax-payers, stock holders should be treated with more respect and hold much more power than their more average counterparts.

What special qualifications/experiences would Rich CorporateSon, Inc. bring to the Governor's office and how might the citizens of Oregon benefit?

Corporations have been running the government for years. We largely finance political campaigns (Oregon is one of five states that has no limits on corporate campaign contributions), and often even write the legislation directly. We feel that this is more than enough to justify taking direct control. By allowing the wealthiest persons to buy majority stock, the corporate model guarantees that the richest, and therefore best, people will gain control of operations. This will allow for efficient plutocratic rule of the Oregon executive branch. Through trickle-down democracy, this increase in power to the rich will -somehow- lead to increased rights for poor people . . . we think.

It seems improbable that increased rights for poor people would be of value to Rich CorporateSon, Inc. Comment?

We do not claim to care for the welfare of the poor; we are simply implying that by dedicating our efforts on improving the quality of life of the rich, poor people's quality of life might also increase. We realize that this makes no sense and are simply following the lead of the equally illogical theory of trickle-down -- or "voodoo" -- economics espoused by the neocons. If people are willing to elect someone who claims this as their economic policy, we are confident that they will elect us with a similar democratic policy.

If it is elected, it will be the only corporation to ever gain legitimate control over day-to-day activities of a state government as well as great influence in a state's legislature. What would be Governor CorporateSon Inc.'s first order of business?

Our team of economic advisers estimates that once elected, Rich CorporateSon, Inc.'s stock price will skyrocket. Our first day in office will coincide with our Initial Public Offering on the stock market. We are expecting high demand for our stock from the Asian and Middle Eastern markets, as they will want to gain control of our ports. This is a fine example of how free markets can be used to their fullest.

So no "business" that would involve state government or the citizens of Oregon?

Once publicly traded, a corporation is legally required to worry only about the financial interests of its stock holders; after our first day in office, this will be our primary goal. Again, the citizens of Oregon will benefit -- in a trickle-down way.

Who are CorporateSon, Inc.'s friends and why are they supporting it?

While Rich CorporateSon, Inc., due to share-holder supremacy, is legally required to only look after the financial interests of its stock holders, we our counting on the support of all of Oregon's richest residents, as well as the organizations to which they belong.

How does Rich CorporateSon, Inc expect to be elected with such a narrow base of support?

These are the wealthiest Oregonians and the only ones who truly matter in modern politics. Due to Oregon's lax campaign finance laws, political campaigns rarely involve the rabble to any important degree. For example, in legislative races, the one who spent more money won 91% of the time, 75% of the money came from only 1% of the contributors, and only 3% of the contributions were in amounts of $50 or less. By raising the most money, we will be able to manipulate the public with savvy ads and flashy campaign events.

Do you think the campaign will be adversely affected by personhood discrimination with voters expecting to see a traditional candidate standing at a podium rather than a crowd in a boardroom?

Well, as you may know, starting in 1886, the Supreme Court has given corporations constitutional rights and protections equal to that of human beings; we therefore believe that any outward discrimination of our candidacy would be in violation of our 14th Amendment right of equal protection.

That said, American citizens -- Oregonians included -- have already shown their willingness to allow the corporate elite to run their political bodies. All one has to do is look at the current executive, legislative, or judicial branches of government to see that, if America continues on the same path, direct corporate plutocratic control is the logical next step.

Currently, corporations, along with prison inmates and illegal aliens, are not legally able to vote in elections. How does your candidate stand on the issue of corporate suffrage and, should it be elected, will it work toward that end?

First I must say that denying the vote to corporations is a horrible injustice and a stark example of the discriminatory anti-corporate society in which we exist. That said, universal suffrage indicates an election system in which each entity has one vote with which to express its political will. While this idea has its merits, it is the opinion of Rich CorporateSon, Inc. that it cuts too close to communism and must be abolished.

This corporation is presenting an election system in which the Fed, through the time-tested open market system will release voting credits for sale. Each credit, whose price will be determined by the invisible hand of supply and demand, will be publicly traded from the date of release to Election Day, when they will be redeemed for the candidate of the owners' choice. Public trading of vote credits will be done through pre-existing markets and will be available to the global market under WTO regulations.

Elections will become a commercial venture and the average Joe is pushed out of the electoral system. How would you convince the vast majority of citizens to pay taxes or join the military?

The average Joe is already out of the electoral system. The decline of the middle class and a decrease in real income has created a social climate in which keeping up with politics is a virtually impossible task for the average person. We're prepared to take advantage of this situation and count on no one noticing that the needs and motivations of a corporation are not the same as that of a human being.

Was Rich CorporateSon, Inc. ever a member of the armed forces and what was its role, if any, in the Vietnam War?

Rich CorporateSon, Inc. was chartered in March of 2006 and so was not able to be directly involved in the Vietnam War. The larger corporate role in war, Vietnam et al, however, cannot be ignored. We produce the guns, bombs, and chemicals with which neo-capitalist imperial rule is spread across the globe. This corporation views war as a convenient way to raise aggregate demand without driving up the price of labor, and will work to keep America in a constant state of warfare.

Well, as governor of Oregon, Rich CorporateSon, Inc. won't have control of foreign policy, will it?

Though starting in Oregon, our goal is to create an empire beyond the boundaries of the state. Free trade should include power as well as goods and services. As a soon-to-be very rich corporation we will control many levels of government, state and federal, through lobbying and campaign donations. If war is what we want, war is what we'll get.

One last question, if elected, how does Rich CorporateSon, Inc. plan to occupy Mahonia Hall, the Governor's residence? I have a tough time imagining that.

As you know, a corporation is a legal fiction; it exists only because we say it does. It does not require clean air, fresh water, or a house in which to live; these are some of the reasons why corporations are better than people. Since it will not be needed for residential purposes, Mahonia Hall will be converted into offices for use by executive officers.

Behind the Rich CorporateSon, Inc. Candidacy

Rich CorporateSon, Inc is a real corporation, incorporated by End Corporate Personhood (ecp) in Oregon. Is it a "real" candidate for governor? Not this year. The spoof political campaign is designed to wake people up to the idiocy and dangers of treating corporations as if they were people.

As silly as it may seem, Shane Parker Alan, ecp's public relations coordinator, is certain that corporate candidacy is a future possibility. He claims corporations have been given the "same constitutional rights and protections as if they were individual human beings." As an example, he related that the Supreme Court ruled big-box stores cannot be voted out of town to protect the local economy. "It would be a violation of the corporation's 14th Amendment right of equal protection." From there he claims it would be reasonable to assume it would also be "a violation of equal protection to prevent them from running for public office."

The ecp views corporate personhood as dangerously undemocratic. They hope that when the public comes to recognize "the underlying threat it poses to society", they will join in ecp's mission -- "to take back the constitution and give corporations privileges, not rights, to be granted and revoked at the will of the people."

For more information, visit the ecp website at http://www.ecporegon.org .