Thom Hartmann: 'Now your vote is the
property of a private corporation'
Posted on Tuesday, March 11 @ 09:36:02 EST
By Thom
Hartmann
"The right of voting for
representatives is the primary right by which all other
rights are protected. To take away this right is to
reduce a man to slavery...." - Thomas Paine
Santa Clara County, of all jurisdictions in
America, should have known better. They could have
started by looking at Florida.
Jeb Bush stole
the vote in Florida in 2000 by kicking thousands of
legitimately registered black voters off the voting
rolls because they had similar names to Texas felons, a
feat well documented by Greg Palast and the mainstream
British press. In a brilliant bit of misdirection, Bush
portrayed the problem as one of incompetent elderly
voters, dumb minority voters, and a problem with "chads"
- unreliable voting technology.
Bush's answer
was to install touch-screen voting machines across
Florida in time for the 2002 election. (In this, he was
following a similar course as Georgia, Texas, and 30
other key states, in large part because of $3.9 billion
in federal funds offered by the "Help America Vote Act"
passed just after the 2000 election to encourage states
to replace government-run paper-trail vote systems with
no-paper-trail computerized systems from private
corporate vendors.)
But in the November
2002 election, when some Florida voters pressed the
touch-screen "button" for Bush's Democratic opponent,
votes were instead recorded for Bush. "Misaligned"
touch-screen voting machines were blamed for the
computer-driven vote-theft, and when a losing candidate
in Palm Beach sued to inspect the software of Florida's
computerized voting machines, a local judge denied the
petition, citing the privacy rights of the corporation
that wrote the programs.
This was followed by
January 2003 revelations that Republican Senator Chuck
Hagel was the former head (and a current stockholder) of
the private voting machine company that tabulated the
vote in Nebraska - where he ran for office and won - and
that he had neglected to tell Senate ethics
investigators about it.
And in February of 2003,
Bev Harris of www.blackboxvoting.com noticed a wide-open
FTP site. Harris had just done a Google search on the
company that tabulated most of the vote in Georgia in
the 2002 election. (That was the upset election that saw
popular war-hero Max Cleland, who lost three limbs in
Vietnam, defeated by a poll-trailing draft dodger who
campaigned by questioning Cleland's patriotism.) Walking
into the unsecured FTP website, she says she found a
software patch that was apparently applied statewide to
Georgia's voting machines just days before the election,
and a folder titled "rob-georgia."
And corporate
control of America's vote has reached beyond the borders
of this nation. The last week of February, New York's
"Newsday" reported in a story by staff writer Mark
Harrington that: "Election.com, a struggling Garden City
start-up scheduled to provide online absentee ballots
for U.S. military personnel in the 2004 federal
election, has quietly sold controlling power to an
investment group with ties to unnamed Saudi nationals,
according to company correspondence."
Fast-forward a few days to the first week of
March, 2003.
Dan Spillane, a former software
engineer for a voting machine company that includes a
former CIA Director and Dick Cheney's former assistant
on its board of directors, has sued his employer for
firing him when he pointed out holes in their system
that he claims could lead to vote-rigging. Although
there is a certification process for ensuring the
honesty of votes tabulated by computerized, touch-screen
voting machines, according to Spillane the system works
"very much like Arthur Andersen in the Enron case." (
Anderson Consulting has renamed itself, added
Microsoft's CEO to its board, and gone into the business
of helping corporations get contracts to perform
previously-government-run services.)
Spillane
filed his lawsuit the same week that Santa Clara County,
California decided to hand their electoral process over
to computerized electronic voting machines programmed by
a private corporation. The machines generate no paper
trail that can be audited, and when voting machine
companies have been challenged to produce audits of
their vote or to disclose details of their software,
they cite the privacy rights that come from corporations
being considered "persons" in the United States.
Of all localities in America, Santa Clara County
should have been the wariest. This is the county, after
all, that sued the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1886
over non-payment of taxes and, in losing the lawsuit,
paved the way for the corporate takeover of the United
States of America.
When the railroad suggested
to the Supreme Court that the Fourteenth Amendment,
which freed the slaves by guaranteeing all persons equal
protection under the law regardless of race, had also
freed corporations because they should be considered
"persons" just like humans, the attorney for Santa Clara
County, Delphin M. Delmas, fought back ferociously.
"The shield behind which [the Southern Pacific
Railroad] attacks the Constitution and laws of
California is the Fourteenth Amendment," said Delmas
before the Supreme Court. "It argues that the Amendment
guarantees to every person within the jurisdiction of
the State the equal protection of the laws; that a
corporation is a person; that, therefore, it must
receive the same protection as that accorded to all
other persons in like circumstances."
The entire
idea was beyond the pale, Delmas said. "The whole
history of the Fourteenth Amendment," he told the Court,
"demonstrates beyond dispute that its whole scope and
object was to establish equality between men - an
attainable result - and not to establish equality
between natural and artificial beings - an impossible
result."
The purpose of the Fourteenth
Amendment, passed just after the Civil War, was clear,
Delmas said. "Its mission was to raise the humble, the
down-trodden, and the oppressed to the level of the most
exalted upon the broad plane of humanity - to make man
the equal of man; but not to make the creature of the
State - the bodiless, soulless, and mystic creature
called a corporation - the equal of the creature of
God."
He summarized his pleadings before the
Supreme Court by saying, "Therefore, I venture to repeat
that the Fourteenth Amendment does not command equality
between human beings and corporations; that the state
need not subject corporations to the same laws which
govern natural persons; that it may, without infringing
the rule of equality, confer upon corporations rights,
privileges, and immunities which are not enjoyed by
natural persons; that it may, for the same reasons,
impose burdens upon a corporation, in the shape of
taxation or otherwise, which are not imposed upon
natural persons."
Delmas had every reason to
assume the Court would agree with him - it already had
in several similar cases. In an 1873 decision, Justice
Samuel F. Miller wrote in the majority opinion that the
Fourteenth Amendment's "one pervading purpose was the
freedom of the slave race, the security and firm
establishment of that freedom, and the protection of the
newly-made freeman and citizen from the oppression of
those who had formerly exercised unlimited dominion over
him."
And, in fact, the Court chose to stay with
its previous precedent. It ruled on the tax aspects of
the case, but explicitly avoided any decision on whether
or not corporations were persons. "There will be no
occasion to consider the grave questions of
constitutional law" raised by the railroad, the Court
ruled in its majority opinion. The case was about
property taxes and not personhood, and, "As the judgment
can be sustained upon this ground, it is not necessary
to consider any other questions raised by the
pleadings."
But just as computerized voting
machines can be reprogrammed, so too, apparently, could
a U.S. Supreme Court decision. The Court's reporter - a
former railroad president - took it upon himself to
grant corporations personhood in the commentary (headnote) he wrote on the case, even though it
explicitly contradicted the Justices' ruling itself.
(And to this day other forms of association, like
unions, unincorporated small businesses, and even
governments do not have personhood rights.)
But
corporations have claimed the First Amendment right of
persons to free speech and struck down thousands of
state and federal laws against corporations giving money
to politicians or influencing elections; they've claimed
Fourteenth Amendment rights against discrimination to
prevent communities from "discriminating" against huge
out-of-town retailers or corporate criminals; and have
claimed Fourth Amendment rights of privacy that will
prevent voters or public officials from examining the
software that runs their computerized voting machines.
Now corporations will be telling the citizens of
Santa Clara County how they voted. And those same
corporations will use the shield of corporate personhood
- once valiantly disputed before the Supreme Court by
the County's attorney - to withhold from the County's
voters the right to "look behind the curtain" at the
corporate-owned software and computerized processes that
tabulate their vote. How sadly ironic.
Thom
Hartmann is the author of "Unequal Protection: The Rise
of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights."
http://www.unequalprotection.com/ and
http://www.thomhartmann.com/. This
article is copyright by Thom Hartmann, but permission is
granted for reprint in print, email, or web media so
long as this credit is attached.