The S.C. Republican Party asked the State of South Carolina’s Election Commission to approve a ballot question that appears to mock a controversial statement made earlier this year by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
First, here’s the question the SCGOP attempted to place on South Carolina’s “First in the South” presidential primary ballot:
“In order to address the matter of Corporate Personhood, the enfranchised People of the Sovereign State of South Carolina shall decree that: ( ) Corporations are people. ( ) Only people are people.”
The question was prepared by Butch Bowers, an attorney for the party. It was one of four questions the SCGOP hoped to add to the presidential preference primary ballot. The other questions dealt with a federal balanced budget amendment, increased domestic energy production and the controversial National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) lawsuit against Boeing.
What’s the connection between Romney and corporate “personhood?” Well, a few months ago Romney argued during an appearance at the Iowa State Fair that corporations were … well, people.
“Corporations are people, my friend,” Romney said, responding to a heckler.
Obviously, the inclusion of such language on the ballot could have created an interesting dynamic for Romney.
“We almost had a situation where the state simultaneously affirmed that corporations were not people while electing a Republican nominee who stated definitively that they were,” one GOP operative told FITS.
None of the four questions made it onto the ballot thanks to a November 22 S.C. Supreme Court ruling.
In fact according to a source at the State Election Commission, paper ballots for members of the military are being mailed out today in advance of the January 21 election – ballots which included the lone presidential preference question.
Stephen Colbert
A source close to the party says the ballot question originated during negotiations between the SCGOP and a political action committee run by Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert.
Colbert – a Charleston, S.C. native – originally sought naming rights to the primary (i.e. “The Colbert Nation Super PAC Presidential Primary”) as well as the opportunity to host a debate in South Carolina. The “corporate personhood” ballot question grew out of the party’s negotiations with Colbert, the source says.
S.C. Democratic Party Chairman Dick Harpootlian has filed a motion asking the Supreme Court to revisit its prior ruling.
“It is important that we all know how the Palmetto State feels about this defining issue,” Harpootlian said, specifically referencing the corporate personhood question.
Meanwhile Democratic operative Tyler Jones said that the whole episode raised questions about the party’s integrity.
“This is what happens when an Amway salesman leads a party full of snake handlers,” Jones said.
Ouch …
SCGOP executive director Matt Moore said the ballot language had everything to do with its negotiations with Colbert – and nothing to do with Romney.
“The World’s Most Famous Living South Carolinian, Stephen Colbert, contacted the SCGOP and offered a significant sponsorship from his Super PAC,” Moore said. “If there’s one thing Stephen loves more than South Carolina peaches, it’s her politics. However, in this case, the partnership just didn’t fit. We give him a tip of the hat.”
***
By matt December 7, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Wow, could SCGOP ‘boss hog’ Chad Connelly be more of a shill for Rick ‘um, what the third one?’ Perry? My goodness.
By BigT December 7, 2011 at 1:35 pm
Anti-Obama, Anti-Occupy….
Obama and Occupy HATE “Corporations.” Even FITS, Haley and the Tea Party call competing for job-producing companies “Corporate Welfare”…showing that they HATE Corporatios too…
What FITS and Co. have not firured out: Corporations fuel the Hand-outs and liberal elite lifestyles for the politicians they worship…
Liberal greed, where you covet what others EARN, is the ugliest greed….
By Shanky December 7, 2011 at 3:24 pm
got shanked!
By Cid December 7, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Wouldn’t you love to see a corporation nude “t?”
By Sailor December 7, 2011 at 3:30 pm
So, Big T(urd), you’re admitting in your second last paragraph that the corporations are bribing the politicians for their preferencial treatment and tax loopholes. Remember General Electric? G.E. made billions and paid zero income tax. What’s not to despise?
Seems to me, your hero Newt is the biggest pig at the trough!
Shouldn’t everyone and corporations pay their fair share?
By BigT December 7, 2011 at 3:38 pm
Sailor: you can either compete, or become like the Liberal Rust Belt…
It’s dolts like FITS and you, who call SC backwards…
Truth is: When we followed your advice, and the advice of the liebrals, we were backwards…
Now we’re gaining population, political clout and we are competing for jobs in the worst economy in my lifetime…
Corporations send kids to college, pay for babies to be born and finance braces…Hate them at your own ignorance…
By Godslayer December 7, 2011 at 3:36 pm
The real question is whether Mitt Romney is people or some kind of robotic-android experiment gone horribly wrong.
By Carl Childers December 7, 2011 at 3:54 pm
T, while I agree with you that is ill advised to hate corporations, we must also acknowledge that they are legal entities, not people. If a legal entity is entitled to avoid taxes, then they do not have a voice or vote.
As to corporate welfare, does ANYONE deny that it exists?
By BigT December 7, 2011 at 4:13 pm
So Carl: churches cannot vote of lobby? What about food banks or other charities???
And since we’re told Obama is a shoe-in because 50 percent pay no taxes, can they also be forbidden from voting????
Corporations should have the same rights as anyone. Just because liberals villify them, is no reason to attack them…
Also: If corporations are getting special political favors because they contribute to Obama, as GE does, then that should be looked into…that is an EXTRA right…or a form of bribery…
By Jan December 7, 2011 at 6:08 pm
Corporation are not people and they should have no rights. The owners of the Corporation have the rights. Now actions against a corporation can affect the property rights of the underlying owners, and the corporation owners should be allowed to assert those rights. That is not hating corporation, that is just common sense.
When you elevate entities to the level of people, you have a very perverted view of the corporate model. Corporations are not real. They are just a piece of paper, acknowledging that a group of people have banded together to operate a business.
By Carl Childers December 7, 2011 at 8:58 pm
So Carl: churches cannot vote of lobby? What about food banks or other charities???
Answer: No. They should not be allowed to lobby. Charities should have no say in the structure or form of government in which they exist. They are just a different for of corporation.
And since we’re told Obama is a shoe-in because 50 percent pay no taxes, can they also be forbidden from voting????
Answer: Yes. Anyone on the government dole should be restricted from voting until they become taxpayers. And what does this have to do with corporations? Why do you present so many red herrings?
Corporations should have the same rights as anyone. Just because liberals villify them, is no reason to attack them…
Answer: What you talking about?? Conservatives vilify corporations also, like unions, which are nothing but corporations.
Corporations are not people. They are a legal form for tax purposes. They should have no personal rights.
By Dot December 8, 2011 at 5:40 am
A vote for Newt is a vote for 4 more years of obama. Newt cannot win the general election
By hisgirlfriday December 8, 2011 at 8:48 am
So how much was Colbert offering the SCGOP to do his bidding to give him a few jokes for his show?
Shouldn’t the SCGOP be at least the little bit embarrassed they took money from Colbert’s SuperPAC?
By Trevor Bauknight December 8, 2011 at 10:10 am
It isn’t so much hating corporations, BigT, as simply believing they aren’t “people” entitled to the rights and protections of the Constitution. A corporation can never be a citizen.