Corporations Vs. Citizens

The issue at hand is whether or not corporations have the same right as citizens when involved in choosing our political candidates.  Well a corporation defined by dictionary.com is “an association of individuals, created by law or under authority of law, having a continuous existence independent of the existences of its members, and powers and liabilities distinct from those of its members.” The answer is right here!!  It’s an association that exists independently from its members.  I would consider it more like a thing than a being the first amendment talks about the freedom of speech.  It doesn’t say anything about bribing other people and other corporations so that they can have their way.  How would that make them equal when one has the upper hand?   

Of course there are always two sides to a story.  Citizens United, as already noted are a non-profit conservative media company.  When looking at their website they claim that they are “an organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizens' control. Through a combination of education, advocacy, and grass roots organization, Citizens United seeks to reassert the traditional American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security. Citizens United's goal is to restore the founding fathers' vision of a free nation, guided by the honesty, common sense, and good will of its citizens.  If this is what they truly believe in, then why did they try to get the Fahrenheit 9/11 banned when Michael Moore was only trying to let the people see the truth behind the Bush family and elections?  That movie was a way of alerting people to connections that people with money can have.  We saw the connections that were made and we were left to make our own decisions to make.  Then Citizens United contradicted themselves by making their own documentary, this time attacking Hillary Clinton.  So at this point they are only trying to make freedom of speech ok for corporations and not individuals such as Michael Moore. 

Justice Stevens believes that “... the patronage system was a misuse of government power; the government has a duty to act impartially.”  This shows that the government needs to act fair and not rely on other sources to sell them out.  The citizens of this country are hard working people with only their voices as their weapon and if corporations want to be treated the same then they should only use their voices without the influences that money has to offer.  Corporations use their numbers against the citizens.  As pointed out by Susan Mckevitt, “We have to get back to one person, one vote, and not have it be millionaires count and the common people don't,"

From everything I have read my decision stands firm that corporations don’t have the rights of individual citizens.  As previously stated one person one vote is the way it should be.  Not a corporation with hundreds of members.  Each of those members needs to act independently in order to be fair.  Corporations use their power and money to influence decisions made that leads to the people we have running the country.  How is that considered equal when each individual only has their opinion and their voice to offer?  The Preamble to the constitution states “We the people,” not “We the corporations.” 

Facts:
“Organization dedicated to restoring government…”
http://www.citizensunited.org/who-we-are.aspx

Justice Stevens “patronage system is a misuse….”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130198344

Susan Mckevitt “one person one vote….”
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/315246/petitioned-warrant-articles-decry-citizens-united-case?SESSc32f76032d4fb31db2659f73b6732bfa=google&page=full