Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jefferson's and Madison's 11th amendment that didn't get included

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:20 PM
Original message
Jefferson's and Madison's 11th amendment that didn't get included
Jefferson Was Right
By: Dr. Michael P. Byron - 05/24/03

Most Americans don’t know it but Thomas Jefferson, along with James Madison worked assiduously to have an 11th Amendment included into our nation’s original Bill of Rights. This proposed Amendment would have prohibited “monopolies in commerce.” The amendment would have made it illegal for corporations to own other corporations, or to give money to politicians, or to otherwise try to influence elections. Corporations would be chartered by the states for the primary purpose of “serving the public good.” Corporations would possess the legal status not of natural persons but rather of “artificial persons.” This means that they would have only those legal attributes which the state saw fit to grant to them. They would NOT; and indeed could NOT possess the same bundle of rights which actual flesh and blood persons enjoy. Under this proposed amendment neither the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, nor any provision of that document would protect the artificial entities known of as corporations.

Jefferson and Madison were so insistent upon this amendment because the American Revolution was in substantial degree a revolt against the domination of colonial economic and political life by the greatest multinational corporation of its age: the British East India Company. After all who do you think owned the tea which Sam Adams and friends dumped overboard in Boston Harbor? Who was responsible for the taxes on commodities and restrictions on trade by the American colonists? It was the British East India Company, of course. In the end the amendment was not adopted because a majority in the first Congress believed that already existing state laws governing corporations were adequate for constraining corporate power. Jefferson worried about the growing influence of corporate power until his dying day in 1826. Even the more conservative founder John Adams came to harbor deep misgivings about unchecked corporate power.

A few years after Jefferson’s unsuccessful attempt to incorporate this amendment into the Bill of Rights, the fourth Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, John Marshall, unilaterally asserted the Court’s right to judicial review in the seminal case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803. In practice this meant that the Supreme Court would have sole and unchecked power to determine what the Constitution meant. Jefferson was aghast. His fear lay in the knowledge that an unelected branch of government, one which is not subject to the will of the citizens, and is effectively immune from check by the two elected branches of government (Only one Supreme Court Justice has ever been impeached—none have ever been convicted and removed) was now solely responsible for determining the meaning of the Constitution. The meaning of the Constitution, and hence the very nature of our political system, was now in the hands of an un-elected and effectively uncontrollable body. “The Constitution has become a thing of wax to be molded as the Court sees fit” Jefferson lamented.

............... snip >>>>>>

Link: http://soundingcircle.com/newslog2.php/__show_article/_a000195-000205.htm
Dr. Mike Byron, a contributing writer for Liberal Slant, teaches Political Science at CSU San Marcos, as well as at Palomar, Mira Costa, and Mesa Colleges. He was the Democratic Party’s write-in candidate for the 49th Congressional District last year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. This Is Very Important
monopolies are destructive to a democracy, and instead supports it's opposite, fascism. And today we see it more than ever....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I was thinking as I was reading this, that they would be horrified to
see the state of our country -- and the monopolies/corporations -- today. They would weep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Yes, because "the monopolies/corporations" control information
Edited on Fri Sep-05-08 09:37 PM by fascisthunter
and with an uniformed or worse, misinformed public(FOX NEWS VIEWERS), a nation becomes corrupted, because democracy itself is smothered. We live in a very sick nation.... and the GOP intends on killing it to rebuild it, in their own totalitarian image.

When they said "revolution", they meant it literally, not figuratively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. That is really interesting -- thanks!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
5. Frankly, I think John Adams wrote the most persuasive arguments against monopoly
He wasn't "more conservative", he was careful. When he made a decision, he was at the front of the pack all the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. What might have been...
I revere Thomas Jefferson.

Hekate


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. Fascinating.
Of course, their "twelfth" Amendment eventually made it in as the 27th because it had no expiration date. How many states would still be needed to put this one over the top?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-06-08 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. 75% of 50 states = 37.5 = 38 states. nt
Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-06-08 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Yes, but how many states have already ratified it is the question?
Was this one that never saw the light of day at all? Or was it one where 3/4 just didn't approve it back then, but might now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-07-08 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. Try this.....
Edited on Sun Sep-07-08 02:07 AM by suston96
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-07-08 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Ah. Never mind.
So this never even got to the ratification stage. Sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-06-08 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
9. I so wish... knr n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-06-08 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
12. We left these niceties behind some time ago.
The Constitution, such as it is, or such as Jefferson might have wanted it, was thrown into the dustbin some time ago. We keep it around as an object of respect, but nobody reads it much, or considers that one must follow it when it becomes inconvenient.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-06-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
13. Great article ...
but Mike ran in 2004, I think. My friend, Jeeni Criscenzo, ran for the 49th in 2006. She was the offical Dem candidate.

Mike gave a talk at our Citizens for Democracy meeting a few weeks ago; he has a new book out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC