Press "Enter" to skip to content

Green Party 2004 Presidential Candidate David Cobb gives anti-corporate personhood presentation in Arizona

Posted at Green Party Watch by Dave Schwab.

David Cobb, the Green Party’s 2004 candidate for president, has been active recently as a leader of Move To Amend,

a coalition working for a Constitutional Amendment to establish that constitutional rights are for humans, not corporations. The Arizona Daily Wildcat recently covered Cobb’s presentation at the University of Arizona in Tucson:

David Cobb, the 2004 Green Party presidential candidate, gave a presentation at the UA Law School on April 13 describing why citizens should be working towards amending the Constitution.

“I am a proud, patriotic and pissed off American,” Cobb said.

Cobb’s talk challenged the audience to answer a specific question: Should corporations have the same rights as individual citizens?

You can read the full article at the Arizona Daily Wildcat.

About Post Author


  1. Dave Schwab Dave Schwab April 22, 2010

    Wrong. The Green Party has a bank account and other privileges because it has a corporate charter. “Corporate personhood” is the legal doctrine that corporations possess the same rights as humans. In practice, this means that corporations have more rights than human beings do, since corporations can live forever and can have limited liability and other privileges under law that people do not. This doctrine was recently expressed by the Citizens United decision, which states that money equals free speech, corporations equal humans, and therefore the First Amendment grants corporations the right to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections.

    At the time the US Constitution was written, there were corporate charters granting corporations certain privileges and responsibilities. If they did not fulfill their responsibilities, their privileges would be revoked. There was no corporate personhood. Corporate personhood is not necessary or desirable. Corporate personhood has been effectively written into the Constitution via Supreme Court decisions by corporatist judges who were appointed by corporatist politicians. If we are to have democracy in fact and not just an elaborate puppet show mimicking democracy, corporate personhood must be abolished.

  2. Gene Berkman Gene Berkman April 21, 2010


    Corporate personhood does not just refer to incorporated entitities. Any association, club or anything else other than a human being or a married couple has corporate personhood so that it can open a bank account, enter into contracts, hire people etc.

    the “Corporate” in corporate personhood refers to the entity not being a natural human being, but having certain rights that pertain to personhood.

  3. More Amen .......... Lake More Amen .......... Lake April 21, 2010

    3 responses so far ? // 1 Gene Berkman :

    “If the Green Party opposes Corporate Person hood, they should be consistent with their own principles, and disencorporate the party.”

    [and there is always ‘Go easy on weak Dem districts’ and the Patricia LaMarshe’s classic ‘Don’t Vote For Me’ ………]

  4. paulie paulie April 21, 2010


    As far as I know, any business or political group can do all the above, not just those that incorporate.

    Is the GPUS actually incorporated?

  5. Richard Winger Richard Winger April 21, 2010

    Also, the New York Times is a corporation. Does anyone think the government has the right to tell the New York Times not to run editorials mentioning an opinion about candidates for federal office?

  6. Gene Berkman Gene Berkman April 21, 2010

    If the Green Party really opposes Corporate Personhood, they can go first!

    I understand that the Green Party has a bank account, can buy ads in newspapers, can hire people to do party work etc. These are all possible because the Green Party has corporate personhood.

    If the Green Party opposes Corporate Personhood, they should be consistent with their own principles, and discorporate the party.

Comments are closed.