Rick Claypool

Like lots of Americans, I don’t really think of myself as an investor, but I am.

I’m an investor because I have a 401(k)-type retirement account. Which means that some significant part of my financial future depends, for better or for worse, on corporate profits, stock performance, and other creatures of the market.

Because I’m an investor, it’s the job of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to look out for my interests, whether or not I am aware of it. About 50 percent of U.S. households are investors of some kind or another. Some are the day-trading aficionados who follow the market as tenaciously as my father-in-law tracks his fantasy football team. Some are like me – we’re investors because that’s the kind of retirement account we were offered for our jobs.

Either way, the SEC is the agency that’s supposed to prevent corporate malefactors from abusing the money we shareholders invest in them. By law, that basically means that these corporations are required to spend shareholder money in ways that will increase profits – profits that are supposed to, among other things, boost my retirement account, since that’s where the money came from. The good folks from Occupy the SEC have a good primer on what it does, from an activist perspective.

Then, about two years ago, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission happened – and a brave new world of ways to spend investor money to influence elections was opened up.

The fact that the SEC looks out for shareholder interests is actually a big part of why Citizens United came down the way it did. Consider the words of Justice Anthony Kennedy in his majority opinion in that ruling:

With the advent of the Internet, prompt disclosure of expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions. […] Shareholders can determine whether their corporation’s political speech advances the corporation’s interest in making profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are in the pocket of so-called moneyed interests.

But Justice Kennedy was wrong. Congress has failed so far to pass laws requiring corporations to disclose their political spending or to require shareholder approval of corporate political activity. The Internet, instead of providing a wealth of information to hold politically active corporations accountable, is increasingly where we see political ads funded by anonymous corporate interests.

Because of Citizens United, my family’s nest egg has become a political weapon for the corporate agenda. I have no way of knowing whether my money is being used to make attack ads for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or Karl Rove’s American Crossroads GPS.

Here’s where the SEC has the authority to step in.

Analysis by Public Citizen’s Taylor Lincoln and Harvard Law School’s John Coates, Ph.D., found that companies that disclose their electioneering activities tend to bring higher returns on investments to shareholders than companies that do note disclose their political activities. For shareholders who are exclusively interested in protecting their investments, this correlation suggests that requiring corporations to be transparent about their political activities would not harm these investments.

The SEC also should empower shareholders to have a say whether and how corporations spend their money in elections. If a majority of shareholders do not support corporate political spending, then that company should not spend its money in politics.

Getting the SEC to step in and police corporate political activity would be a tremendous victory, but the agency isn’t going to act without pressure. Already, legal scholars and other experts have started weighing in with the SEC on how it could do this work. We at Public Citizen have convened the Corporate Reform Coalition, a diverse group of more than 70 different organizations working together to compel the SEC to act. Soon, we’ll need help from activists all over the country to help us convince the SEC that, because of Citizens United, cracking down on corporate political activity is now part of its job.

We’re also fighting for constitutional amendment to fully upend the Supreme Court’s perverse Citizens United ruling. Combating corporate influence in elections promises to be a long, arduous campaign over the next several years, and we’re committed to doing everything it takes to end corporate domination and put people back in charge of our government.

Help us rein in corporate influence. Sign up to receive emails in order to stay informed about opportunities to take action.

Share/Bookmark

Rick Claypool, online organizer for Public Citizen's Congress Watch

Every time I send an email to urge folks to contact their members of Congress, I get a handful of replies that resemble one or the other of these two quotes:

1.) “I’m not going to contact my member of Congress because he is a crazy, extreme, corrupt nincompoop who is going to vote whichever way the corporate lobbyists tell him to vote.”

2.) “I’m not going contact my member of Congress because I know she cares about consumers, the environment, social justice and generally shares my utopian vision of a perfect world.”

Believe me folks, if you’re looking for a reason not to have to deal with the quagmire of vitriol and rancor that is the 112^th Congress, I hear you.

And I wish I could say, “Yeah, don’t bother. You with the corrupt member of Congress and you with the just and principled member of Congress, don’t worry about it. The people who really need to contact their members of Congress – whoever they are – will do so. You can just sit this one out.”

But I can’t say that. Because it’s not true. And that’s not how democracy works.

To the person who says he has a corrupt, corporate-influenced member of Congress, I say this:

“Do you really think it’s better if this member of Congress only hears from people who AGREE with him? If you feel like you’re being ignored, at least you can hold him accountable for that – and at least he knows you’re there.

“By not contacting his office, you’ve made it so he doesn’t even have to bother ignoring you. He doesn’t even know you’re there.

“Let’s get something straight: there are millions of us. We’re the American people. We are the 900-pound gorilla in the room. Our members of Congress are free to ignore the people, if they choose. But if they do, we can (and should) make it very, very uncomfortable for them. At minimum, we should not take for granted our power to make our presence known.”

To the person who says she has a brilliant member of Congress whose values are identical to her own, I say this:

“Do you really think it’s better if your member of Congress only hears from people who DISAGREE with her? Because if you think your member of Congress cares about public health, safety and the environment, then, chances are, there are corporate interests that will spend unlimited amounts of money to flood her office with negative messages.

“By not contacting her office, you’ve made it easy for her to doubt the existence and support of people like you who think she’s doing the right things.

“Meanwhile, she’s not ignoring you. She’s working for you. But if you ignore her – and she only hears from the loudest and shrillest of her political opponents – she might think her constituents really don’t support the strong, substantial reforms that are necessary to fix our nation’s worst problems.

“She might suppose the best she can do – and therefore the best use of her energy – is to pass meager half-measures. Because that’s what she thinks her constituents want.”

As our appallingly unpopular Congress resumes its work this fall,  they’re going to try to pass some bills. Some of them will be terrible. Some of them will be beneficial.

So, please, when I (and others working on progressive campaigns) urge you to contact your members of Congress about pressing legislation, please do so. Because I can guarantee that if you’re not contacting your legislators, someone else is.

Visit Public Citizen’s online action center for ways to get involved and sign up for emails.

Share/Bookmark

One of our supporters emailed me this awesome video of an impressively well-choreographed and performed flash mob protest, big band and all. It made my day, and I just had to share. I hope you’ll share it too.

Their tune is a protest song about unlimited corporate spending to influence elections – and it’s played to the melody of “Sixteen Tons,” a classic anthem of worker struggles. Only now, instead of owing our soul to the “company store,” today it seems more like it’s our “company Congress” that’s lost its soul.

Want to join the movement that’s working toward solutions to the corporate corruption of our government? Sign the petition at www.democracyisforpeople.org.

To the folks who made this video: Bravo! It’s protests like this that bring life to our movement and inspire us to keep taking action.

Do you have a video, song, image, slogan or other artwork you’ve created to protest the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission? If so, let us know.

Post a link to your protest art in the comments section below, or send it in an email to amendment@citizen.org.

UPDATE: Aug. 26, 2011

I’d like to give credit where credit is due. Phyllis Meshulam, the supporter who contacted me, is the director, organizer and lyricist behind the flash mob.

Inspired by the “Target Ain’t People” video from last summer, Meshulam and other members of the Sonoma County, California, MoveOn group – particularly choreographer Mary Ann Ciavonne and solo vocalist Dusty Wroten – made the video happen.

To organize the flash mob, the group networked broadly and enlisted the help of the Hubbub Club Band, and singer and dancer friends. Burning Token Media did the videography, and James Marchbanks and Michael Litle, a Communications Professor from Sonoma State University, did the final editing.

Again, bravo!

Share/Bookmark

Their message was simple: We must reclaim democracy from the limitless corporate influence unleashed by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Thanks to the thousands of activists who participated, the message may have reached as many as a million people. That’s an awesome impact for just one day of action!

Now it’s time to take the next step.

Right now, our members of Congress are in their home states. They will be away from Washington, D.C., until Sept. 6 so they can hear from their constituents.

We’ve put together a web page of tools and tips you can use to organize meetings with your members of Congress and other actions to oppose the corporate takeover of our democracy.

Follow this link for tools and tips for local organizing.

One of the most exciting resources on this page is the “Local Activism Bulletin Board” we set up so you can let others know if you’re organizing locally.

You can use the bulletin board to post details of events and contact information so others in your area will be able to reach you.

Margaret Mead famously said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

Time for us thoughtful, committed citizens to get to work!

Share/Bookmark

It is disappointing that the president didn’t pick Elizabeth Warren.

But it is heartening that Elizabeth Warren picked Richard Cordray.

As Warren was assembling the new agency, she chose Cordray, a former Ohio State Attorney General, to run the agency’s enforcement division. She did so because of his history of standing up for consumers and winning against Wall Street and big banks that tried to rip off their customers.

Here’s what Elizabeth Warren said when she heard Cordray was nominated to lead the bureau:

“Rich has a proven track record of fighting for families during his time as head of the CFPB enforcement division, as Attorney General of Ohio, and throughout his career. He was one of the first senior executives I recruited for the agency, and his hard work and deep commitment make it clear that he can make many important contributions in leading this agency. He will make a stellar director. I am very pleased for Rich and very pleased for the CFPB.”

But 44 Republican senators have pledged to oppose ANY director unless the bureau is weakened first.

As Ohio’s Attorney General, Cordray aggressively stood up to banks engaging in deceptive practices and rampant foreclosures, and ultimately saved residents of that state more than $2 billion.

Make sure your senators — especially if you have a Republican senator — know that you support Richard Cordray and a strong Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Tell your senators: Confirm Cordray.

Share/Bookmark

Public Citizen online organizer Rick Claypool at the Target protest (via Eric Russell/USW)

Opponents of corporate money’s corrupting influence in politics made their presence known loud and clear during Target Corporation’s annual shareholder meeting yesterday in Pittsburgh.

More than 100 protesters bearing signs with messages such as “Hands Off our Elections,” “Corporations are not people,” and “No Mouth, No Soul, No $peech” rallied outside of the not-yet-opened Target store in the East Liberty neighborhood of Pittsburgh, Pa.

Several of the demonstrators – acting as proxies on behalf of Target shareholders – entered the shareholder meeting to interrogate CEO Gregg Steinhafel about the corporation’s expenditure of $150,000 to support an extreme right-wing candidate during the 2010 elections.

Questions about corporate money in politics in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission dominated the shareholder question and answer session.

Clearly, this was something CEO Steinhafel did not want to talk about. After several questions on different aspects of the corporate donation, he pleaded with the audience for somebody to ask a question about something else.

I then approached the microphone, explained my role at the shareholder meeting speaking as a proxy for the Sisters of Notre Dame, and asked yet another question – specifically, querying how the corporate spending is accounted for and pressing Steinhafel on the difference between Target’s lobbying money and its campaign expenditures, something the CEO had conflated in his explanations.

Several more questions followed about corporate money in politics followed. A fashion publication reported Steinhafel was “embattled and annoyed” by the question and answer session.

Disappointingly (but unsurprisingly), Target still refuses to cease or even commit to full disclosure of its political activities.

Nevertheless, the demonstration and shareholder question and answer session sent a strong message to corporations that they will be held accountable for meddling in the people’s elections.

Share/Bookmark

But Public Citizen and a diverse coalition of groups committed to standing up to corporate influence in elections have other plans.

During Target’s June 8 shareholder meeting in Pittsburgh, the groups, including Common Cause, Delta Foundation, Keystone Progress and We Are One coalition members, will rally to demand that Target keep its money out of politics.

Here are the details:

What: Target Shareholder Protest

When: Wednesday, June 8, noon to 2 p.m.

Where: 6231 Penn Ave., Pittsburgh, Pa., 15206 (the not-yet-opened Target store in East Liberty, near Bakery Square)

Why target Target? Last year, the big box behemoth provided a case study of why it’s so outrageous that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that, under the First Amendment, corporations and people are the same. As a result of this ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, corporations like Target can spend as much as they want to influence elections.

And boy did Target want to influence an election. It gave $150,000 to MN Forward, a front group backing Tom Emmer, an extreme right-wing candidate in Minnesota’s 2010 gubernatorial race.

Target spokespeople tried to justify the support by explaining Emmer was the pro-business candidate (he supported repealing all corporate taxes) – and unwittingly highlighted the stark contrast between corporate interests and the interests of real people.

This is a guy who supported a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage, tried to eliminate the state’s minimum wage, and favored allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptives. On the political spectrum, he makes Scott Walker look like Howard Dean.

The backlash against Target was swift. Advocates for LGBTQ rights and corporate accountability mobilized. There was a boycott. There was a flash mob. Lady Gaga even got involved.

In response, Target apologized and made superficial changes to its policies on corporate political spending.

That’s not enough. So on June 8, we will urge Target’s CEO and shareholders to keep Target’s money out of politics and send the message that corporations that pour money into the people’s elections will be held accountable.

Corporate shareholders – the real owners of any publicly traded corporation – are people. Nearly half of all American households are shareholders (anyone with a 401(k) or similar retirement fund), and we shareholders should have the power to stop CEOs from writing unlimited checks from corporate treasuries to impact politics. After all, it’s our money.

Empowering shareholders is just the beginning. Public financing of elections, full disclosure of all political spending, and a constitutional amendment to reverse Citizens United are all essential.

Target disclosing its political spending and giving its shareholders a louder voice in its spending decisions would be a step in the right direction – a step toward restoring democracy for people.

Let us know if you will attend the June 8 demonstration in Pittsburgh and help spread the word.

Share/Bookmark

Yet the bankers on Wall Street continue to reward themselves with astronomical bonuses for engaging in the same high-risk financial gimmicks that crashed our economy back in 2008. Firms, big banks and hedge funds on Wall Street spent more than $135 billion on record-breaking payouts in 2010; the top 25 hedge fund managers raked in $22 billion by themselves.

It’s an absurd situation. It has to stop. And you can help stop it.

Congress passed the Wall Street reform bill last year, and now federal agencies are seeking comments from the public on how they should implement the section of the law about Wall Street pay practices.

That’s right – they want to hear from you.

But, in order to send your comments to the seven agencies, each has its own set of requirements, its own website and its own email address – it’s the kind of stuff that can be confusing if you’re not somebody who looks at government documents every day (heck, it can be confusing even if you do).

So we made it easy by setting up a website where you can send your message to the agencies: http://pubc.it/FixWallSt

It’s especially important for you to personalize your comments by sharing your own story about how the economic crisis has affected you, your family, your friends or your community.

And if you would like help writing your comments to maximize their impact, please don’t hesitate to write to us at action@citizen.org.

You can write a paragraph, or you can write a book. But make sure you submit your comments before May 31. Afterward, the agencies will no longer be accepting comments.

If you’re not sure what to write about, here are some ideas:

•    Write about your out-of-work relative, once awarded employee-of-the-year.
•    Write about your neighbor, forced out of retirement because the crash eviscerated her 401(k).
•    Write about your friend who just graduated from college, with honors, into a jobless economy.
•    Write about the Irish, the Icelanders and the Africans who suffer because bad pay incentives led the Wall Street fraudsters to spread their toxic practices globally.
•    Write about yourself.

Need more incentive to go write your comments? Well, you should be aware that the bankers raking in millions and billions on Wall Street would rather not see things change – and they’ve hired cadres of bank lobbyists to fight rules like this every step of the way.

Don’t take my word for it – you can read about it yourself in our recent report about Wall Street’s efforts to bias the rule-making process.

Want to learn more about Wall Street’s outrageous pay practices? Check out our essay on that very subject.

Just make sure that before the end of May, you also visit our website where you can send your comments to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the National Credit Union Administration and the Office of Thrift Supervision.

Share/Bookmark

If that sounds alarmist, it’s because the numbers are truly alarming: A recent study of Medicare participants found that, in a single month, one of every 17 hospital patients was injured or killed by a preventable medical error. Many more Americans are hurt by unsafe drugs and medical devices.

Given the staggering injury and death rate, it’s shocking that some members of Congress want to shield from accountability those in the medical field who are responsible for harm.

They’re pushing H.R. 5, and overreaching bill that would immunize practically the entire medical industry from responsibility when their defective products or services hurt people. If it passes, the costs of medical mistakes would shift from the negligent actors to injured patients, their families, and taxpayer-funded health and disability programs.

Only an extremely small number of doctors are responsible for most medical errors. Just 5 percent are responsible for more than half of all medical errors. Those doctors should be held responsible for their actions – not given a free pass. The same goes for drug companies and medical device manufacturers.

Instead of attacking patients’ rights, Congress should focus on improving patient safety and reducing deaths and injuries. H.R. 5 does neither. But Public Citizen’s research has shown that 10 basic safety measures would save, conservatively, $35 billion and 85,000 lives a year.

Urge your representative to oppose H.R. 5.

Share/Bookmark

Among the numerous nonsensical cuts in the GOP budget are draconian cuts to federal agencies charged with preventing Wall Street from crashing our economy again.

Do they think Wall Street is going to regulate itself?

The cuts to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission will increase America’s vulnerability to another financial crisis and make the marketplace less safe for consumers.

Less regulation is just fine with Wall Street. As awful as this recession has been for most of us, 2010 was the best year ever for the banks, firms and hedge funds that gave $135 billion in record-breaking payouts.

Take a moment to send a message to your senators telling them they need to fully fund the agencies with the authority to crack down on Wall Street’s activities that bankrupt our states, our communities and small businesses. To send a message to your senators, follow the link below:

www.citizen.org/do-not-cut-consumer-protections

The most irresponsible response to these circumstances would be to cut critical public protections when they are needed the most.

Flickr photo by pamhule.

Share/Bookmark