Sunday, January 24, 2010

Naming the proposed amendment.

Yesterday, I put a post here and on The Smirking Chimp regarding the idea of making a new constitutional amendment that will end the creeping nonsense that began way back in 1886 when a Supreme Court packed with former corporate lawyers decided that a corporation was an actual person and had the rights granted to persons under the Constitution, most notably the rights enumerated in the 14th Amendment. The modern day Supreme Court, packed with members of the right wing Federalist Society, now wants to make sure corporations have full use of their First Amendment rights, not only to say what they want politically but to spend as much money as they want to get the message out.

I gave my version of the proposed constitutional amendment the name The Definition Of Persons Amendment. My friend Larry wrote and said he liked the idea, but not the name. His point was that some might think the amendment will be about the definition of when a fetus becomes a person and has legal rights, and of course that is not what this is about at all.

I am throwing the question out to the readers. Do you have an idea for a name for this proposed amendment? I'd like to see a name that is short and has a positive connotation. I'd rather not call it the "anti-corporate personhood amendment". It's accurate, but it's negative and a little clumsy to say. While neither of them was successful, both The Equal Rights Amendment and the Defense Of Marriage Amendment had names that were short and positive. Both got shortened further to ERA and DOMA. The Definition of Persons Amendment would be DOPA, and that clearly doesn't work well.

Any ideas, gentle readers?


Abu Scooter said...

How about the "Corporate Definition Amendment?" It may be a bit dry, but it's concise enough for sound-bite use. I don't see why, as this progresses, "CDA" and "CorpDef" couldn't become convenient shorthand terms.

¡Karlacita! said...

Still thinking.