OCTOBER 15, 2010
I just noticed I am writing this while wearing my wedding ring. Normally, I do not wear it while preparing this column. We will see if it makes a difference. Perhaps my wife’s influence coming through the wedding ring will soften my opinions.
As early as next season, Americans may see a long-time favorite with a different look. Although the Japanese have had this innovation on a small scale for a few years, it is close to hitting the American grocery store produce section big time. SQUARE WATERMELONS are on their way. They will not replace the traditional round or oblong watermelon but they will be available. The fruit is said to taste the same and will be sold in seedless and seeded varieties.
If you are wondering why someone would mess with a popular staple like the watermelon, you do not have to look to far for the reason. Anytime a new idea or innovation is trotted out for no apparent reason, you only have to look at the money. Producers will save large sums of money in shipping costs. Square watermelons can be stacked for shipping and display. Whether or not the consumer will see a cost savings is another question. I would bet not with the explanation being the cost spent on research and development has to be recouped and the price would have risen if the savings were not realized by the producers and shippers. We have never heard that explanation before.
Remember when the Supreme Court decided corporations have a First Amendment Right to free speech. That was about a year or so ago. Legally, corporations have always been ‘citizens’. They exist, they can sue, they can be sued, they can be fined civilly, they can be criminally prosecuted, they can enter into contracts, they can make charitable contributions, they pay taxes, etc. The Supreme Court ruled they could fund and buy advertisements for or against a political candidate or cause. This right is unlimited.
Legally, this is the correct ruling. Corporations are affected by laws and regulations passed by the legislatures at the local, state and national level. “No taxation without representation” is a myth from the time of the Revolution. This was never a big rallying cry or cause for the Revolution but it fits here. Why should corporations be subject to laws and regulations without being able to express their opinion?
Political action committees, Unions, the ACLU and a few others have always been able to advertise politically. Now every corporation can do the same thing. A corporation can be formed to air commercials. Because of this Supreme Court ruling, we are seeing a plethora of commercials for or against a candidate or cause that were not legal two years ago. One problem being discussed is that a corporation can be formed with foreign money or seek foreign contributions for its political arm and that will not be public information. Corporations are private entities and do not have to allow public access to its books.
I think this is a good change. Unions have long had the power to exert influence over who is elected. Now corporation can do the same thing. I just hope the money does not get out of hand.
Originally, Republicans were for the change while Democrats were against it. President Obama caused a Supreme to react to a part of his State of the Union speech in January when he derided the decision in his speech. Since the change is now being implemented, it looks like it is a draw. The real winner is the Tea Party.
BRUCE A. BRENNAN
No comments:
Post a Comment