LETTER: Rep. Kilmer flim-flams on answer about corporate personhood

He hasn’t sponsored a House resolution similar to a constitutional amendment called for in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

I’m writing to clarify a statement in the Oct. 14 PDN article “District 6 Candidates Voice Picks; [Derek] Kilmer, [Todd] Bloom Debate Leaders, Climate Change.”

It referred to U.S. Rep. Derek Kilmer’s response when I asked him to explain his endorsement of campagn-spending-related Initiative 735 while refusing to co-sponsor a resolution with the exact same language.

I-735 urges Congress to introduce a constitutional amendment to rein in campaign spending and corporate influence by clarifying that corporations are not guaranteed the rights of people and money is not equivalent to speech.

Kilmer did say, “I don’t think money is speech, and I don’t think corporations are people,” and the article said he is “a co-sponsor of a House resolution for the kind of constitutional amendment called for in I-735.”

But he has not, despite repeated requests, co-sponsored HJR 48, the only House resolution with the language of I-735.

He is, however, a co-sponsor of HJR 22, a much weaker resolution that doesn’t end corporate personhood.

This fact was easy to miss in the flood of information Kilmer gave to avoid answering my question.

The U.S. Constitution begins with “We the People” and declares that all power in a democracy resides in its citizens.

The argument that corporations have the same rights as people, while leveraging vastly more financial resources, is undermining the very meaning of democracy.

I-735 is a message from voters to Rep. Kilmer.

Is he listening?

Judy D’Amore,

Port Townsend

More in Letters to the Editor

Most Read