And with that, we will move along to the main course...
Corporate America Pt. 1
Is the United States a corporation or a nation?
I want to take an objective look into this and separate fact from fiction. I do not want to cite a reference without being able to actually view that reference, as has been done so many times by too many conspiracy theorists.
One can post this question on the internet and get any number of websites showing lists of what they claim are facts about our government that prove without a doubt that the United States is in fact a corporation owned and operated by the British Monarchy. The problem is, the so-called facts are blindly stated without any links to the documents they are citing from. Just saying that you got a fact from a document without showing that document, or at least showing a direct quote from it that relates to your theory, doesn't prove your point what-so-ever.
So my intent is to go through a list of statements one-by-one, and try to find the documents associated with them to prove or disprove the theory. I will include links where available. I will use direct quotes where available. I want this to be as thorough as possible so that whoever may read this can go and look for themselves, and form their own opinion on the matter.
Before I get to investigating statements into the United States being a corporation, I think we need to take a look at corporations in general.
Let's start part 1 by answering the question:
What is a corporation?
According to Merriam Webster's Dictionary a corporation is:
1a: a group of merchants or traders united in a trade guild b: the municipal authorities of a town or city
2: a body formed and authorized by law to act as a single person although constituted by one or more persons and legally endowed with various rights and duties including the capacity of succession
3: an association of employers and employees in a basic industry or of members of a profession organized as an organ of political representation in a corporative state
A few things pop out from these definitions that will relate to a topic I will discuss later. First of all is the "municipal authorities of a town or city" from definition 1. The next thing that stands out is the word "constituted." Simply because of how our own governing body established a Constitution in the formation of our country.
I decided to look at a second source to help better understand what a corporation is. Being that a corporation is a form of business entity, at least as we understand it to be, then I chose to look at:
www.businessdictionary.com
Here's what they had to say about corporations:
Corporations are the most common form of business organization, and one which is chartered by a state and given many legal rights as an entity separate from its owners. This form of business is characterized by the limited liability of its owners, the issuance of shares of easily transferable stock, and existence as a going concern. The process of becoming a corporation, called incorporation, gives the company separate legal standing from its owners and protects those owners from being personally liable in the event that the company is sued (a condition known as limited liability). Incorporation also provides companies with a more flexible way to manage their ownership structure. In addition, there are different tax implications for corporations, although these can be both advantageous and disadvantageous. In these respects, corporations differ from sole propietorships and limited partnerships.
So based on what we've read we can say that a corporation is a form of business organization that has legal rights separate from its owners. The owners of the corporation aren't legally liable for the operations of the business. We know that a corporation is a body, or group formed together that are authorized by law to act as a single person.
Let's look at one more definition before moving forward. Since a corporation is defined as being a form of business, then what exactly is a business?
This again is from businessdictionary.com:
Business - A commercial activity engaged in as a means of livelihood or profit, or an entity which engages in such activities.
So we can add to our understanding of a corporation that it is an entity which engages in activities for the purposes of making a profit.
By stating that the United States is a corporation, they are then saying that it is a business organization that operates separate from its owners whose purpose is engaging in activities for the purpose of making a profit. So let's begin looking at these statements and their sources, and try to see where the facts and fictions really are.
The first place I happened upon this theory was through a youtube video that someone had posted.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HfsKO22Ycc)
There are any number of websites that you can find on the web containing the same list of accusations, and using similar citations for their sources.
Just type "United States is a corporation" into Google and you'll see exactly what I mean.
I.
The first statement in the video says,
"UNITED STATES CODE Title 28 3002 (15)
(A) (B) (C)
The UNITED STATES is a corporation"
First of all, what is the United States code?
The following information is from -
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/
The United States Code is the codification by subject matter of the general and permanent laws of the United States. It is divided by broad subjects into 50 titles and published by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives. Since 1926, the United States Code has been published every six years. In between editions, annual cumulative supplements are published in order to present the most current information.
Lets now look at US Code Title 28 3002 (15)
The following is from -
www.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sec_28_00003002----000-.html
(15)
"United States" means -
1. a Federal Corporation;
2. an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States;
3. an instrumentality of the United States
This first citation checks out. Here, in the United States Code, the United States is defined as being a federal corporation. We already know what a corporation is, but what is a federal corporation?
Having done a google search "define federal corporation" I came up with no reliable sources for a clear definition for this exact term. A website called sourcewatch.org did, however, show a definition for "Private Federal Corporation" They show a couple of examples of types of federal corporations, and cite 3 different sources. I will include their definitions, examples, and sources here:
A Private Federal Corporation (PFC), also known as a Federal Government Corporation (FGC), is a corporation which has been established by the Federal Government. There are of course, benefits to this, not the least of which would be the disbursement and management of funding by the corporation that would not be subject to Congressional oversight or monitoring. An additional benefit would be autonomy in operations.
Examples of existing PFCs are:
- COMSAT
- In-Q-Tel
- Millenium Challenge Corporation
- Federal Prison Industries / UNICOR
The following information comes from a source cited on the sourcewatch.org site:
http://osaka.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/reinvent.htm
This document was written by A. Michael Froomkin, and was orginally published in the Illinois Law Review in 1995 [U. Ill. L. Rev. 543]
In the introduction for his paper titled, "Reinventing the Government Corporation", Mr. Froomkin states,
"Federal Government corporations often enjoy public advantages, including national establishment, tax and securities law exemptions, sovereign immunity, and priviledged access to capital.
"Because some federal government corporations are owned wholly or partly by private parties, yet maintain control over public funds and functions, their legal status raises important constitutional questions concerning accountability, separation of powers, and nondelegation."
"In his 1993 Reinventing Government program, Vice President Al Gore encouraged the proliferation of federal government corporations, obscure government devices whose legal status remains unclear even after 200 years as part of our national life."
*Proliferation:
1. Growth by the rapid multiplication of parts
2. A rapid increase in number
Beginning in section I. of his paper, Mr. Froomkin explains the powers inherent in a federal corporation.
A. Federal Power to create corporations
"The federal government's authority to charter corporations derives from the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution, as expounded in Chief Justice Marshall's decisions in McCulloch v. Maryland and Osborn v. Bank of the United States."
U.S. CONST. art. I, § 8, cl. 18
Let's take a look at this article of the Constitution.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 states:
"The Congress shall have Power...
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
The 2 cases that he mentions, McCulloch v. Maryland [17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 409-12 (1819) (upholding constitutionality of Second Bank of the United States).] and Osborn v. Bank of the United States. [22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 738, 859-60 (1824).], both find use of this clause for the establishment of federal corporations.
He says that McCulloch "established that, despite the lack of an applicable enumerated federal power, the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution allows the federal government to charter and use a private entity for the public purpose of banking. The second bank of the United States, the subject of both cases, was a federally chartered corporation with 80% of its stock owned by private persons and 20% by the United States. The Bank had twenty-five directors, five of whom were appointed by the President from among the stockholders, subject to Senate confirmation. The Remaining twenty directors were elected by the other shareholders. The Second Bank, like its precursor, had extensive power over the money supply and, consequently, over the monetary policy of the United States. Although the President could remove any of the five directors he appointed, he had no such power over the privately elected directors who constituted a comfortable majority. The Bank, therefore, ensured that the monetary policy remained in the control of the wealthy citizens and private banks, who could afford to purchase shares. Neither McCulloch nor Osborn stated that Congress has a general power to create corporations for any pupose. Instead, those cases held that Congress's power to create a Bank derives from, and exists in order to effectuate, its power to manage the fiscal affairs of the United States."
So what we see here are two cases that used this particular clause from the constitution to create a secondary bank, and established a precedent for future cases to create other federal corporations. This set up alone appears to be a frightening piece of evidence showing how our federal systems have been privatized, and are no longer under the control of our elected officials at all. I started writing this paper trying to be very objective about the concepts that were being stated, but its fairly difficult to remain that way after reading what these two cases have established.
But now that we have seen an example of federal government corporations, lets look to part B. where Mr. Froomkin explains the types of corporations.
B. Types of Federal Government corporations
Congress ordinarily charters a federal corporation by legislation rather than delegating the power to an executive branch official. If the legislation specifies incorporators, they are usually government officials. The legislation incorporating an FGC (Federal Government Corporation) ordinarily sets out its purposes, powers, structure, and obligations.
[12 U.S.C. §§ 1716-1723i (1988 & Supp. V 1993) (establishing Fannie Mae).]
"In keeping with the long-held theory that FGCs should be run on 'business-like' principles, many FGCs are exempted from civil service rules regarding pay, employee tenure, and other rules such as the Freedom of Information Act."
So a federally created corporation, because it is considered a 'business' does not have to adhere to the Freedom of Information Act, and therefore is not required to disclose any information to the public. This is the definition of a true secret society. Now if the original statement that the United States is a federal corporation is true, then it is very possible that they are not required to ever disclose anything to us.
He then continues to describe 3 different types of Federal government corporations, and gives examples of each:
1. "In wholly owned federal corporations, such as the Commodity Credit Corporation, the federal government holds 100% of the equity and exercises 100% of the votes on the board of directors or other governing body...
2. "In mixed-ownership federal corporations, such as the RTC and the Resolution Funding Corporation (REFCORP), the United States may own some or none of the equity. A mixed-ownership FGC's charter often guarantees that the President will appoint at least a minority of the directors even if the federal government does not own shares...
3. "In private federal corporations, such as COMSAT, the federal government holds no stock but may have a statutory right to select members of the board of directors. A private federal corporation is, formally, little different from a corporation chartered by a state although it may have publicly appointed directors and tax advantages, and its debts may carry an implicit guarantee from the federal government."
Its pretty obvious in his writings that Mr. Froomkin has a dislike of the idea of federal government corporations, so his opinion is biased. But I choose to cite him because his paper has clear references to legitimate documents from supreme court cases, and constitutional law. Mr Froomkin never states, from what I read of his paper, that the United States itself is a corporation, but he does show us how certain agents of our government are controlled by corporate delegation. The President's power is limited in establishing control of these corporations, since they are privatized. He can appoint and remove only a small percentage of their governing boards, it seems, as only a show of false power, rather than actual authority.
This is just my summary of what I have read.
I have heard in the past that the federal reserve is about as federal as federal express. And based on what I have just read, and relayed to you, It appears this may very well be the case.
The author states that Al Gore tried to push for the proliferation, or rapid expansion of government corporations, but I have not checked that citation to know of its validity. He also states that these corporations have existed for 200 years. I'll have to look further into this and see when the first federal government corporations were created. I am aware of, but not knowledgable in, the Virginia Company that was chartered by the British Crown for the purposes of establishing new settlements in America during the 1600s, and we will look into them later on, but I don't know if they have anything to do with with these types of United States government corporations.
Back-tracking to the United States Code's definition of "The United States" we see in definition 2 that it also includes "an agency, department, commission, board or other entity of the United States. And then in definition 3 it says "an instrumentality of the United States."
So according to the Code, The United States is a Federal Corporation (which abides by the rules set forth in Article I of the Constitution), and any agency or instrumentality of it is considered part of the United States.
So this brings forth the question, is a company like Halliburton, which is a defense contractor for the United States, or by definition an agent of the United States considered by US Code to BE the United States? By establishing its headquarters in Dubai, does that now mean that their foreign establishment is actually part of the United States?
For further clarity, the word instrumentality, as used in definition 3, is defined as:
1. Quality of being an instrument
2. Agency or means by which an entity accomplishes its functions, fulfills its obligations, or
realizes its objectives.
3. Government agency (such as a municipality) whose obligations (such as bonds) are backed by
the 'full faith and credit' of the national (federal) government.
*www.businessdictionary.com
So any agency that the United States uses to accomplish its functions is considered by this Code to be part of the United States. Also by the definition, all of the instrumentality's obligations are backed by the federal government. So who, or what exactly is considered to be an instrumentality of the federal government?
I will continue this investigation in Pt. 2
