On Monday the Supreme CourtĀ struck downĀ a key part ofĀ the Affordable Care Act, ruling that privately-owned corporations donāt have to offer their employees contraceptive coverage that conflicts with the corporate ownersā religious beliefs.
The owners of Hobby Lobby, the plaintiffs in the case, were always free to practice their religion. The Court bestowed religious freedom on their corporation as well ā a leap of logic as absurd as giving corporations freedom of speech. Corporations arenāt people.
The deeper problem is the Courtās obliviousness to the growing imbalance of economic power between corporations and real people. By giving companies the right not offer employees contraceptive services otherwise mandated by law, the Court ignored the rights of employees to receive those services.
(Justice Alitoās suggestion that those services could be provided directly by the federal government is as politically likely as is a single-payer federal health-insurance plan ā which presumably would be necessary to supply such contraceptives or any other Obamacare service corporations refuse to offer on religious grounds.)
The same imbalance of power rendered the Courtās decision inĀ āCitizens United,āĀ granting corporations freedom of speech, so perverse. In reality, corporate free speech drowns out the free speech of ordinary people who canāt flood the halls of Congress with campaign contributions.
Freedom is the one value conservatives place above all others, yet time and again their ideal of freedom ignores the growing imbalance of power in our society thatās eroding the freedoms of most people.
This isnāt new. In the early 1930s, the Court trumped New Deal legislation with āfreedom of contractā ā the presumed right of people to make whatever deals they want unencumbered by federal regulations. Eventually (perhaps influenced by FDRās threat to expand the Court and pack it with his own appointees) the Court relented.
But the conservative mind has never incorporated economic power into its understanding of freedom. Conservatives still champion āfree enterpriseā and equate the so-called āfree marketā with liberty. To them, government āintrusionsā on the market threaten freedom.
Yet the āfree marketā doesnāt exist in nature. There, only the fittest and strongest survive. The āfree marketā is the product of laws and rules continuously emanating from legislatures, executive departments, and courts.Ā Government doesnāt āintrudeā on the free market. It defines and organizes (and often reorganizes) it.
Hereās where the reality of power comes in. Itās one thing if these laws and rules are shaped democratically, reflecting the values and preferences of most people.
But anyone with half a brain can see the growing concentration of income and wealth at the top of America has concentrated political power there as well ā generating laws and rules that tilt the playing field ever further in the direction of corporations and the wealthy.
Antitrust laws designed to constrain monopolies have been eviscerated. Competition among Internet service providers, for example, is rapidly disappearing ā resulting in higher prices than in any other rich country. Companies are being allowed to prolong patents and trademarks, keeping drug prices higher here than in Canada or Europe.
Tax laws favor capital over labor, giving capital gains a lower rate than ordinary income. The rich get humongous mortgage interest deductions while renters get no deduction at all.
The value of real property (the major asset of the middle class) is taxed annually, but not the value of stocks and bonds (where the rich park most of their wealth).
Bankruptcy laws allow companies to smoothly reorganize, but not college graduates burdened by student loans.
The minimum wage is steadily losing value, while CEO pay is in the stratosphere. Under U.S. law, shareholders have only an āadvisoryā role in determining what CEOs rake in.
Public goods paid for with tax revenues (public schools, affordable public universities, parks, roads, bridges) are deteriorating, while private goods paid for individually (private schools and colleges, health clubs, security guards, gated community amenities) are burgeoning.
I could go on, but you get the point. The so-called āfree marketā is not expanding options and opportunities for most people. Itās extending them for the few who are wealthy enough to influence how the market is organized.
Most of us remain āfreeā in limited sense of not being coerced into purchasing, say, the medications or Internet services that are unnecessarily expensive, or contraceptives they can no longer get under their employerās insurance plan. We can just go without.
WeāreĀ likewise free not to be burdened with years of student debt payments; no one is required to attend college. And weāre free not to rent a place in a neighborhood with lousy schools and pot-holed roads; if we canāt afford better, weāre free to work harder so we can.
But this is a very parched view of freedom.
Conservatives who claim to be on the side of freedom while ignoring the growing imbalance of economic and political power in America are not in fact on the side of freedom. They are on the side of those with the power.
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate