Jeff Clements is the co-founder of Free Speech for People, a national, non-partisan campaign to challenge the creation of Constitutional rights for corporations, overturn Citizens United v. FEC, and strengthen American democracy and republican self-government. He is the author of the Corporations Are Not People (Berrett-Koehler, 2012). Jeff, an attorney, has represented people, businesses and the public interest since 1988.
Jeff served as Assistant Attorney General and Chief of the Public Protection & Advocacy Bureau in the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office from early 2007 to 2009. As Bureau Chief, he led more than 100 attorneys and staff in the enforcement of environmental, healthcare, financial services, civil rights, antitrust and consumer protection laws. Jeff also served as an Assistant Attorney General in Massachusetts from 1996 to 2000, where he worked on litigation against the tobacco industry and handled range of other investigations and litigation to enforce consumer protection and antitrust laws.
In private practice, Jeff has been a partner in the Boston law firms of Mintz Levin and Clements & Clements, LLP, which he founded in 2003. He also has practiced in Maine, where he has represented clients in a variety of litigation and in investigations and prosecutions by the U.S. Attorney’s Office and Maine Attorney General’s Office.
In 1992, the people of Portland, Maine elected Jeff to serve as a Trustee and President of the Board of Trustees of the Portland Water District, a public agency responsible for protecting and delivering safe drinking water and ensuring proper treatment of wastewater for 160,000 people. At the time, Jeff was a co-founder, officer, and director of Friends of Casco Bay, an environmental advocacy organization focused on protection and stewardship of Maine’s Casco Bay. He also has served as a Trustee and President of the Board of The Waldorf School in Lexington, Massachusetts.
Jeff graduated with distinction in History and Government from Colby College in 1984, and magna cum laude with a concentration in Public Law from the Cornell Law School in 1988. He lives in Concord, Massachusetts with his wife and three children.
Pingback: MLK, MIC and the FEC | Nicole Sandler - Radio Or Not
An Alternative to Capitalism (if the people knew about it, they would demand it)
Several decades ago, Margaret Thatcher claimed: “There is no alternative”. She was referring to capitalism. Today, this negative attitude still persists.
I would like to offer an alternative to capitalism for the American people to consider. Please click on the following link. It will take you to an essay titled: “Home of the Brave?” which was published by the Athenaeum Library of Philosophy:
http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/steinsvold.htm
John Steinsvold
“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.”
~ Albert Einstein
I think you need to SERIOUSLY consider changing the phrase in your logo “repuplican democracy” to remove the name of one of the major parties. perhaps “democracy to/in our republic” or “our repuplic to the people”
just caught the tail-end of you on Adam Kugman’s program “Mad as Hell” yesterday and wanted to say Right On! I’ve been ranting and raving about corporate abuses for years and most of my friends dismiss me as a Left-wingnut. I appreciate your work. Persevere! If you have a few moments and feel like checking out my blog at corporatecockroaches.com I’d be interested in your opinion. P.S. I’m not a professor, it’s just a nickname my friends gave me because I usually have a backpack full of books and try to get them to read a bit.
Thanks – - Looking forward to checking out your blog. Keep pulling those books out of the backpack and get your friends to work! –Jeff
Your book is outstanding! Especially revealing was the role that Lewis Powell and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce played at the beginning of this historic travesty. I’ve signed on re the Peoples Rights Amendment and hope to help get Illinois to do what Hawaii and New Mexico have already done: pass a Resolution demanding Congress pass the 28th Amendment and submit it to the States ASAP!
Thank you!
Since lobbying and political contributions are not mentioned in the Constitution, all your amendment does is preclude the argument for corporate contribution based on the First Amendment. There is a sea of clever lawyers out there that may be able to create non-corporate entities or other means to get around your amendment. And it does not prevent Congress or the states from passing legislation allowing corporate political donations. Your amendment doesn’t prevent unincorporated PACs, churches, or political parties from making contributions. And it does nothing about lobbying. Party support is as big of a problem as corporate support. Why don’t you just say that we are limiting support for elections and lobbying to people?
For example:
“Only individual, human being, residents of the USA may contribute resources to influence the outcome of any election or to create, modify, or advance any legislative bill—federal, state, or local. Those contributed resources must be owned free and clear by the contributing individual with no conditions or claims held by any organization, including business, professional, religious, and union organizations.”
This form of the amendment would not prohibit organizations from lobbying, it would simply allow funding to those organizations to flow only from people. The problem with your amendment is that it will take a huge effort to get it passed, thus: 1) using up a major bullet and 2) disillusioning people that the problem is solved and thus delaying the real solution for probably decades.
Thanks for the comment, Paul. You make some good points. I don’t not quite agree with other points, particularly the reference to “your amendment.” While I think the People’s Rights Amendment is badly needed and much more effective than you imagine, I will join millions of others doing this work to try to get the best amendment(s) that ensure effective republican democracy in America, without pride or ego about my own particular contribution. In the end, it will be “our” 28th Amendment and possibly the 29th Amendment that will get the job done. See this post for my views on this point: http://corporationsarenotpeople.com/2012/01/19/the-nation-constitutional-amendment-to-reverse-citizens-united-but-should-we-decide-which-one/
Free Speech for People, for example, supports the People’s Rights Amendment, as well as the Sutton-Udall Amendment that ensures Congress and the States can prevent uncontrolled money from corrupting elections and government. If better approaches come out of the national conversation/debate, we’ll work for those, too. That’s why I support and work with many groups and approaches (see the links on the sidebar under Constitutional Amendment Campaign). I don’t think anyone has the monopoly on the perfect answer yet, but I do know that by moving the Amendment campaign forward, we can win real, fundamental reform. I have more in my book on this (including corporate law reform) with links and resources to the various people and groups working on this.)
Thanks again.
–Jeff
It was amazing to hear you speak, and why are you not running for president! Would love to see you in more public light expressing so completely how possible it is for us to fix our government because that was the initial goal of our constitution. I can not believe more people do not believe in their own rights or powers because they’ve become so complicated we need specialists to translate.