'Corporations are Not People' Constitutional Amendment

[muon2]

I think this is a much more complicated issue than the simple phrase "Corporations are not People". Since the trust busters of the early 20th century the federal government has tried to draw a line that limits excessive influence by large corporations. Restricting direct contributions to candidates has generally been a line that can be drawn and defended. Restricting any participation in the electoral process, even in specific circumstances, is a tough call.

The first amendment includes freedoms of speech and association among its provisions. When a group of people form an association and choose to engage in political speech that would seem to be a protected activity. Tax laws tend to drive associations of people into some corporate form. Even small not-for-profit clubs sometimes have little choice but to form a corporation to compete for donations. When does the amount of profit become so great that it impinges on a fair electoral process and demand the freedoms of speech and association be curtailed? I don't see a clear way to draw a line. As a further complication, what if a large corporation is held by a single individual shareholder?

The first amendment also includes freedom of the press, and in the 21st century the internet is going to make the definition of the press less clear than ever. If a corporation emails a newsletter or runs a blog it gets difficult to draw a distinction between that activity and more traditional activities of the press. A newspaper can run a political endorsement editorial at any time during a campaign, and that newspaper is generally a corporation. How does one distinguish between that and a corporate blog that regularly reports on news affecting that corporation but happens to editorialize in the weeks immediately before an election? I find that hard to answer, too.