---
JOINT RESOLUTION
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
‘‘ARTICLE--
‘‘SECTION 1. The sovereign right of the people to govern being essential to a free democracy, Congress and the States may regulate the expenditure of funds for political speech by any corporation, limited liability company, or other corporate entity.
‘‘SECTION 2. Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.''
---
So it *specifically* refrains from establishing Congress' power to regulate campaign spending by non-corporate persons!!! In other words, if the reactionaries on the SC choose to strike down all campaign finance restrictions, that's fine with Edwards, except for those restrictions struck down on the grounds that they differentiate between corporations and individuals.
What kind of nonsense is this? The problem with money in politics is that rich people have more of it than the rest of us. Whether they use it via the vehicle of a corporation or as individuals makes little difference. We're supposed to object to Goldman Sachs giving politicians money but a fascist billionaire like Richard Mellon Scaife or Sheldon Adelson can do what he likes?
SA