>> Michael Pollak wrote:
>> 2) The amendment drive here could be fixed with a few words so that
>> it wasn't crazy. Instead of abolishing corporate personhood, the
>> amendment could simply say that Congress and the states can pass laws
>> that discriminate between corporate and natural persons when such
>> discrimination is found to be in the public interest.
>>
>> Which I think is really what people who sign this mean. They don't
>> really want to abolish corporations. They just want to be free to
>> pass laws to curb what they can do.
>>
>
> I think the MoveToAmend.org group is simply trying to restore the
> authority of state and federal government to regulate corporations. I
> don't think they're trying do abolish corporations (though, of course,
> there may be a few corporaphobes who favor eradication).
The whole issue of corporate personhood is a distraction from the real issue of campaign finance law, which is giving Congress the right to regulate campaign expenditures by *anybody* - corporate or non-corporate.
And there's no need to restore the state's authority to regulate corporations - obviously corporations are already regulated, in lots of ways. Yes, sometimes the Supreme Court will overturn one of those regulations, but it also regularly overturns laws that apply to natural persons, too. Again, the issue of corporate personhood is a red herring.
SA