Corporate personhood is deeply entrenched in legal tradition. It's not a simple matter to reverse or extract that. See the Dictionary Act, Section 1 of the U.S. Code, which clearly defines incorporated entities as persons for legal purposes. [0] [Disclaimer: IANAL and surely do not fully understand the implications and background here]
I don't think artificial restrictions on political involvement are the right way to go about a resolution. That ultimately just forces participants underground.
Instead, we need an updated electoral process that allows full engagement from all interested parties and still has a desirable outcome for the everyman, small innovators and entrepreneurs.
IMO the biggest problem over the last century has been the consolidation of credible information sources into a handful of media conglomerates. The internet is helping reverse that, at least partially, though it's at risk too with Facebook and Google controlling the vast majority of the traffic.
>> I don't think artificial restrictions on political involvement are the right way to go about a resolution. That ultimately just forces participants underground.
I don't see any justification for someone in Florida funding a campaign for a senator in Michigan or California.
I don't think artificial restrictions on political involvement are the right way to go about a resolution. That ultimately just forces participants underground.
Instead, we need an updated electoral process that allows full engagement from all interested parties and still has a desirable outcome for the everyman, small innovators and entrepreneurs.
IMO the biggest problem over the last century has been the consolidation of credible information sources into a handful of media conglomerates. The internet is helping reverse that, at least partially, though it's at risk too with Facebook and Google controlling the vast majority of the traffic.
[0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/1/1