That Act would be just as unconstitutional today as it was then. There was also no enforcement mechanism within that Act; it was a paper tiger, at best.
Again, which corporations would be prohibited and which would not be? What prohibitions would apply, to which, and why?
Yes it would, that's why it would require a constitutional amendment to clearly define what a corporation is and is not.
As to which corporations, I'd have to seriously look into that; the devil is in the details. That's why I said in my first post that I would support such a concept but I wanna see the legislation. But it's not my job to know all of the nitty-gritty details; I'm not the law maker.
Restricting freedom of speech is not something I take lightly. The only reason I consider such a thing is because of the situation we have today now that all bets are off (Citizens United and McCutcheon). Here we have a clear cut case where we need to put limits in place because we have completely lost control of the legislative process.
This is EXACTLY the opposite of a situation conservatives would never live with. Where corporations have NO say, and people can just vote in anything they want and take everything away from corporations. That would be a horrible situation. But now we have a situation where the corporations have the ability to form and make law any way they want, taking everything away from the people.
If you believe the former is bad, you HAVE to believe the latter is just as bad.
"Daniel-san; you need balance" - Mr. Miaggi
