How about MUST regulate.
And what about PROHIBIT raising and spending money by corporations?
Simply providing Congress with the option to address an issue doesn't guarantee that they actually will. Congress currently possesses the ability to take many actions but they don't.
Worse, calling for the "regulation" of raising and spending money by corporations in elections would legitimize never-intended First Amendment free speech corporate rights. Free speech and every other right in our Bill of Rights were meant by its architects to be reserved exclusively for real human beings. Corporations were intended to be creations of the state with privileges, not rights, granted via charters by We the People through state legislators and, in the case of national banks, Congress.
The architects of this resolution didn't take the time to study and reflect. As a result, they didn't come up with the right solution.
Voters in Boulder, CO and Missoula, MT just voted to end corporate personhood. People at Occupation sites across the nation are displaying signs that say abolish corporate personhood. They understand an important part of the solution.
The resolution effort is not completely useless however. If lucky, the resolution will receive one or more congressional hearings. These will provide important teachable moments to educate the resolution's supporters, other members of Congress and the public at large. They'll provide an opportunity to show that our political system, if not entire country, is broken because the political system is fixed. Finally, they'll represent an arena where real democratic fixes can be promoted, including the proposed constitutional amendment by Move to Amend (http://movetoamend.org) which states, "We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, and move to amend our Constitution to firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights."
1 | 2