Over the past few weeks, we have explored  our relationship with corporations. We have discussed the complicated and dangerous hold they have on the United States.  I have talked about how we got here and the mindset we must have if we hope to  protect our Republic. Most recently, we discussed the concept of our living Constitution.

This week, I want to bring it all together and talk about step two in our movement to reassert the People’s power. If you remember episode six ‘Bloodless Revolution,’ I provided a warning of the work ahead. I told you that liberating our nation from corporate and political elites would not be easy. I was upfront about the grind ahead of us, and step two continues that grind.

The next step will require substantial pressure on both federal and state politicians. It will require making demands and then holding them accountable to those  demands. It will require reminding them that they work for us, and demanding they do the job we elected them to do. 

The next step is demanding Congress send an amendment to the states for ratification. That will be hard enough on its own, but then we must pressure state leaders to ratify it. I am not saying to promote just any amendment. We do not want a symbolic crumb from the table of partisan politicians. We need an amendment that makes a difference.

That amendment must finally (and permanently) put corporations in their place. We must ensure corporations are no longer privileged to the full rights of the People. We must, once and for all, certify corporations as artificial persons. 

I want to take today’s episode and discuss this necessary amendment. During today’s chat, I will cover four topics:

1.	I will provide you with a quick snapshot of the amendment process. 
2.	We will briefly discuss related, previously proposed amendments.
3.	I will give you an example of what this amendment should contain.
4.	Finally, we will discuss why the wording is so important .

The Amendment process is covered in Article five of the Constitution. I won’t read it here verbatim, as it can be confusing. I will attempt to explain it in simpler terms, but if you would like to read it in full, go to www.archives.gov. Once on the site, click the “America’s Founding Documents” tab. Finally, click on “Read a Transcript” under the Constitution. 

Article five lays out the amendment process in detail, even if that detail may be a bit confusing. In more plain and modern terms , there are two ways for the amendment process to play out.

The first would be sixty-seven Senators and 290 representatives agreeing on something.
"The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution…" 

All amendments, to date, have been achieved through Congress.

The second is for thirty-four state legislatures to apply for a national convention. 

"…on the Application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments…"

This has so far been hypothetical. There has never been a constitutional convention launched by the states. Many have argued over exactly how this would be accomplished if it ever happened.

Once an amendment passes Congress or Convention, it is sent to the state legislatures. The states must then vote to ratify it. Three-quarters of all states (38) must do so for the amendment to become the law of the land. It remains that way perpetually, or until the same process is used to repeal it.

Also included in article five is a clause that no longer holds any bearing. It was a gag on proposing amendments that would affect slavery or a direct tax until 1808. This, obviously, has no impact on us today. The article ends by stating no state can be deprived of an equal number of Senators without its consent.

To date, the amendment process has been as follows:

1.	Both Houses of Congress pass the proposed amendment by a two-thirds threshold.
2.	The national archivist sends notifications to every state’s governor.
3.	Three-fourths of all states pass the proposed amendment as written. The count is tracked and tallied by the National Archives.
4.	When the three-fourths threshold is crossed, the archivist proclaims a new amendment. It is immediately published in the Federal Register.

The process is simple and straightforward , even if mostly set up to fail. That isn’t a bad thing. An amendment is a serious action taken by the nation. It should absolutely have widespread public support . Currently, it is too difficult to have amendments introduced. However, I do not disagree with requiring three-quarters of the states to ratify it. We need to be more open to solidifying rights, but we must be careful to not broaden them haphazardly. 

More deliberate language could have prevented the issues we face with corporations. Could it be that ambiguity was the intention the whole time ?

That said, we cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good . We have proven that misguided amendments can be repealed. In 1919, we ratified the eighteenth amendment. In 1933, we repealed it with the twenty-first. When the People’s rights are being threatened, we must be willing to enact an amendment to protect them.

In the past, there have been a few proposed amendments related to my proposal. It has been a hot topic since the Citizens United decision in 2010 .

In 2011, Representative McGovern from Massachusetts introduced the “People’s Rights Amendment.”

Also in 2011, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont introduced an amendment. He named it the “Saving American Democracy  Amendment.”

In 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2021, the “We the People Amendment” was introduced. It was first introduced by former Representative Rick Nolan of Minnesota. More recently, it was introduced by Representative Pramila Jayapal from Washington.

The “We the People Amendment” is slated to be introduced once again in the current Congress. I doubt it receives much attention, but we will see.

These proposals contain much of what is necessary, but I am not sure they go far enough. Sometimes they try to leave a door open. It is like they don’t want to specifically call out corporations for how they are harming our Republic. 

I believe we must use this amendment to make a statement which cannot be misconstrued. It must ensure history cannot be repeated... again. It must ensure corporations can never again rise to this level of control. 

So, what should an amendment on this subject include? As we go through this, I want you to keep in mind I am not a lawyer. I am going to introduce concepts and explain why these concepts are necessary. The actual wording of some of my concepts may not be appropriate for an amendment, but you'll get the idea. It would take someone more versed in writing laws to scribe an acceptable amendment.

First, titles are important. They convey meaning. They express the objectives meant to achieve. They need to be in simple terms, so it is easy to understand.

I would call this proposal the “Personhood Amendment .” 

I would begin with: 

“The rights of the Constitution and the reference to Citizen, Person(s), or People shall only pertain to naturally born persons. 

Artificial persons, entities created by incorporation, entities created for the purpose of doing business, only have rights specifically granted by the granting authority of a State or Federal agency.

Artificial persons have no natural claim to the rights of the Constitution.” 

The reason I begin with this section should be obvious. I am saying that only natural people have inherent rights in the United States. Artificial persons, including corporations and other businesses, may only be granted specific rights. These specific rights would be granted by a state or federal government authority.

The next section would further define the role of artificial persons. It could be a first step to a symbiotic relationship between the People and corporations.

“Artificial persons are subject to all laws and regulations enacted by the People and their elected representatives.

Artificial persons must act in good faith  to maintain their status:  

•	Artificial persons granted life in the United States must act as fiduciaries for the benefit of the natural persons of the United States.
•	Artificial persons may be terminated by an act of state or federal courts or through state or federal legislation.
•	Leadership, not limited to the chief executive officer, may be held criminally accountable as determined by a presiding court.
•	Leadership may be barred from holding any future positions of leadership for a minimum of ten years as determined by the presiding court.
•	Good faith may be further defined by state or federal legislation.”

The first line of this section is straightforward and says what it means. Artificial persons should be subject to laws enacted by the People.

The next part might be controversial. But it is necessary  to ensure that we make our Republic safe for future generations. It ensures that artificial persons, specifically corporations, lose their influence on our government. We must ensure they can no longer influence a government By the People.

I include that artificial persons must act in good faith. The amendment should go on to further define what good faith means. This would include things like truth in advertising and ethical business practices. Most importantly, it would require balancing the needs of the People with profit.

I note that those  doing business in the United States must act as fiduciaries. This means that artificial persons must work in the best interest of the People of the United States. When they do not, they would be subject to lawsuits or revocation of their grant of life. 
I also include a clause that would make terminating an artificial person appropriate. This could be carried out by state or federal entities when deemed necessary. This could be punishment for crimes, or to curtail unethical business practices. Unethical business practices should put the life of artificial persons in jeopardy. The freedom of doing business in our Republic should require ethical business practices. They should live in fear if not.

The next bullets I include are the most controversial. Here, I make the leadership of said artificial person criminally responsible. This would include executives, directors, and others involved in decision making. Courts would be able to impose serious punishment on those found criminally liable. This is extremely important. Too often, corporate leaders wreak havoc and destroy lives with no repercussions. They just leave and move on to another company to destroy. We must be able to hold unethical business leaders accountable. We must be able to punish them for the damage their companies have caused. We must be able to ensure they can't do it again.

The next section should address political contributions, limiting them to only natural people.   

“Political contributions may only be made by United States citizens and natural persons. 
All political contributions must be publicly disclosed including originator, amounts, and recipients. 

Artificial persons may not make political contributions.

As fiduciaries for the People, Artificial persons may provide datasheets to government agencies.

All political contributions are subject to federal and state legislation.”

This section does a few very important things for our political system. It takes corporate money out of politics. This will drastically reduce the campaign cycle. It ensures we know who exactly is donating to our political process. It protects the one important role artificial persons have in our political process. 

How does it do these things?

It should be obvious  how it takes corporate money out of politics. It is one of the primary  goals of this amendment. This removes the ability of anyone but a natural person to donate to political action. 

This has a second effect of reducing the campaign cycle. Instead of one cycle immediately after another, we would have more time between. Politicians would spend less time running for office and more time governing. Without the millions from corporations, they would not have the money to campaign so long. Instead of two years of political bombardment, we could reduce it to eight to ten months, or even shorter.  This could also lead to better-quality candidates. The parties would have less money to invest in weak candidates. (I say “could” because I don’t know if the parties recognize good candidates these days.)

Limiting political contributions and mandating disclosures ensures more transparent elections. We will know who is supporting political candidates and safeguard against foreign interference.

Lastly, this section continues the only role artificial persons should have in governing. It allows them to provide datasheets to government representatives and agencies.
These datasheets are often referred to as “whitepapers”. Whitepapers are reports and fact sheets used to present a problem and provide a solution . 

A fiduciary whitepaper would be written by a subject matter expert. These reports would present facts and offer an accurate cost-benefit analysis. They would not have a partisan or corporate slant, as we see too often today.

The final section addresses our membership in organizations like the World Trade Organization. 

“All Persons (natural and artificial) of the United States shall not be subject to any international court, committee, panel, tribunal, or any other organization that meets, deliberates, or receives testimony outside of public view or record.

This amendment shall in no way abridge the freedom of the press.” 

This part of the amendment may be hard to understand. Many laws focused on corporate regulation get overturned by WTO dispute resolution panels. These panels are very secretive in nature. They make declarations that must be followed, or its members face consequences. But the public is not allowed to take part. The public may not watch, review, or even know who their so-called experts are. In other words, we are not allowed to question or even know why decisions are made. This section would ensure we are not subject to secret tribunals that we have no say in, such as these.

I end it with a declaration that this does not in any way prevent the freedom of the press of the first amendment. 

I didn't include this next part in the amendment because it doesn't belong there. But it relates and should be a legislative action once we ratify the amendment.

I know this will sound counterintuitive, but it is important for a couple of reasons. I would like to see a way for artificial people to contribute financially to politics. It cannot be the way it is today. They cannot be allowed to donate to direct campaigning or a specific party. We all know that today, corporations hedge their bets and donate to both party’s candidates. They invest millions in political action committees to push their biased narratives. They want to ensure that all representatives will take their calls. That is the only wat to ensure they can protect their corporate interests. 

Remember: corporate interests don't care about the politics. They may stoke the discourse, but politics is irrelevant to them. The politics are nothing more than a distraction, so we don't see what the corporate elites are doing.

We should allow them to donate by having both national and state political funds. These political funds would be non-partisan and have very little rules about contributions. They would pay out in thirds before an election cycle. Two-thirds would be split between the two major parties. The remaining third would support independent candidates. Legislation would determine manner and qualifications for disbursement. 

The reasons for this are three-fold. One: money for campaigns would be drastically reduced, and this would help cover some of that. Two: it provides a fund to help independent candidates run for office. That is extremely important for the health of our Republic. And three: it shows us the companies who actually want to support our Republic. It also tells us which companies only contribute for Congressional favor.

Like I said before, I am not an expert in constitutional law. I am sure there are better ways to write what I am suggesting. I am simply offering examples of what is necessary. I'm providing first steps to suppress the corporate coup ravaging America. I am offering solutions to end corporate dominance in America once and for all. 

I am sure there are faults with the way I have expressed some of this. You know how legalese goes. It’s always written to be as confusing as possible . It would be nice if we had people working for the country that knew how to take a concept and turn it into a law or amendment. 

Oh, wait! We supposedly have 535 of them.

I am not saying this is the only way to write these concepts into existence. I am saying these concepts need to exist, and now we must demand Congress do so. 

So why have I spent this time to discuss a proposed amendment? How does this help the People take back control? More importantly, how do we get it passed? 

In episode six, we discussed the only way to exert the People's power. we need an overwhelming demand for dedication to the People's agenda. We must demand politicians stop working for partisan, corporate-controlled parties. We must remind them that they serve us. We must demand they work for the People. 

Demanding an amendment to elevate the People over corporations is the only way. It is the only way to secure the Blessing of Liberty for our children and their children. We cannot rely on the ‘good nature’ of our political elites to do their job. We must insist they fulfill the duties we delegate to them.

Again, we are not telling them how to do their job. We are providing them with the People’s agenda and telling them to work together and get it done. 

An amendment to reduce corporate power is necessary. We have seen that laws can be ignored by fabricated court precedent. We have seen that politicians will not end corporate dominance on their own. That leaves us only one option: an amendment. An independent candidate's platform must demand this within their first 100 days. (If you worry that 100 days isn't enough, we ratified the twenty-sixth in ninety-eight days.)

This serves two purposes. First, it removes money and corporations as major determinates of politics and legislation. Second, it is another indicator of political elites that do not work for the People. When politicians do not support the amendment, it will provide us a list of those who must be replaced. 

You think that I am living in a fantasy world. You are thinking that there is no way this is possible. Remember what I told you in episode six. It’s possible, but it takes dedication and grind. 

The number of working, struggling,  Americans is far greater than the elites. Working Americans can control politics through our sheer numbers. All we have to do is vote for it. We must coalesce around an independent candidate pushing for societal changes. 

If the People can unite, we can elect an independent president. I know that’s a difficult goal to imagine, but it is possible. If we can do that, the Power of the People will be felt by every politician in America. Whether it is federal or state representative, they will all know the People have spoken. We then will have the power to demand the implementation of the People’s agenda. 

Like I said, it takes dedication. It will require pressuring your Senators and Representatives. Once the amendment goes to the states, we must continue our political pressure there. The election of an independent president would underscore our power. Politicians around the country would take notice. If they do not, we MUST replace them.

In the end, once they get past the initial shock, I think corporations will find this to be beneficial. They can avoid the risk of cancelation for donation to unethical candidates. They no longer have to consider who they donate to. They can contribute to politics without risking consumer backlash. Secretive international courts would have no control over their actions. They would enjoy laws and regulations designed to promote American businesses. They would profit from a stronger nation, emboldened by invested and appreciated workers. We would all enjoy a more symbiotic relationship between capitalism and the People. We could move past the parasite that is unregulated capitalism.
We must reestablish this nation of the People as a nation by, and more importantly for the People. 

It’s possible, but like step one, step two requires fearless dedication to the grind. Aren’t our children’s and their children’s future worth a little extra effort now?

We can make a difference. We need to make a difference. We must take our power back.

We the People are the Power.