Slim chance. They need a 2/3 vote in each house to amend their corporate code. And they fiercely defend their corporation code.

That is basically what this reform is. It tweaks the definition of corporations into entities that have all sorts of necessary corporate powers, but not the power to spend in politics.

DELETE YOUR ACCOUNT

Hey, thanks for asking! I’m talking to folks in VA, but nothing is moving yet.

Ohhhh nooooo. I’m so sorry.

Unions? Yes — they’d follow the same rule as biz corps: no treasury-funded political spending, but full ability to use a PAC.

ActBlue? No. ActBlue has no for-profit parent, and nothing in the initiative touches its core function of processing individual contribs. It doesn’t “spend” on politics.

It’s true as far as it goes, and the author readily admits that it doesn’t go very far. You don’t tend to have duelling corporate interests spending millions to oppose each other on issues. You tend to have corporate interests protecting corporate interests and spending accordingly.

I was thinking just this.

If you’d like to check out my big paper on this, it may reduce a little bit of the head-scratching: www.americanprogress.org/article/the-...

It’s a way we don’t usually think about corporations. The incorporating state defines what the corporation is. If they didn’t want to give the corporations they charter the power to *own property*, they don’t have to!

Exactly!

Pretty much! But every state that does this helps itself. If Montana does this, and no other state ever does, Montana's politics will be cleansed of corporate and dark money, top to bottom.

It will *absolutely* be challenged in the courts! It's been built to withstand court challenge as well as possible.

That's the strategy. Start with the 23 states + DC that have ballot issues, then once it clears court challenges, take it to the other states.

So, if Montana passes this, no corporation could spend in Montana's politics. But a Delaware corporation could still spend in DE's politics, or NY's, or NC's. But Montana's politics would be protected top to bottom from corporate and dark-money influence. (MT can only affect what happens in MT.)

They wouldn't have the power to do so—just like foreign folks don't have the power to spend in US politics. If an out-of-state corporation went beyond its Montana powers, Montana could revoke its ability to operate in the state as a corporation—and they'd probably lose their business insurance.

Hey there! Grateful for the shoutout from Prof. Reich today on this. We're very excited about this project—we really think it could change the face of American campaign finance.

I'm happy to answer any question on this—whatcha got, Bluesky?

Sedition is a very specific thing. Telling someone something about orders is not sedition.