Most large assemblies of people are like that. Unions are like that. Political action groups are like that. Underground movements are like that. The impracticalities of having everyone agree on everything means that <i>whenever you have a large assembly of people you must hand over control to decision-makers</i>.<p>Shareholders do have ultimate control over corporations, by the way. But shareholders, generally, would rather sell their stock--or fall asleep at the wheel--then exercise corporate governance.<p>But that's besides the point.<p>You are downplaying the fact that the Constitution clearly grants us right to assembly, in the same amendment that grants us free speech, and an assembly of people has the right to speech just as much as a person does. According to jurisprudence, the government may only curtail these rights with laws that meet a "strict scrutiny" standard: they must meet a compelling government interest, they must be narrowly tailored, and they must be close to minimally restrictive. McCain-Feingold does not meet the second and third standards, and 4 justices think it does not meet the first.