You might be right as a matter of policy (I don't think so, but it's a debatable point), but as a Constitutional issue it's pretty clear to me and the majority of the Supremes that the right of groups of people who happen to speak through a corporation is strongly protected by the First Amendment.<p>Or, let's say, take your position to an extreme: that would entail forbidding the New York Times Corporation from publishing on politics.  I'll note that they are the plaintiffs in two important First Amendment cases, <i>New York Times Co. v. Sullivan</i> (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan</a>) and <i>New York Times Co. v. United States</i> (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_States" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_St...</a>), the first defined modern era libel case law and the second was WRT the Pentagon Papers.<p>Or does the provision for freedom of the press somehow carve out an exception for these "immense aggregations of wealth" (well, before the decline and fall of the MSM really got started).<p>As for donations, both 501 (c) (3) non-profits and companies are explicitly forbidden from donating to campaigns, they have to have individuals do it through a PAC.