The article is an opinion piece by Thom Hartmann arguing that the modern U.S.electoral system has been significantly distorted by the legal doctrine of corporate personhood.

Hartmann claims that historical legal interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment, particularly rooted in the late 19th century, have been misused to extend constitutional protections originally intended for individuals to corporations.He traces this development to the 1886 Santa Clara County v.

Southern Pacific Railroad case, arguing that a clerk’s headnote, rather than the Court’s formal ruling, helped establish the idea that corporations could be treated as “persons” under the Constitution.According to the article, this interpretation evolved over time through subsequent Supreme Court decisions such as First National Bank v.Bellotti and later Citizens United v.FEC, which expanded corporate political spending rights under the First Amendment.Hartmann argues that these rulings have enabled wealthy corporations and individuals to exert disproportionate influence over U.S.elections through political spending and lobbying.

He connects this to broader concerns about democratic integrity, suggesting that corporate financial power now effectively functions as political speech.

The piece also references a recent Delaware court decision allowing municipalities to grant voting rights in specific local contexts to corporate entities that own property, framing it as a troubling extension of corporate political influence.The author concludes that these developments represent a long-standing distortion of constitutional law that undermines democratic governance.

He calls for reforms such as constitutional amendments or Supreme Court restructuring to reverse corporate personhood doctrines and restore political power to individual citizens rather than corporate entities.