Can a corporation walk into a voting booth and pull a lever for a candidate?

[WCGreen]

Simple question and yet this seems to never have been considered in the run up to corporations assuming the legal protection of "person-hood".

I get the idea of a corporation assuming person-hood in the form of a board acting at the behest of the shareholders. It makes sense to have one "person" enter into a legal agreement, keep the corporation alive longer than any given shareholder, allow the corporation to act as a person in all things financial and legal.

But if the corporation can not walk into a voting booth and vote, should they be able to act as a person in the political Field? Never mind the fact that if the corporation could vote then all the shareholders would, in essence, be given two votes.

And given the very fact that a corporation can have convicted felons as shareholders, other corporations as shareholders and even foreign entities as shareholders, should they be allowed to act in a purely political way?

I have no problems with people who own corporations getting together and give individually to the candidate of their choose, that is free speech. But to poison the political world with money from an entity that can not vote is, to me, a slap in the face to all of the people who have only their vote to check the millions of dollars that corporations can bring to an issue.

Donating money is an extension of a persons political rights as a voter. A corporation can not vote because it is a collection of anonymous shareholders

In the same vein, children and trusts should not be allowed to donate money since they can not vote. Currently, kids over the age of ten, I believe, can contribute money. Trusts can also donate money and should not be able to because they can not vote.

Bottom line; until a corporation can walk into a voting booth and pull a lever, they should not be treated as a political entity. Period!