The framers and signers of the U.S. Constitution would react with shock and disgust to the money being spent to control the democratic political process

...................................................................................................................................................................
People need a voice equal to the Koch money
By Jesse Lewis, June 11, 2014

It may never be a good idea, and definitely never a popular idea, to propose amending the First Amendment. But it seems a bad idea to support Supreme Court action that has already amended free speech to effectively say "the more money you throw at a democratic political process, the more free the speech, the more pervasive the speech and the more effective the speech."

It's even a worse idea to suggest you may have the insight to know how the authors of the First Amendment might respond if they were here today to witness political campaign spending. But, as long as you are conjecturing, why not imagine how the framers and signers of the U.S. Constitution would respond to the notion that democracy could be controlled by a few wealthy individuals (and of course, corporations). I'm going to imagine shock and disgust would be the mildest of their reactions.

The proposed amendment by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., may not be a good idea, but we need action to level the playing field, which allows the collective me to have what is said be as meaningful, and have as much impact on the political process, as Charles and David Koch's money.
...................................................................................................................................................................