Here we go again... a proposed constitutional amendment (which will fail anyway) will take away the right of corporations to freely expressing themselves during political campaigns, which will mean, among other things that almost all newspapers and TV commentators will be unable to offer their political commentary. Eugene Volokh clearly states the chilling effects of such an amendment.
Nearly all newspapers, TV stations, cable networks, and radio stations (except of course for nonprofits such as NPR) are organized as corporations or other entities established for business purposes. Under section 3, they "shall be prohibited" from making expenditures "in any election of any candidate ... or the vote upon any ballot measure." Since to write or print or broadcast anything, newspapers, networks, and broadcasters must spend money, this would ban — not just authorize Congress to ban, but itself ban — editorials supporting or opposing a candidate or a ballot measure. ("Shall be" in the Constitution is generally language that indicates that something becomes the law without further Congressional action, e.g., "This Constitution ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land" and "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.")
The proper response to corporate money is for people to get together and use what they do have to communicate the message and get others involved in the process. I'm not a fan of the big corporations either, but I see the largest problem as the fact that they tend to control the regulatory agencies intended to regulate them. Once you have big money combined with the power of government, you are much worse off.
Yep, Henry... the problem is that some folk are only for the free speech they agree with. Everyone else must be silenced; and the best way to do that is through the law.