After unsuccessfully trying to get on the South Carolina ballot for president in the last cycle, Stephen Colbert very nearly got on the state’s Republican ballot in its upcoming Jan. 21 primary.

According to the Free Times in Columbia, S.C., Colbert approached state Republican officials about making a significant contribution via his Citizens for a Better Tomorrow,Tomorrow PAC if the party got state elections officials to add a ballot referendum asking voters if “corporations are people” or “only people are people.” Apparently Colbert attempted to also sponsor a debate (which doesn’t sound so unusual in retrospect) before party officials decided that the partnership “was not a good fit.” Those were the words of state party executive director Matt Moore.

The question actually ended up on sample ballots, but the state Supreme Court ruled that all questions would be struck from the primary. Colbert is now asking state Democratic party chairman Dick Harpootlian to petition the high court for a rehearing, which he apparently will do in addition to appearing on “The Colbert Report” tonight.

“Trust me, this was a measure of last resort,” Colbert said in a statement. “I’ve always thought Democrats had only one skill: simultaneously being atheists and holier-than-thou. But apparently they also have legal standing in this case.”

“After the citizens of South Carolina declare once and for all that corporations are people, we can move on to other urgent issues facing our great nation,” said Colbert, “In 2016 I hope to include a question on whether Democrats are people.”

The whole campaign is the latest in Colbert’s effort to make a mockery of the current state of campaign finance laws, what with his own establishment of a SuperPAC and his funding of Iowa commercials supporting Rick Parry (with an “A”). Undoubtedly, there is more to come.

What is still a bit bizarre is why the state Republican party was even talking to Colbert in the first place. Apparently they have been struggling to find ways to fund the primary, and apparently even satirical money is better than no money at all.