Your proposal is problematic and probably unworkable.
"[Electing] representatives who are clearly willing to create a constitutional amendment separating corporation and state" is problematic because (1) incumbency is like a super power in elections, and (2) even virgin candidates will say whatever it takes to win. We have an abundance of evidence -- to the point of it being cliche -- that campaign promises aren't reliable indicators of future actions.
The amendment process itself is also problematic.
As set out in Article Five of the Constitution, an amendment can be offered in one of two ways: It can originate in the U.S. Congress with a 2/3rds majority vote in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, or; by 2/3rds of the states holding Constitutional Conventions to propose amendments. All of the amendments currently in force originated in Federal legislative action.
In the first instance, you would be asking -- for the most part -- entrenched politicians to act against their own selfish interests and the interests of their corporate masters. Good luck with that.
The other option must be considered even more troublesome since, despite its being available since the adoption of the Constitution itself, it has never been exercised. Not only has no Constitutional Amendment ever been adopted via this procedure, none has even been seriously proposed.
All amendments, proposed by whichever procedure, would then need ratification by 3/4s of the states, each by either state Constitutional Conventions (which has been done once) or by state legislative action ( the way all other amendnments were adopteded).
So, if history is any guide, the only likely course is the first, a course which would require a greater nobility on the part of a majority of federal legislators than they have ever previously demonstrated
Again, good luck with that.