Remy: 5 Things You Didn't Know About Citizens United

The controversial
Citizens United Supreme Court decision, which struck
down many restrictions on campaign finance practices, is four years
old. When the ruling came down, blowhards such as Keith Olbermann
(then on MSNBC) railed that it was “our Dred Scott,”
likening it to the notorious and despicable antebellum ruling that
blacks had no rights whites need respect.

The video above lays out “5 Things You
Didn’t Know About Citizens United” and should make us all feel
a little better about the ruling. It’s hosted by Reason regular
Remy, produced by Sean Malone, and comes from the Center for Competitive
Politics, a nonprofit headed up by former Federal Election
Commission chairman Bradley A. Smith (read Reason articles by and
about him
here).

Shorlty after the Citizens United ruling in 2010, Reason TV
released “3
Reasons Not to Sweat the Citizens United SCOTUS Ruling“:

That video in turn led to my appearing on Bill Moyers’ PBS show,
where I discussed Citizens United, campaign finance, and
the benefits of anonymous political speech with the host and
Harvard’s Lawrence Lessig.

Go
here for video and a transcript of that
conversation. It was a wide-ranging, spirited, and
at-times intense discussion that is the very model of excellent
public TV. I’m happy to say that I received a lot of email from
people who said that I persuaded them to a more libertarian
perspective on the issue. Here’s a snippet from the end of the
appearance:

BILL MOYERS: And in the long run, what do
you think we ought to do?

NICK GILLESPIE: I, well, you know, I think
that we should move in the direction that Citizens United is
pointing. And to have less campaign finance regulation. Because
that will increase the amount and variety of speech. When you talk
about having, you know, controlling or taking back our democracy,
that means saying, “Okay, you can speak now. You cannot speak now.”
In the end, it’s about the suppression of speech, which is the most
dangerous thing.

I don’t like corporations. I don’t like
politicians. I, for whatever reason, I love free speech. And I see
this decision as enabling more of that, which will help me and my,
you know, gang of ragtag utopians, hopefully, pull off the caper of
the 21st century, and actually work towards a government that, you
know, does its proper functions well, and leaves us the rest alone,
to live our lives in peace.

LAWRENCE LESSIG: So, yay, free speech, we
agree about that.

NICK GILLESPIE: Absolutely.

LAWRENCE LESSIG: Horrible, horrible
lobbyist, fundraising Congress. We also used to agree about that,
at the end of your video. So, I should think we agree. We should
have more free speech and less control by lobbyists or the funders.
And have a Congress that cares about the people and not about their
funders.

NICK GILLESPIE: And we can do that now. We
don’t need a constitutional amendment. What we need to do is to say
to our congressmen, “If you vote for this law, if you vote for this
policy, you’re done. You’re fried.” And that can happen. And it has
happened. And it should happen more. I think we are moving into a
world of more engaged politics, more participatory politics,
because of the internet. Because of other dimensions of life.
Decentralization of power or rather of knowledge, if not of
political power. And it will lead to a decentralization of
political power.