Reason editor on Bill Moyers Journal debating corporate speech decision by SCOTUS

[BenIsForRon]

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02052010/watch2.html

I'm so glad Moyers had a libertarian on to debate this decision. I am still very torn on what should be done about it.

I think in this debate, Nick Gillespe ultimately won, because the law professor did not lay out a more precise law or amendment that could limit the influence of money while at the same time preserving free speech.

Which is sad, because I would like to see a foolproof law that would keep corporations from having the ability to flood media with lies and propaganda before an election. But.. is it really possible to make such a law?

I'm just afraid of the effect this might have on someone like Rand Paul. Imagine if Goldman Sachs or Halliburton started running negative ads every commercial break for the week before the election.

[BenIsForRon]

Sorry guys, I try not to bump my own threads, but I think this debate really represented both sides of the argument well. Check it out, let me know if you thing they left any important ideas out of the debate.

[The Patriot]

I honestly don't see this as a problem. I agree with the decision of the court. It is clear the congress has no right to abridge speech, whether it be the individual or a corporation. And beyond that, in a free society, I just think speech in all forms should be protected, and in a free market, businesses should be able to spend their capital how they wish, whether that be in investments, expansion, or commercials.

I honestly don't see what all the faux populist fuss is about. It isn't like individuals from corporations and unions weren't already giving money to forward their interests and setting up PACs. I don't see what good will come from say Goldman Sachs running adds for Obama in 2012, it certainly won't help Obama. At least the average joe will know in plain view who these companies support. I don't think the average guy is going to say, "Geez, Bank of America supports Obama, I am going to support them as well."

[BenIsForRon]

Valid point, but what if Goldman doesn't put their name in the commercial? What if they just put at the end of the ad: Paid for by concerned citizens.

It seems like a high risk to me, while at the same time, any law dealing with campaign finance will just be a bandaid on the underlying problem: voter ignorance.

So yeah, I totally don't know what to think about this issue, but I guess I'll know how to feel after we see how the 2010 elections go.

[Immortal Technique]

That was awesome thanks
The guy from Reason has me shifting my position on this issue
Good debate though

[NYgs23]

Media corporations already have unlimited free speech. This decision will lesson the power of the mainstream media, as well as incumbent politicians and the two big political parties.

[TastyWheat]

Okay, I like Nick Gillespie and all, but why is he wearing black all the time? Does he think he's Roy Orbison or something?

[Danke]

Okay, I like Nick Gillespie and all, but why is he wearing black all the time? Does he think he's Roy Orbison or something?

Maybe he admires Julian from the Trailer Park Boys?

[rprprs]

An excellent debate. As many problems as I have with Moyers, he occasionally pulls through. This was one of those times. Very fair and balanced.