Not long ago Newt Gingrich seemed to be a big fan of super PACs.
The former House Speaker two years ago called the new legal framework that gave rise to unlimited fundraising by outside groups a “great victory for free speech” and predicted that the biggest of the recent federal court decisions deregulating campaign rules would make “it easier for middle-class candidates to compete against the wealthy and incumbents.”
Then he got a taste of the new rules in Iowa.
After weeks of withering attacks by a super PAC supporting his rival Mitt Romney, Gingrich won’t stop talking about the injustices of unchecked spending — specifically the $3 million spent attacking him. He even coined a name for it, saying he got “Romney-boated” by his chief opponent’s “millionaire friends.”
Of course, this really isn't a case of flip-flopping: Gingrich continues to support the new campaign finance system, even though he's whining about the way in which it is working. But given that nobody actually seems happy with what's happened to campaign finance in the wake of Citizens United, wouldn't it be nice if someone like Gingrich had the courage to step forward and admit he was wrong—and that a functioning democracy requires a campaign funding framework that not only allows all voices to be heard, but also holds politicians accountable for the messages they put on air—and who they ask to pay for them?