IT’S GETTING TOUGHER TO BE INVOLVED IN POLITICS IN SOUTH DAKOTA
by Lee Schoenbeck
Remember the lady from Hermosa back in the 1970’s that didn’t want people hunting mourning doves. She got the issue on the ballot and won. Hunters got organized a few years later and got the season back, but for a brief time – a single citizen roared. Today, with our current campaign election laws, its more likely that the lady from Hermosa would have committed a crime than an election win. The new campaign finance laws are aimed at curtailing average citizen involvement in elections.
In the recent past, being a treasurer of a campaign was something you did for a friend. You signed a few checks, made a few deposits, and did one or two reports a campaign cycle. Today, not so true. It is highly likely that the citizen groups promoting assorted ballot issues, unless staffed with a CPA and an attorney, are in violation of several criminal statutes in the Campaign Finance Requirements chapter of our Code.
SDCL 12-27-1 includes very broad definitions of “political committees” (PC) and “ballot question committees” (BQC). Just not being a PAC is not enough to avoid the filing requirements and criminal penalties. For example, if you and your friends are opposed to one of the ballot issues and you want to get involved against it, if you meet the very loose definition of a PC, it’s a crime for you to accept any money (no pooling a bunch of twenties) or pay any bills (bar tab) for the group with the office of treasurer vacant. SDCL 12-27-2. Some of these groups of citizens are going to be surprised to find out they even needed an “office of treasurer”.
At a time when a full page ad in the paper is going to run over $500, the same group of concerned South Dakotans needs to realize that if they pool $501 without filing a “Statement of Organization” that are again engaged in criminal behavior. SDCL 12-27-3. If they don’t get the right biographical information on the source of the funds, another crime. SDCL 12-27-11. Even if they thought they weren’t something formal, that needed to be filing government reports, they still might be criminals. SDCL 12-28-18.
Here’s the real kicker of the new crimes – SDCL 12-27-19. When this group receives a check from an “entity”, if the group of citizens doesn’t get the required state form from the entity BEFORE receiving the check – another crime.
In most of these instances it’s the treasurer of the committee that’s going to jail, but sometimes the crimes catch more citizens.
The real question to ask is what impact all this “do good” and “feel good” legislation will have on regular folks wanting to promote – or protect – their values at the ballot box. All of our elected officials that have a vote, a veto, or a voice in this legislation have made it harder for South Dakotans to participate freely in elections. Maybe it’s time to relook at all these reforms.
South Dakota has a proud history of leading the nation in the initiated measure and referral process. There are obvious examples of groups taking advantages of structural flaw in that process of late. Reaction by officeholders to the abuses are not surprising, but more government burden on the innocent citizens isn’t the answer.
Well written, well stated. Unfortunately South Dakota has turned into a state where those with the deepest pockets write and enforce the rules. In this state, money and the people/groups that have it have taken control. Truly a sad turn of events…
What changed?
Yes, and those are just some of the state-level regulations. If you register your political committee with the IRS, you have many federal issues to deal with as well.
Overtime we try to “drive money out of politics” or “make politics more transparent” or a host of other bromides which sound good, we end up making it harder on grass roots people just trying trying to influence their government and make it more likely money and professionals will have the biggest voice.
Why do big companies not really mind most regulations? Because their smaller, nimbler, more innovative competitors can’t navigate the regulations.
Or big companies being less concerned with taxes? They can more easily pass them on to their customers.
Or rich liberals liking high property taxes for “education, arts, and welfare”? They have more influence with the government and it gets spent on them anyway (or makes them feel less guilty about their wealth and obligation to be charitable).
What is missing in the system is truth and truth-tellers.
1) Our media no longer objectively makes sure we have information. Did they examine the depth and details of the initiated measures or did they just allow each side to present whatever they wanted and hope we sorted out the details?
2) Granted he was limited by space in which to give an explanation, did our attorney generals “explanation” of IM22 explain anything really or did he just regurgitate the “intent” of the sponsors?
3) Look back at the discussion of Marsy’s Law and IM22 and honestly assert the public was informed by the proponents, opponents, press, and attorney general in any way. The entire thing was yelling, obfuscation, misdirection, and positioning. And, to Lee’s point, where was the common grass roots activist in the process as compared to the professionals on all sides who yelled obfuscated, misdirected, etc.?
On another subject, last night I was in an intellectual (to the extent Im capable of having one) discussion on my deck with a really smart person. He was the one who rhetorically asked “where are the truth tellers?” and specifically said the media has become the “anti-truth” for most people meaning if the media says/promotes it, the truth is on the other side.
He further showed me the “news feed” on his phone over the last two days. Literally, while the President is at a G-20 summit, there were only a few “articles” on the summit and ZERO on the substance while all G-20 articles were slam pieces on the President or his family (Donald Trump rightly responded to the slam on his daughter because we all know how the media would have fawned if it had been Chelsea covering for her mother). Everything objective I’ve learned on the summit came from reading international news sources.
Right now this state has ONE (singular) real news reporter in this state (Bob Mercer) and maybe a couple of real news editors. Our TV stations are barely more intelligent than “Entertainment Tonight” and tell me where I can find the hourly NEWS on the radio?
But the Republican establishments response to IM 22 and Marcy’s Law, and other initiatives and referendums, during the election cycle last year, was to merely say, “Just vote ‘No’ on everything.” Didn’t the GOP establishment, through its strategy, merely feed this lack of discussion of the issues surrounding the 2016 initiatives and referendums, however?
“Everytime” not “overtime”. Autocorrect.
Troy and Lee nailed it.
Absolutely spot on Troy.
We have been driven into hyper regulation status by all the accusations of this fraud and that fraud Rightly or Wrongly but as my dear friend Bob Beadle said to me years ago; “Charlie remember one thing. Every bill you pass takes a certain amount of Freedom away from someone!”
Great article Lee!
Speaking of that woman from Hermosa. I am reminded that that was the same year McGovern challenged Nixon. And when McGovern exited the voting booth in Mitchell that November of ’72, after having voted for himself for president, a reporter asked the anti-war Democrat McGovern, how he had voted on the morning dove initiative. I remember McGovern responding to the reporter by saying, “I can’t image anyone wanting to shoot a dove….” 😉
But speaking of the woman from Hermosa, once again, let us also remember, that when she started her petition drive on that issue some 45 years ago, that she didn’t have to worry about getting signatures from every county or a proportionate number of signatures from a balance of rural and urban counties as some are suggesting legislatively today. No, she just collected signatures, because in a world that supposedly backs direct democracy, there are no boundaries other than the greater political universe, or in this case the State itself. Because when there are democratic strides of a direct nature in a republican form of government, the idea should be to empower the person or the people and not the political units or counties, which are merely inanimate by-products of a mere republican form of government…..
EC,
Yes, I think the GOP party collectively failed to articulate specifics against these bills.
Troy,
Thank you….
EC
the flaw in the system is not the disbursement of signatures – I agree with you.
the flaw is the lack of disbursement of information when voting – under the current system. If you don’t like the Pelosi line (I’ll read it when it becomes law), you can’t like the way voters are presented with what they are voting on under the current system
Im going to write an article on this topic next