NRA Alerts members to vote NO on Initiated Measure 22

Pat Powers

The National Rifle Association sent out an alert tonight to it’s South Dakota Voters, as it views the awful IM22 as a direct attack on organizations such as itself, designed to prevent them from communicating about political issues without disclosing personal and private information of their members and donors

Of course, you can read it for yourself:

screen-shot-2016-10-25-at-6-57-42-pm

18 thoughts on “NRA Alerts members to vote NO on Initiated Measure 22”

  1. 2nd paragraph– Blatant lies for the gullible..It doesn’t do any of those things, it would stop groups like this and “libbie” groups from paying for favors from politicians…. Are conservatives not insulted that they are known to be so ignorant they can be fed this garbage and lap it up without question?

    1. It actually would do those things. Measure 22 is so long and complicated it’s hard to keep track of all the misguided things it would do. The NRA is correct in their statement, though. You should read the measure and see.

    2. Jaa Dee, Have you read the 34-page bill, which was written by a group in MA, by the way?

      Its enactment would do exactly what is outlined in the NRA letter. The names and addresses of donors to organizations who make statements about policies would be placed on a list on the internet for anyone to see.

      The purpose of that is to scare people from donating money to those organizations and to scare those organizations from expressing themselves on political matters so that they do not have to report their donors. Either way, the idea is to stifle people’s Constitutional rights of free speech, privacy, and free association.

      It is not difficult to find examples in other states of people who were harassed and even physically attacked after their harassers/attackers found their personal information on so-called disclosure lists. It is scary.

      1. I suspect that I have read much more of it than you….POST the quotes from the IM that says what the nra claims— in the 2nd paragraph….

        1. I have read every word of the bill.

          When you have, you will know to what I was referring and perhaps you might even know what you are writing about for a change.

          1. Don’t bet on that last part with him 🙂

            I have read it also…heck the pro-22 are advertising about how it will require disclosure (ie harrassment) of donors

            1. .POST the quotes from the IM that says what the nra claims— in the 2nd paragraph..

              “require disclosure of donors….”– Sad, that you cannot even understand what “doners” is referring to

          3. You guys stated something as FACT if you can NOT produce proof you lied as blatantly as the nra — Once more —POST the quotes from the IM that says what the nra claims— in the 2nd paragraph…

          4. . Are conservatives not insulted that they are known to be so ignorant they can be fed this garbage and lap it up without question?

  2. Is this the vote that had at least 5 pages of legal explanation in the local paper to explain what all it said? If you have to use that much space to explain then it for sure is no good. Vote NO.

    1. Sir, you have just defined “willful ignorance”…
      Attorney General explanation

      The Attorney General explanation for this measure is as follows:[5]
      “

      This measure extensively revises State campaign finance laws. It requires additional disclosures and increased reporting. It lowers contribution amounts to political action committees; political parties; and candidates for statewide, legislative, or county office. It also imposes limits on contributions from candidate campaign committees, political action committees, and political parties.

      The measure creates a publicly funded campaign finance program for statewide and legislative candidates who choose to participate and agree to limits on campaign contributions and expenditures. Under the program, two $50 “credits” are issued to each registered voter, who assigns them to participating candidates. The credits are redeemed from the program, which is funded by an annual State general-fund appropriation of $9 per registered voter. The program fund may not exceed $12 million at any time.

      The measure creates an appointed ethics commission to administer the credit program and to enforce campaign finance and lobbying laws.

      The measure prohibits certain State officials and high-level employees from lobbying until two years after leaving State government. It also places limitations on lobbyists’ gifts to certain state officials and staff members.

      If approved, the measure may be challenged in court on constitutional grounds.

  4. An Anti corruption committee is needed with investigating powers…….having the Attorney General investigate EB5 and Gear Up is like having the fox watch out for the hen house…….. I find the article funny that they criticize where some of the funding is coming from …….and here comes the NRA outside of the state telling us what we need in SD. Even Thune says (and I have it on tape) when one party is so dominate you get some very strange legislation,…….. I22 is needed to keep our HONEST politicans in SD honest.

    1. “is needed to keep our HONEST politicans in SD honest.”— Haaaa, if that happened they (r) pols. in this state couldn’t get rich from pay offs from all the special interest groups—- like the nra….. As we see just here they have a base that is too willfully ignorant to even look at the IM..

  5. “The National Rifle Association sent out an alert tonight to it’s South Dakota Voters”

    its – not it’s.

Comments are closed.