State House introduces HB 1089 – the Transparency and Accountability Act

Pat Powers

Is this the ethics reform bill that South Dakotans had been waiting for when they approved the unconstitutional Initiated Measure 22?

As primed by Representative Larry Rhoden in the House, and Senator Ryan Maher in the Senate, the Transparency and Accountability Act puts more teeth in addressing election wrongdoing, as well as a clear line of responsibility when a report of fraud or misuse of state funds occurs.

HB1089P by Pat Powers on Scribd

What do you think? Is this what South Dakotans were looking for in the first place (but without the whole “paying for politician’s robocalls and postcards with taxpayer dollars” thing?)

17 thoughts on “State House introduces HB 1089 – the Transparency and Accountability Act”

    1. Why do you say that? It is about putting some teeth into current laws requiring candidates to file their campaign finance on time, so we the voter can see where their support may be coming from. Don’t you want that?

      Talking about transparency, Mayor Huether vetoed the council’s bill that would have required the huge SF Park & Rec Dept to post the audio of their meetings, like the SD Legislature does. Evidently he doesn’t like transparency when it comes to his administration

      1. I read this law as a change to take away the impartiality away from the SOS and make them someone who can now easily become embroiled in controversy. I imagine a SOS endorsing candidates and then having to investigate and prosecute campaign violations. That portion specifically seems poorly thought out. Not all secretary of states are worthy of this power.

      1. I don’t see where Mr. A. was convicted of anything, but guilt by association is always a good conservative deflection from a topic when they don’t want to respond to facts–What does his thoughts on this issue have to do with Castro?- Perhaps you can refute the thoughts of the guy?

  3. I think it’s too late. Just appropriate the $12,000,000, take it from education, tell the teachers they don’t get their raises because the people voted to give the money to politicians instead, and be done with it.

  4. From-AP in blackhillspioneer———– “A judge put the initiative on hold while the law-suit moves forward”— Larry Rhoden–“it’s simply unConstitutional”—————–What kind of tyrannical mob state is this when these people think they are judges? It is NOT the job of Rhoden or any other (R) in the legislature to decide what is
    Constitutional….. It is getting harder to determine which is more prevalent among these people………corruption or stupidity.

    1. Larry Rhoden doesn’t think he’s a judge, Mark Barnett does. He’s the one that said it was unconstitutional “beyond a shadow of a doubt”. So who’s the stupid one?

    1. Jaa Dee,

      Totally convinced you are a conservative trying to make liberals look goofy. You are gifted, man. Gifted.

      1. What does that have to do with my post?— Did you or anybody post a link to the Barnett finding on IM22 where it proves he officially declared IM22 unConstitutional? Even if he had it is still going through the judicial system.

        Do you also believe a legislator can declare something unConstitutional?

        You want a discussion after that childish blather—-go for it.

Comments are closed.