Tapio campaign hadn’t spent $5k by March 8th, but today reporting $115K in expenses Loans. Updated again….

Pat Powers

A couple of interesting points in relation to the Tapio campaign today. As you’ll recall, Neal stated today that he’s put $115,000 of his own money in the campaign so far:

This caused me to remember that I hadn’t posted his financial disclosure to the Clerk of the US House yet, so I went to pull it, but found this curious memo:

So that means that as of March 8, 2018, Neal noted to the Clerk of the US House that he hadn’t raised or spent $5000 in his campaign. But 30 days later, he’s declaring that he’s spent loaned his campaign $115,000. That’s seems like a strong burn rate for 30 days, especially coming off of a period where less than 5k was spent.  (Senator Tapio wished it clarified that while he has loaned that much to his campaign, he may not have spent that yet.)

In about another week, Tapio’s first campaign finance report for the first quarter of the year (1/1 – 3/31) should be due which will further flesh out his campaign finances, and provide some insight as to what he’s spent why he’s loaned his campaign $115,000 on over the course of the past month.

Now, US House Committee on Ethics notes in their manual that:

Individuals are required to file an FD Statement once they “qualify” as a candidate by raising or spending more than $5,000 in a campaign for election to the House of Representatives. If you receive a notice to file a Statement before you have raised or spent more than $5,000 on the campaign, you should notify the Clerk of the House in writing or through the electronic filing system that the campaign has not yet crossed the $5,000 threshold.

and…

Funds loaned to a campaign from any source, including from the candidate, as well as funds expended for state filing fees, count toward the $5,000 threshold.”

Yet, Neal has no disclosure form into the Clerk of the US House at this time, despite his claim of $115k of loans in expenditures.

Hmmm..

Update:  Senator Tapio contacted me this morning and pointed out this passage that indicates that his report is not due until May 5th since he did not enter the race until 2018:

First, a qualifying candidate must file no later than 30 days before any election (including primaries) in which the individual is participating. Thus, if you become a candidate on January 5 in an election year and the primary is on April 22, the report is due by March 23 (no later than 30 days before the election).

Same page 3 as cited above.  So, we have to wait another 3 1/2 weeks for the financial disclosure form, but we should see first quarter campaign finance filings by next week.

Another Update: Senator Tapio wished for me to explicitly clarify that the $115,000 is a loan put into his campaign, and does not reflect his expenditures:

I loaned my campaign over $5,000. The ethics rules indicate that exceeding the $5,000 threshold makes me a candidate, which then requires me to file a financial disclosure. Your correction correctly denotes that I have not violated the financial disclosure rules, as they clearly indicate May 5 as the actual deadline.

However, your continued use of “expenses” terminology is legally troublesome. Loans to campaigns are not an expense. By stating I have $115,000 in expenses or that I have a high burn rate is slander. The $5,000 threshold doesn’t have anything to do with expenses. Therefore, nothing factual leads you to that headline.

If you keep that headline and stand by the claim of loans are expenses, you are proving your ignorance in front of people with whom you work. Failure to correct that important factual issue, can have deleterious affects on your credibility, and can undermine the credibility of those with whom you associate.

A loan to an organization is never classified as an expense. Revenues, such as donations which will not be paid back, and expenses, legitimate expenditures of a campaign, appear on a profit and loss statement. Loans are simply classified as a liability on a balance sheet, and in no way indicate the money was either used or not used for expenditures.

And there you go.

The campaign finance report can come out anytime now. Anytime…..

51 thoughts on “Tapio campaign hadn’t spent $5k by March 8th, but today reporting $115K in expenses Loans. Updated again….”

  2. I believe you’re confusing him dumping $115,000 of his own cash into the campaign with the amount spent by his campaign. Two different things.

  3. He’s going to have ethics issues before the primary… this shows a complete lack of campaign infrastructure on Tapio’s part. Abandon ship while you can!

  4. Could it be that Tapio was spending money traveling the state before he became a candidate? That would not have to be reported as raised or spent by his campaign, would it? Lot of money though.

  5. Simply having the guts to run a self-funded campaign with such low odds of success is a sure sign of huge balls. He’s the only one bringing real attention to the wolves at our doorstep rather than the mice in our kitchen and is entirely unapologetic about being politically incorrect. He’s more similar to Trump than Dusty or Shantel. Whether or not that’s a positive and will help him in such an agricultural state, we’ll just have to find out. Both Dusty and Shantel are very capable individuals and would serve us well, but I fear they wouldn’t have the same gall Trump has, which Tapio has exuded that shows that he doesn’t want to go to congress because its the next step in his career. He wants to go to congress because he knows what he wants to get done.

    1. The line between having huge balls and being an idiot with a crap ability to assess risk and reality is a pretty murky one.

  8. Time to dump Shad. Tapio would be a serious contender if he had good counsel. If he wants to win he should spend some of his $$$ on a real campaign advisor.

    1. You don’t know Shad. He’s smarter than Neal is by miles. There’s better argument to be made that Tapio’s message would be even more muddled if Shad weren’t helping him. His speeches don’t reflect the quality of his quotes in his press releases. It’s not a mystery.

      1. Obviously not when you see potential missteps like this in a campaign. Even dumb people know how to fill out simple paperwork.

        1. It’s very likely Tapio is handling the financials himself. It would make sense given he’s spending his own money. Self funding candidates are often a different breed. They want someone to do the campaign workload but they don’t like to share credit for success. Only blame for mistakes.

          1. Then he isn’t smart enough to win this campaign. We’ll hear about how it was the establishment that brought his downfall and how the Party wouldn’t help him.

            His advisors do deserve some part of the blame is this is truly happening because they need to take some power away from him. Self-funders aren’t smart enough on their own to completely comply with campaign finance laws – they just aren’t. Successful campaigns are won by teams of people- not individuals.

            If Tapio isn’t willing to listen to competent people- he’s not competent to serve.

  9. Tapio lost all credibility and effectiveness in a 35 person Senate. Can you imagine how deep he’d get buried in Washington?

  10. The nation wanted change and we elected Trump. Now it’s time to send him someone that he can work with and I believe Tapio is the only candidate that can guarantee that.

  11. If Chad were so genius he wouldn’t be wrapped up with Tapio to start..maybe he could fire Tapio. That’s be even funnier.

    1. Not Smart, his name is spelled SHAD, not Chad . . . see the many replies before yours.

  12. These side issues may get Tapio in trouble, but they are distractions. He is focused on the real threats to this nation.

    Shantel spends too much time talking bad about Neal. She needs to run her own race and quit trashing him behind the scenes.

  13. It will be interesting if any of the candidates, Congressional or Gubernatorial show up to the Sheraton Wed at 7:30.

      1. FREE Wednesday April 11, Sioux Falls Sheraton Event Center, 7:30 pm

        Anni Cyrus, Former Child Bride Speaks
        Aynaz Anni Cyrus is an American-Iranian Human rights activist, journalist, producer and freedom fighter. A child bride in her home country of Iran, abused and imprisoned as a teen, she escaped to America and now advocates for women and girls suffering…
        EVENTBRITE.COM

      2. Why don’t you show up and protest, or better yet come and ask Annie Cyrus some questions. I think it will be very interesting. Nothing like freedom of speech done in a civil manner.

    3. Tara would you please remind everyone at the that attends another event that tries to single out and scapegoat Muslims that the tragedy of child brides is happening here in the United States and is still legal in a number of states sometimes practiced by various religious faiths or individuals based on their interpretation of the Bible.

      1. I have researched the laws and no where in the US is is legal to rape and marry a child. They do make accept ions if say the boyfriend is 18 and his girlfriend who might be 16 gets pregnant would be able to marry with consent from the parents. The Florida law has been changed.

    1. No, he said he needs a terrorist attack. Why don’t you take him at his word?

      Suspect a Trump endorsement isn’t happening.

  15. For Godsakes, Pat. How much more clearly does it have to be spelled out that there was no thesis premise for you to write your original article before you have the decency and good sense to admit you were wrong and pull the damn thing entirely?

    Someone clearly suggested ever so gently with the very first comment out of the box that there was no ‘there, there,’ by pointing out that you were clearly mistaking Neal’s loan to his own campaign as an ‘expense.’ A conceptual misnomer so diametrical and ill founded as to cast serious doubts not only on your data interpretive skills as a reporter but on your procedural acumen as an erstwhile campaign adviser.

    Then follows a string of ill founded and ignorantly insulting comments based on the faulty and easily disproven thesis of your article suggesting stupidity, incompetence and even ethics violations by either Neal or myself. All baseless. All easily disproven. And none protected under the public persons strictures of slander law because they deal not with opinion or expression of interpreted fact, but with attempted documentation on your part which used ‘evidence’ as counterweight to convince your audience of the absolute and unchallenged veracity and credibility of your claim, which you buttressed and reinforced with your own response in the comments section. You doubled and tripled down on an absolute lie.

    Loans are not expenses any more than a campaign contribution from any other donor would qualify as such.

    Neal may be too nice a guy to actually suggest actionable response to such a clear case of misinformation and attempted damage to reputation, but I’m not.

    My suggestion would be that you scrap your baseless post, stop trying to couch it in an erroneously cited ‘missed reporting deadline,’ that doesn’t even hit until May 5th and think twice before publishing articles that stretch so hard to do damage to opponents of the mainstream establishment candidates who line your margins and your pockets.

    Your bias is showing. Again.

    Shad

      1. That’s a good thing to have in your search history. Nicely done. And very fitting for someone whose go-to is to engage in hemistich and recitativo suggesting that people espousing the very loving, tolerant and inclusive virtues of the Christian gospel are somehow regressive in warning of the comparatively intolerant and violent tendencies of the full implementation of Sharia. It sort of makes you look like a bumpkin. And I’m guessing that regardless of the size of your monthly meetings, those 793 robes are probably out of reach unless this summer’s youth car wash and bake sale goes incredibly well. Caramel rolls are a surefire hit.

        1. My Muslim neighbor lets me borrow his lawn edger. He has yet to behead anyone afaik. Back to your bunker, chickensh*t.

  16. Yep. And my guess is, your neighbor is not a full adherent of Sharia law, which you’ll note was precursor to the premise which is observable fact for all but those who’ve lost their heads across the Muslim middle east and now in western Europe. I guess your Ingsoc device doesn’t tell you about those incidents or the very clear reality of what’s happening in peaceful places falling victim to the myth of multiculturalism and ‘The Religion of Peace.’ I’d encourage independent research that doesn’t involve Snopes. Really ‘Give it the full Dusty’ on the Mecca and Medina portions of the Qu’ran and the Hadith. Let me know what you find.

    1. By that logic, you shouldn’t wear cotton/poly blends. Extremists exist in all cultures. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

  20. The guy who wrote that last update sure loves looking at themself in the mirror and hearing himself talk. Just a pretty boy who isn’t too smart.

Comments are closed.