$8000 PAC limit to be proposed.

By -
In today's Argus Leader, as part of his package of campaign finance reform, Secretary of State Chris Nelson is proposing an $8000 limit on PAC's:

Lawmakers arriving in Pierre on Monday also were greeted with their first look at a package of legislation reforming some of the state's campaign finance reporting laws.

"We'll spend some time on that issue. It's an important one," said Republican Sen. Bob Gray of Fort Pierre. He's the president pro-tem of the Senate.

Secretary of State Chris Nelson is pushing the package. It includes limits, for the first time, on contributions by individuals to political action committees. Nelson proposes an $8,000 limit for those committees.

"That makes a lot of sense," said Sen. Ben Nesselhuf, D-Vermillion. "I still think we also need to include those subfunds and other political funds in reporting requirements."

It also seeks to raise the amount that individuals may contribute legally to legislative and statewide candidates. It also proposes a $50 per day fine for late filing of campaign reports. About 30 legislative candidates missed the deadline last summer, Nelson said.

Several questions about campaign reports from the past election assure that the Nelson package will be among the more closely watched bills of the session.

Nelson said Monday that the limits on campaign contributions haven't been altered since 1975. His proposal raises the numbers roughly the same level as the rate of inflation.

For legislators, contributions from individuals could be no more than $1,000. The limit now is $250. The limit for contributions to legislators from other candidates' campaign committees would be $8,000.

"I don't know of many legislative candidates who will get $1,000 contributions, although some could," Gray said.
Read it all here.

It's about time the campaign donation limits were raised. Now the only question remains whether or not it is going to put a stop to the abuses out there, or will they create only a minor obstacle, easily hurdled just as they are now.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Nelson is smart. He knows he can buy support for his package by raising these limits. The thought of being able to raise and spend more money is exactly what these legislators want. This bill should be killed but will pass unanimously.
2:31 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

By -
Image
(Click on letter to enlarge) And while it may not be printed at taxpayer expense, I don't see a disclaimer, either. When they hold the special session (supposedly at the end of November) , since he's left them already, I think his colleagues should expel him from the caucus. Sure. At that point it's only going to be symbolic. But since he's already said he's running again in the near future, sometimes symbolism is enough.
Read more

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

By -
Here's some of the information on the Corson County Charges: COUNT I That on or about December of 2005, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT II That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT III That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration, separate and distinct from the act alleged in Count II, with
Read more

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.

By -
As the only South Dakota blogger out with 5 daughters, I feel I need to weigh in on the whole discussion that's occurring with regards to the HPV vaccine, and Governor Rounds' proposal to make it available. My family (including my three oldest girls) watched my mom, their grandmother, succumb slowly and painfully to cancer which spread throughout her body. If a similar fate from a different type of cancer was preventable through a simple shot, why wouldn't anyone advocate for it? At the age most of my kids are going to be getting it, they're still playing with barbies, and negative influences such as most of the programming on MTV, and other assorted trashy television is verboten in my house. All they're going to know about this vaccination is that it's a shot, just like for teatnus or measles. They'll go "Ow, I don't want a shot," and that will be it. Just another mark on their vaccination record. One check box for DPT, one for HPV, and so on
Read more