As opposed to letting it stand or fall on it's own merits, the nanny staters who took free choice away from business owners have decided to challenge the validity of the referral petitions:

Of about 25,400 signatures reviewed by the South Dakota Tobacco Free Kids Network, nearly 40 percent were found to be invalid, the group contends.

Read it here.  KELO land had something to say about it too. Too bad they were wrong:

Thursday was a historic day in South Dakota. For the first time a group is challenging a petition to put an issue on a statewide ballot. Supporters of a statewide smoke free law filed paperwork with the Secretary of State's office claiming opponents did not collect enough signatures to put a smoking ban on the 2010 ballot.

Read that here.  Sorry guys. You're wrong. It was tried back in the 1980's.  Petition invalidation has been tired before (my dad was hired as the investigative firm to break a ballot initiative petition) and let me tell you this - it is prohibitively expensive to try to prove. It can involve hundreds, if not thousands of hours of independent investigators reviewing each and every petition, and a ton of court time.

Back then, as it was fought out in court, because of the expense, the plaintiffs eventually gave up. (Dad thought they had the petition broken, but he wasn't paying the bills on it.)

It may be a new thing under the current law. But it certainly was done before.

And as difficult as it sounds, it appears as if the nanny staters are going to try to do it anyway.

My question - if they're so secure in their position, what are they scared of?

What are they scared of?

Apparently there's a troupe of residents of Brookings who are peeved off. Why? Just one of those secret things decided by a public body behind closed doors without informing the public as to what their plans are......  Recently, the Brookings county commission has started to buy up property around the courthouse according to "some plan."

And that secrecy (as well as some potential violations of the open meeting laws) has people all riled up.

What has everyone mad? The County Commission has undertaken a plan to go on a land buying spree for surrounding properties, and are already saying that they intend to knock them down.  Except they won't tell anyone what the plan is, with said plan being decided behind closed door. If there is actually a plan. As I had noted when it came up in the newspaper once before....

"They are not open meetings," he responded. It's a task force. We've signed a confidentiality agreement at this so we can discuss all kinds of crazy things that don't end up in the newspaper, he said. "And some of the things that we've come up with are kind of crazy I think.

And we don't want to excite a lot of people until we have a plan. And at this point we do not have a plan.'"

Err, yeah. Right. I would point out that the land owners are not doing anything wrong.  They're interested in selling properties for a set price to a willing buyer. I would too.  The problem with this lays solely at the feet of the county commission doing things any public body should be embarrassed to do.  And even the county commission itself is divided on it.

The discussion at one point became contentious as Gregg accused Falken of continually criticizing Gregg's actions as a member of the task force.

The task force was started by the Brookings Economic Development Corporation and also includes city council members and other local officials . It was formed earlier this year shortly after the commission's attempt to purchase Gas 'N Mor on Sixth Street for use as an administrative building fell through. The group's stated purpose is to provide more input on the space-needs issue the county has been wrestling with for years.

and...

He also asked Gregg and Larson why they hadn't provided more information to the commission about the options the task force is considering. "I don't want to circumvent anything that's happening , but I really haven't heard anything coming back from the committee yet of any potential things that we could possibly be looking at," he said.

Commission Chairman Larson responded that the task force had been forwarding written reports to both the city council and county commission to update the boards on the task force's progress. (Those documents have not been made available to the Register.)

Larson told Falken that the task force discussions are separate from the commission's actions, and that the task force would discuss the purchase if and when it becomes official.

Read it all here.  Secret documents and the bodies involved aren't fully informed of what's going on?  No wonder their plans are being referred to a vote!

It seems as if the county is trying to nibble away at the surrounding properties while intentionally concealing what they're up to, as in the words of one commissioner, while he attempts to defend and rationalize what the commission is doing...

"It's kind of like going to McDonald's and eating a Big Mac," he said. "If you take her all down at once, you're going to choke. We've got to take a little bit of a step at a time, and after we get this completed then we'll move onto the next process."

So, they'll just expend public dollars and then let us all know about what their plan is after it's completed - without any opportunity for discussion, dissent and debate? Amazing.

This situation on the part of some commissioners acting without opening up their plans for a public airing is shameful. I have heard word that some people out there are so mad about this that they may contemplate a recall effort for the members of the county commission. But at the moment, they've been out there collecting signatures on petitions to contest the County Commission's actions.

And guess what - it appears that they might just have done it:

Good morning everyone!

This is the first update of the day (Wednesday, 17 June) – but we wanted you to know…….we did it!

We currently have over a thousand signatures – and petitions are still coming in! You are truly awesome!

OK – so here’s the schedule for the day:

• Nancy and Gloria will take the first 1000 notarized signatures to the courthouse as close to 9:15 this morning as possible [this timeline is doorbell and phone call dependent - J ]. Marty (Gloria’s other half) will be at 715 4th St. while we are at the courthouse.
• We know there are still signatures being collected, and signatures that are being notarized. We plan to take a second batch of signatures to the courthouse as soon after 1:15 as possible, and we will make a final delivery at 4:30 this afternoon.
• If you already have signatures collected, please have them notarized and deliver them to Gloria’s (715 4th St) as soon as possible – so we can include them in the 1:00 PM delivery.
• If you are still collecting – wonderful! Please get those signatures notarized and delivered to Gloria’s no later than 2:30 this afternoon.
• If you need a ride to a notary, or need notarized signatures picked up, please call Nancy or Gloria or Marty
• If you have signatures that come in after that, call us! We’ll decide the best way to get them counted – because our window to add signatures closes when the courthouse closes at 5:00 today!
• If you would like to take part in any of the three deliveries (or all of them!) – please let us know so we can be watching for you. Again: as close to the following times as we can make it: 9:15; 1:15; and 4:30.

Thank You, Thank You, Thank You!!!!!!! More updates as the day goes on! Nancy and Gloria

Stay tuned, and watch the news today for more on the petitions being turned in.

I've always contended it's difficult to make up something that's as odd and convoluted as a person is going to find in real life. The Cuban Spy case which has been breaking in the news and it's strong South Dakota connection would be one of those.

A retired State Department worker and his wife have been arrested on charges of spying for Cuba for three decades, using grocery carts among their array of tools to pass U.S. secrets to the communist government in a security breach one official described as “incredibly serious.”

An indictment unsealed Friday said Walter Kendall Myers worked his way into higher and higher U.S. security clearances while secretly partnering with his wife, Gwendolyn Steingraber Myers, as clandestine agents so valued by the Cuban government that they once had a private four-hour meeting with President Fidel Castro.

State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said that the arrest culminated a three-year investigation and that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has ordered a “comprehensive damage assessment” to determine what he may have passed to the Cubans.

and…

The indictment says Kendall Myers disclosed to the State Department that he traveled to Cuba for two weeks in 1978, saying the trip was for personal and academic purposes. The next year, a Cuban government official visited the couple while they were living in South Dakota and recruited them to be spies, the indictment says. At Cuba’s direction, authorities say, Kendall Myers attempted to get jobs that would give him access to classified information.

Read it all here.

How strong of a connection is it? Amazingly, this Washington post article seems to indicate that one of the traitors to our country was recruited straight off of US Senator Jim Abourezk’s staff after he left office!

The following year, Myers moved to South Dakota, apparently to teach, friends said. He lived with a woman who would soon become his second wife, Gwendolyn Trebilcock, a legislative aide for then-Sen. John Abourezk (D) in her home town of Aberdeen.

Abourezk said in an interview yesterday that he liked both of them. “She is a very good woman,” he said. “And I always thought he was a decent human being.”

An official from the Cuban mission visited the couple in South Dakota and recruited them, officials say. He asked Myers to join the State Department or the CIA, authorities said. Gwendolyn Myers would later tell an undercover FBI agent, posing as a Cuban operative, that her husband chose State because he was not “a very good liar.” The CIA required regular polygraph tests, Myers said.

Read it all here.

Wow. Not exactly the Bourne identity, but a fascinating tale nonetheless. It might bear a review of the Senator’s papers just to research more of the back story.  This will continue to be an interesting case to watch, expecially as the political connection continues.

Now, for those of you interested, here’s the FBI affidavit - reading through it, there is a mention (page 17) that they met with the co-conspirator in South Dakota in 1978, which would be during the time it appears she would have been on Abourezk’s staff.

walter_kendall_myers_complaint

If you’re interested as to whom else was in this office, this would have been at the time Tom Daschle was the person in charge of foreign policy issues for the Senator.

One website notes that there might be more South Dakota weirdness with this Couple. Word is that there’s also a Supreme Court case involving them:  The article at the American Thinker on the spy case is the most authoritative one I’ve read yet on the topic, and makes a good and in depth examination - especially many of the South Dakota connections.

Speaking of the case - South Dakota v. Gwendolyn Steingraber (a previous maiden name -pp) and Walter Kendal Myers (No. 13017)296 N.W.2d543; 1980 S.D. LEXIS 385.

Here’s a Blurb from the court case:

STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GWENDOLYN STEIN-GRABER AND WALTER KENDAL MYERS, Defendants and Appellees
No. 13017
Supreme Court of South Dakota
296 N.W.2d 543; 1980 S.D. LEXIS 385

May 23, 1980, Argued
September 17, 1980, Opinion Filed

PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, HUGHES COUNTY, SOUTH DAKOTA. THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. MC KEEVER Judge.

CASE SUMMARY:

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Defendants in a criminal case filed a motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant. The Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Hughes County, South Dakota, granted the order on the grounds that the deputy sheriff executing the warrant had not complied with S.D. Consolidated Laws § 23A-35-8, the “knock-and-announce” statute. The State filed an intermediate appeal.

OVERVIEW: The residence to be searched had an en-closed porch attached to the front. Entry to the porch was obtained through a screen door. The deputy sheriff who was serving the warrant opened the screen door without first knocking, entered the porch, and approached the front door to the living quarters. This door was open. The deputy saw two people in the living room. The deputy entered the living room and announced his purpose to execute the search warrant almost simultaneously with his entry, although he could not recall whether the an-nouncement was made before or after he stepped into the living room. The court stated that because the deputy complied or clearly intended to comply with the statute at the front door to the living area, it was not necessary that he comply with the statute before entering the porch through the screen door. The porch here did not appear to be an integral portion of the living area of the residence, but more in the nature of a foyer or natural entranceway for the general public. Next, in announcing his intention to execute the search warrant nearly simultaneously with his entry into the living room, the deputy had substan-tially complied with the statute.

OUTCOME: The court reversed the order. It remanded the case to the circuit court for further proceedings.

and…

OPINION BY: WOLLMAN

OPINION
[*544] This is an intermediate appeal from an order suppressing certain evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant. We reverse and remand.

Acting pursuant to an informant’s tip regarding drug-related activity, a search warrant was obtained authoriz-ing a search of a residence at 328 North Grand in Pierre. At approximately 7:30 on the evening of September 17, 1979, several law enforcement officers, led by Hughes County Deputy Sheriff Charles Vollmer, undertook to serve the warrant. The officers positioned themselves at various places around the house. Deputy Sheriff Vollmer and two other officers approached the front door of the residence.

The residence is a brick structure with an enclosed [**2] porch attached to the front. Entry to the porch is obtained through a screen door. Deputy Sheriff Vollmer opened the screen door without first knocking, where-upon he and the other two officers entered the porch and approached the front door to the living quarters. Finding this door open and observing two occupants in the living room, one in possession of a marijuana pipe and a tray of what appeared to be marijuana, Deputy Vollmer entered the living room, announcing his purpose to execute the search warrant almost simultaneously with his entry, although he could not recall whether the announcement was made before or after he stepped into the living room. Immediately after entering the living room and ordering the two occupants to be seated on the [*545] couch, Deputy Vollmer handed a copy of the search warrant to defendant Myers, one of the occupants.

INTERESTING, as I was living a couple blocks down the street at the time.

Who would have known that as I passed it on the way to School, I was passing a treasonous den of iniquity.

South Dakota's spy story still has another chapter yet to be written. And that would be what happens when you commit treason by passing on state secrets to a nation hostile to our own interests.

I've contended since the onset that the 2010 Governor's race is not going to solidify for a great deal of time. While the Lt. Governor as the current front runner has been open about his candidacy for a couple of years now, was long ago endorsed by the Governor, and has raised a pile of cash, it's by no means a done deal.

Strong evidence of that is the fundraiser that was recently held in Sioux Falls where people involved are claiming that it raised $250,000. But more important - notice who was involved in the campaign, as related by Mt. Blogmore:

The Knudson event was casual, with jeans common and burgers served. But the donations were serious. The suggested level was $1,000, and about 200 folks turned out. The list of co-hosts included: Barb and Tom Everist, Dave and Jill Bockorny, Bob Thimjon, Tom and Patti Dempster, Dan Kirby, Jeff and Carol Parker, Kevin and Carmen Schieffer; Rob and Larissa Skjonsberg and Don and Christine Dunham.

Skjonsberg is especially interesting, since he was chief of staff to Gov. Mike Rounds, who supports and promotes the campaign of Lt. Gov. Dennis Daugaard. Also on the Knudson bandwagon is former Rounds press secretary Mark Johnston.

“I think they look at the total picture and believe I’m the better governor,” Knudson said.

Read that here.  While Johnston had not necessarily been involved previously with the Daugaard effort, Skjonsberg had, and had done so quite strongly while he was Rounds' chief of staff as was noted in a post I did back in August 2007 (yes, 2007) on the topic:

We know it is early, but we believe it is important for us to join Dennis' team now and help him as he prepares his campaign for Governor of our great state. We believe you’ll want to join him too.

Within the next couple of weeks, one of the members of our planning committee will be contacting you to confirm your attendance at our get-together. South Dakota is moving forward — let’s continue the progress by helping Dennis Daugaard get his campaign off to a strong start! We look forward to seeing you on September 13th..

Signed, Rob Skjonsberg and Paul E. Bachand.

Read that here. The word I'd heard some time back is that one of the reasons that Rob shifted allegiances was because Dennis would not commit to a position on ethanol that (surprise, surprise) differed from that of the Rounds administration. As I've said many times, that's his Achilles heel.  And this fundraiser doesn't help. It's as if the seeds of doubt has been planted about his inevitability.

At this point in time, I'd say that the three serious campaigns are entering a state of flux.

Dennis has the money, but as evidenced, his support isn't as deep and as ultimately inevitable as he previously thought. I'd say this is symptomatic of how early he started his campaign, because when you've been on top on the race for so long, where do you have to go? The only place to go is down, and when you have previous supporters now doing fundraisers for another guy, what does it tell others who might be inching towards the fence to hedge their bets?  Lt. Governor Daugaard is at a point where he needs to retool and refine things a bit.

Dave Knudson struck a major blow to Dennis' campaign this week with that Sioux Falls fundraiser. His problem now is that he needs to show that his appeal is broader than a bunch of rich people in Sioux Falls.  Within GOP confines (remember there's a primary first), he has to get past a voting record which some find unpalatable, and he needs to show how his candidacy works for the guy scrubbing the bathroom as well as the one leading the boardroom.  Plus he needs to quit acting like he finds campaigning uncomfortable. As I'm hearing from people at GOP events, It shows.

Scott Munsterman's campaign has not had as dramatic a movement as Knudson's this past week, but word is he continues to quietly gather supporters at the grassroot level, as well as current and former GOP noteworthy's talking about support. He's enjoying the process of campaigning, and he's quietly picking up a person or two who had helped with from Rounds' 2002 effort. Scott also has a campaign that's intesting to young Republican activists, such as his driver, Brandon Lindstrom ( formerly of the SDSU College Republicans).

Despite Scott's current financial disadvantage, the success of the Knudson fundraiser also provides an unmentioned side benefit to the Munsterman campaign. For those wavering on Daugaard who find Knudson's voting record unpalatable, Scott provides a viable door number three for conservatives. And, not having been part of the last 7 fiscal years  - 6 of which dug into the reserves because of deficit spending - Scott's door number 3 might be an increasingly attractive choice.

Now, the other guy in the race?

In the contest, I either hear of or see something of candidate's activity without having to go hunting. Ken Knuppe? Not so much. Going to his campaign calendar, I see he has a Republican dinner in May, and one in June, and that's about it.   At a time when other candidates are picking up money or support, Ken needs to come out of invisibility mode and shake things up drastically. Or else be prepared to figure out who else he can support.

Stay tuned in the contest - much more to come!

Read Pat's main website at dakotawarcollege.com - South Dakota's #1 independent political website!

You have got to be kidding me.

In what has come to be almost ritualistic every few years in South Dakota, the dope smokers have gotten up off the couch to try to foist another dope legalization measure on South Dakota.

A petition drive has started to seek a statewide public vote on a proposed law that would legalize marijuana in South Dakota as a medical treatment for severe and chronic pain.

and..

The new proposal would legalize the limited use of marijuana to treat symptoms of illnesses that include pain and the nausea that can accompany chemotherapy treatments for cancer.

Read it here.

And as in every measure that’s come before, it has several fatal flaws - not the least of which is a twist I hadn’t noticed in past measures.

* It legalizes medical pot for kids.
*It legalizes drug dealing (for up to 5 addicts per drug dealer)
* It provides no standards for the safety, dosage, or anything else having to do with the pseudo-pharmaceutical product.
*It provides overly broad immunity to drug dealers - and a presumption of medical use, irregardless of there being a factual basis.
* It prevents law enforcement from seizing property associated with drug dealing.
* Despite having to register with the state, drug dealers apparently don’t like open government. Their identities are shielded under the act.

Read it here….

And then there’s the latest twist -

Under this act, Dope Dealing would become a protected class of citizen when it comes to housing under South Dakota law:

Section 19. No school, employer, or landlord may discriminate against a cardholder by refusing to enroll, employ, or lease to, or otherwise penalize a person solely because of his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or a registered designated caregiver unless failing to do so would put the school, employer, or landlord in violation of federal law or cause it to lose a federal contract or funding.

So. As a landlord, if you personally and morally objected to illegal drugs and the people who sell them - guess what? Under this law, they would now have a cause of action to sue you if you didn’t want drugs on your property.  Object to drug dealers working for your place of business? Again, they’d now have a cause of action to bring suit against you.

It doesn’t matter if they use it for medical reasons - all they’d have to prove is that they have the “get out of jail free” card as almost every pot grower in the state would have access to just by asking, and you’d have no recourse.   Your property could be used to grow drugs without your say so, and as an employer, you’d be forced to retain a drug dealer employee as long as they had their card because of the special protections they’ve created for themselves as a result of the act.

Special rights for drug dealers? I think not.

Somehow, I think this act is destined for the dust bin of history - just like every measure of it’s kind that has gone before.

I got to speak with Secretary of State Chris Nelson last night as he was on his way to Rapid City to join his daughter for her birthday. Chris indicated that for the past 2 months, he's been giving a great amount of thought to where he was going after the Secretary of State's office, and moving in the direction of running for South Dakota's lone congressional seat  holds a great interest for him. As he's been going to events around the state, it's clear that the crowds are unhappy with the way things are going in Washington and they are looking for change.

At this point, he's going to continue to travel the state, and listening to what people have to say. So while there is no formal exploratory committee which has been formed at this point, he is out gauging interest in the race, and how people see him fitting into that contest.

As a Republican - I have to say that this prospect is quite exciting. Chris already enjoys good name identification from his races, so he's not starting from square one. If we've ever had a candidate that fit the ideal of "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" - an honest man going up against machine politics - this would be the battle straight out of that mold.

Chris is Mr. Smith - and we may just have the chance to send him to Washington.

(Please credit South Dakota War College)

This is HOT off the press.

On a day that coincides with his daughter's birthday, tonight at the Lawrence County Lincoln Day Dinner, Secretary of State Chris Nelson announced that he is exploring a run at the congressional seat currently held by Democratic Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin.

This race just got very interesting.

Hang on to your seats, as I'll have more on this breaking story as it develops.

Remember when the Argus got after me for "repurposing" a Tim Johnson video interview (as they called it) that they had on their website, because it had an "embed" function for sharing among the various denizens of the internet? 

The point was that they didn't like it when they thought I was using something that was theirs, despite providing full credit and a link back. Which was fine, as they claimed to not be technically adept enough to disable that button. Given that fair use guidelines are for excerpted works, and this was a gray area, I quickly complied.

(Please note that present company are excluded from this criticism, as KELOland.com and it's parent company actually realize that an "embed" button is for the purpose of sharing video, thank you very much. -pp)

Well, it sounds like a tempest is brewing today, over an instance where the Argus is being accused of taking a breaking story that was to be found nowhere else but on the internet, causing them to base 2 days of their own stories on it - without even a mention of the on-line outlet where they found out about it.

And one South Dakota blogger isn't taking it lying down:

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Todd Epp
To: jverges@argusleader.com; Randell Beck
Cc: Pat Powers ; Doug Wiken ; Cory Allen Heidelberger ; Scott Ehrisman ; Scott Hudson ; Steve Sibson
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 9:14:44 AM
Subject: Thanks for crediting SD Watch!

Josh:

I want to thank you for crediting South Dakota Watch's breaking coverage of the Lincoln High School chorus and drumline kerfuffle at the Tax Day protest April 15th. Oh, wait. You didn't. In the blogosphere, it is not just a courtesy but expected that if you comment or add to a story that you did not break that you credit and link to the original story. That goes for both blog and MSM sources. Apparently, the Argus Leader does not play by such rules of attribution or politeness.

This is not a criticism of your story. It was good--it was balanced and clarified and enhanced my own reporting on the matter. It is what I would expect from a professional journalist such as you. Nevertheless, you failed to acknowledge the source of the original reporting on April 15 and 16 on SDW.

Ironically, I know the Argus Leader will contact others who they believe have appropriated their work. And obviously, facts are not protected intellectual property. However, to ignore a source of original reporting of a major community event, in my opinion, is unprofessional and ignoring of how news on the web works in 2009.

In the blogosphere, the philosophy is "we send you away to bring you back." We link to original sources and other sources because we know our readers crave more information about a topic. And we know that sending them to a competitor is not going lead to them never coming back to our own sites. Quite the contrary. We know our readers will return because they know that we appreciate their loyalty and intelligence. While I may be a "competitor" with other MSM outlets and my fellow bloggers, at least as far as we bloggers are concerned here in South Dakota, we believe the truth and facts--even though we may color them with our own points of view--is more important than a monopoly on such truth and facts.

I hope the Argus will reconsider this policy in the future.

Best regards,

Todd D. Epp
Editor/Publisher/Reporter
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch.net

So at this point, Todd at SD Watch has lobbed the ball over to the Argus for in his mind a failure to practice what they preach.

Especially coming at a time when they face declining subscriptions, and their parent company Gannett reported posting a drop of nearly 60% in net income, one would think they'd be willing to try to evolve to embrace a model that is more in line with the modern era of on-line news as Todd describes.

Or at least embrace an old one, where if you find out about a story from a fellow news source, you give credit where credit is due.

I have to give Brookings Mayor Scott Munsterman credit for jumping in with both feet, as he puts out one of his first campaign pieces for the 2010 Gubernatorial Race, and lays it out there. Of course, getting one in the mail also means I'm going to pick it apart in hopes that the next time out he can make it better, and others will emulate the good things, or at least avoid some of the problems.

The campaign piece left me a little flat for a couple of reasons.  First and foremost, it was hard to tell if this piece was selling a candidate or a book. I've looked at it three times, and it still does not give me a clear impression. There's nothing asking for my vote or my support. Just that Scott's "leadership experience and solid background in business have validated his passion to serve...."  As a voter and a campaign activist, that statement doesn't stir me, nor does it compel me to action.  And I'm not sure who, exactly, has validated his passion, or if that comes automatically with parking validation.

Secondly, it was really wordy for  a campaign piece of this nature. It needs more pictures. For example, he describes his family, but we have no picture to connect ourselves with them. The only thing we do see are Scott and wind towers. Lot and lots of wind towers.  When I read the piece, frankly Scott continues to use the verbose bromides that I suspect are going to plague the entirety of his campaign.  He needs to drop the left panel of page 1, as well as paragraph 2 on the left panel of page 2 above his campaign kickoff announcement.   (Replace that paragraph with a good picture of the family, and it would solve a couple of sins.)

Next, where's the logo that "pops" from the page to leave no doubt about what the man is running for?  Add that to the checklist.

Finally, you can tell he's using a team that's probably new to politics, as they make a complete "rookie" mistake. The first thing I looked for off the bat, and I failed to find?

According to SDCL 12-27-15 and the Secretary of State's guide to campaign finance reporting notes: Any printed material or communication made by a political committee or political party that expressly advocates  must prominently display or clearly speak the statement: "Paid for by (Name of candidate, political committee, or political party)."

The disclaimer. Whoever proofed this on behalf of the campaign needs to be slapped, because that should have been the first thing they should have noticed.

Not a bad piece, and very salvageable. However, I'd yank it off the press until a few things can be fixed - especially that lack of disclaimer.

Stay tuned - I'm sure there will be many more campaign pieces to critique before we hit the 2010 June Primary!

What’s more important to South Dakotans – traditional or online media?

 

Help us in our research efforts, in partnership with Lawrence & Schiller, to better understand media habits of people across the state. Take this 5 minute survey and we'll donate a $1 to the United Way for each completed answer. Click here to take the survey TODAY!