No Campaign Disclosure for General Assembly Members?

Maybe this has already been talked about but this is the text of a bill dropped by Joe Wilkinson (R- Badideaville), italicized portions are to be struck from the current law.

“(a)(1)(A) The candidate or the chairperson or treasurer of each campaign committee organized to bring about the nomination or election of a candidate for any office, except county and municipal offices, or the General Assembly and the chairperson or treasurer of every campaign committee designed to bring about the recall of a public officer or to oppose the recall of a public officer or designed to bring about the approval or rejection by the voters of any proposed constitutional amendment, state-wide proposed question, or state-wide referendum shall sign and file with the commission the required campaign contribution disclosure reports. A candidate for membership in the General Assembly or the chairperson or treasurer of such candidate’s campaign committee shall file such candidate’s reports with the commission and a copy of such report with the election superintendent of the county of such candidate’s residence.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

6 responses to “No Campaign Disclosure for General Assembly Members?”

  1. Mouth of the South Avatar
    Mouth of the South

    You may be right with the updated change. The original left the General Assembly in the first section but eliminated it from the second, thus removing entirely from disclosure. However, if the exception is removed from the first section, then they would have to file with the commission.

  2. olyellar Avatar
    olyellar

    I think that eliminates the exception – I think GA members would still have to file disclosures under the amended law.

    I stand willing to be wrong.

    Where’s Campbell?

  3. Mouth of the South Avatar
    Mouth of the South

    The poster up top didn’t copy it exactly. It removes “General Assembly” from the first part as well.

    It would remove all requirements for disclosure under that statute.

  4. olyellar Avatar
    olyellar

    I should preview first – “do with” not “dow tih”, but yall probably figured that out.

  5. olyellar Avatar
    olyellar

    Actually, if I’m reading it right, I’d wholeheartedly endorse this idea.

    It appears that this does not eliminate the disclosure, but ends the double-filing that you have to dow tih the county. If that’s the case, I’ll go down and lobby for it my own self.

  6. innerredneckexposed Avatar

    Can I have bad government for $1000 Alex?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *