Press "Enter" to skip to content

Goodwin Gets Facts Wrong About IM 22

Tim Goodwin, Exceptionalist
Tim Goodwin hates IM 22 so much he can’t explain correctly.

Rep. Tim Goodwin (R-30/Rapid City), in a recorded interview with Lori Walsh on SDPB Radio this noon, said that voters didn’t know what they were voting on when they passed Initiated Measure 22, the Anti-Corruption Act. Rep. Goodwin is projecting: he just proved he doesn’t understand what’s in IM 22.

Rep. Goodwin claimed that he skipped “20 or 30” social events to which he was invited because IM 22 would have limited him to accepting $100 in gifts from lobbyists.

Reread IM 22 Section 31:

No lobbyist or employer of a lobbyist may make gifts to one person who is an elected state officer, legislative official or staffperson, or executive department official or staffperson aggregating more than one hundred dollars in a calendar year….

IM 22 didn’t prevent Rep. Goodwin from attending any social events. It only prohibited him from accepting gifts from lobbyists worth more than $100. He could have gone to a Chamber dinner, ingested $100 worth of Chamber steak and wine, and then stopped ingesting. He could have gone to a Retailers mixer the next night and done the same, and then an NRA event, and a Family Heritage Alliance event, eating up to $100 worth of goodies at each one before having to stop taking hors d’œuvres for the night. Or he could have done what federal candidates have to do under FEC regulations: don’t take free stuff. Pay for your own meal or don’t eat. IM22 set a limit: $100 per lobbyist, per candidate.

Rep. Goodwin further demonstrated his ignorance of IM 22 by talking about the Democracy Credits, IM 22’s public campaign financing plan. Rep. Goodwin claimed that candidates who took Democracy Credits “can’t use any of your own money.”

Again, Rep. Goodwin is wrong. IM 22 Section 51 said that to qualify for Democracy Credits, legislative candidates had to follow certain rules:

  1. spend no more than $1,000 of their personal funds;
  2. accept no more than $250 from any one person;
  3. take no PAC or party money (“natural persons” only!);
  4. transfer no Democracy Credit cash to other candidates or committees; and,
  5. refund any Democracy Credit cash not used for legitimate campaign expenses.

IM 22 would not have stopped Rep. Goodwin from using any of his own money or raising money from other sources.

If Rep. Goodwin can’t read and accurately explain a ballot measure whose text has been public for a year and a half, how can his District 30 constituents expect him to understand any of the bills (51 in the House, 54 in the Senate so far) that will come zooming across his desk in the coming two months?


  1. mike from iowa 2017-01-10 12:54

    So Goodwin needs to read IM22 to know what’s in it and can’t be bothered to do that much? Typical wingnut I’m thinking.

  2. Porter Lansing 2017-01-10 13:20

    Who else is sick of hearing Republicans claim that voters were deceived by and uninformed about IM22? Produce a series of valid certified polls that affirm your assertions or STFU.

  3. Eve Fisher 2017-01-10 14:33

    Porter – AMEN!

  4. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 14:38

    The $100 rule in the IM is ridiculous. Anything above a single meal and you are breaking the IM. It needs to be killed completely. Glad those kind rules don’t apply to businesses.

  5. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 14:40

    All the hype about this IM came after Gear UP and EB5 and I am still waiting for you all to prove that it goes beyond the people already arrested. Conspiracy in a pig’s eye.

  6. jerry 2017-01-10 14:43

    Where do you go to pay a hundred bucks for a single meal in district 30 Mr. Boswell?

  7. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 14:44

    You can in District 5 there Jerry

  8. jerry 2017-01-10 14:45

    Mr. Boswell, I do not have the answer for you but Marty Jackley does, why don’t you ask him to tell you. Even Mike Rounds, or Dennis Daugaard could give that information as they have it.

  9. jerry 2017-01-10 14:49

    Where in district 5 will a meal set you back a hundred bucks? What would that meal consist of Mr. Boswell?
    I think I asked about District 30 where Goodwin claims he was denied food, what about there?

  10. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 14:50

    Minerva’s Second Street Lunker’s if you his him and his wife. with drinks easily done.

  11. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 14:53

    appetizers, prime, dessert a few drinks for a couple not hard to get to $100

  12. jerry 2017-01-10 14:57

    Food, Mr. Boswell, food. It looks like you would have to be slobbering drunk to spend a hundred bucks on Yourself. That is what we are talking about here. Yourself, not you, the bride and your’s and your neighbor’s kids. There is no there there with Mr. Goodwin nor with you sir. That hundred buck plate deal is fair.

  13. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 15:04

    How about Wolly’s Grill and Cellar in Hot Springs and many times when people are home and eat out for the night for business they bring their wives. And there is no need to get obtuse there Jerry. The $100 for a single incident in one year from one group is incredibly small.

  14. jerry 2017-01-10 15:17

    The law is specific Mr. Boswell as it indicates singular not plural.

    No lobbyist or employer of a lobbyist may make gifts to one person who is an elected state officer, legislative official or staffperson, or executive department official or staffperson aggregating more than one hundred dollars in a calendar year….

    It clearly states one person as in one person singular. There is no obtuse there there Mr. Boswell. Just read the law as written is all one can ask Mr. Goodwin and for that matter, you sir.

  15. jerry 2017-01-10 15:20

    Wooly’s is pretty much the same Mr. Boswell. If you or Mr. Goodwin, as a singular, eat a hundred bucks of chow at one plate, you should ask the waiter for an audit. You just paid to much.

  16. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 15:21

    I would imagine that if someone complained and the ticket was for him and his wife. The “Ethics” commission would have claimed a violation took place. That is the problem with this IM it’s sketchy at best.

  17. jerry 2017-01-10 15:24

    Forgot to add this Mr. Boswell That joint is closed until March 17 so Mr. Goodwin will have to dine at Mac’s Steakhouse, under the golden arches.

  18. jerry 2017-01-10 15:28

    I really doubt that there would be an issue if the complaint were genuine Mr. Boswell. I really think that you are being over protective of lawmakers that are supposed to be there to serve the citizens not expect to be served by them. If you want to treat a lawmaker for a meal, keep it a hundred. More than plenty for the legislator, you would not want to see him drunk and be arrested for a d.u.i. no would you? Or worse yet, be involved in an accident that kills a biker. What are the odds of that one wonders?

  19. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 15:30

    That’s your opinion and your welcome too it. But the $100 limit is pretty small and it really doesn’t matter IM22 will get killed.

  20. jerry 2017-01-10 15:36

    Maybe it will get killed but to many folks, a hundred buck meal for one dude is a lot. When legislators go to the people and bitch about not getting a hundred dollar steak with taters, they may get some push back, that is all one can ask for. Defend your gluttony eating a hundred buck steak and taters to your constituents who cannot afford to go to Burger King.

  21. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 15:46

    I would imagine he goes to the King as well. But when you are conducting the peoples work. $100 is not much of an expense. IM 22 goes too much in oversight. The Republican Legislature will kill IM22 but keep enough of it through other legislation to make the people happy.

  22. jerry 2017-01-10 16:17

    Yep, Mr. and Mrs. Citizen would love to see how that steak at Mad Mary’s for a hundred bucks for Timmy by himself will really shows how lawmakers work. They will look at their meager beans and rice and go honey, that Timmy shore does need to eat that big ol steak to keep up on things.

    Tim shows the real deal, you only go to Pierre to fleece. You do not go to serve the citizens, you go so you can make a deal to screw them. Tim does not get much for pay to go to Pierre, but wants to make up for that with gifts showered upon him like hot water in the governor’s lake on the geese’s back there. Timmy lets the cat out of the bag for his intentions to strike it rich. IM22 works in that it keeps Tim honest, even when he does not want to be.

  23. Roger Elgersma 2017-01-10 16:20

    Anyone who is so greedy that they can not turn down over one hundred dollars is the type of person which needs an ethics committee.

  24. Chuck-Z 2017-01-10 16:21

    South Dakotans and especially South Dakota employees have been repeatedly told to be frugal and get by with less. No raise for three years, sporadic cost of living, minimum wage fighting. Suddenly these legislators can’t party on a penny? I think they should give it a serious try before condemning it. We are simply asking them to abide by their own policies.

  25. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 16:25

    maybe Jerry and Roger you should realize that Doing the State’s Business should be treated like a Business and not sticking with the Hired Hand Mentality. Liberals were all over about getting Teachers their pay increases. Maybe it’s time to consider that the people we elect as Legislature are due the pay at the level of their responsibilities. Then maybe you would have to worry about a $100 tab.

  26. LSC 2017-01-10 16:50

    I think you need to read a little further on this one… Looks like meals, beverages, etc. for spouses, children, staff members, etc fall under that $100. That adds up pretty quickly.

    Section 31. That chapter 12-27 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:

    For the purposes of this section, the term “gift” means any compensation, reward, employment, gift, honorarium, beverage, meal, food, or other thing of value made or given directly or indirectly to any person.

    No lobbyist or employer of a lobbyist may make gifts to one person who is an elected state officer, legislative official or staffperson, or executive department official or staffperson aggregating more than one hundred dollars in a calendar year, nor may a lobbyist or employer of a lobbyist act as an agent or intermediary in the making of any such gift, or to arrange for the making of any such gift by any other person.

    The value of gifts given to an immediate family member of any elected state officer, legislative official, or executive branch official shall be attributed to the officer or official for the purpose of determining whether the limit has been exceeded, unless an independent business, family, or social relationship exists between the donor and the family member, subject to approval by the commission in a manner to be promulgated by rule by the commission pursuant to its rulemaking authority under section 40 of this Act.

    No person may knowingly receive any gift which is made unlawful by this section. A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

  27. jerry 2017-01-10 17:10

    When you think of the state’s business as time to fill your pockets, then you should just be a banker and bypass the middle man. In case you might have missed it Mr. Boswell, there are no liberals in South Dakota. Have you not seen the representation in the legislature? The IM 22 was passed by all walks of life, except yours of course, that are sick of the corruption and dual standards presented by the lobbyists and their marks.

    To lavish oneself and family members with bribes is a little hard to take, that makes sense on why the law was voted on with such overwhelming support. If I were a church goer, I would call the results Biblical for what it points out, Thou shall not steal is kind of a big one they tell me. To take something for nothing, is theft. To take something for something is a bribe.

  28. jerry 2017-01-10 17:18

    Me, I would rather see someone take the job seriously in Pierre. I would like to know that the reason they are there is to serve the people of the district and their state. Yes, one of the things that elected officials are supposed to be bringing to Pierre is their expertise in different fields that only help move the state forward. “Maybe it’s time to consider that the people we elect as Legislature are due the pay at the level of their responsibilities. Then maybe you would have to worry about a $100 tab.” Maybe we should do exactly that. Only take people who have been successful in categories like native representation according to population, women, education, law, agriculture, tourism, lumber production and the like. If you want the job to go to Pierre, show us your chops in those fields.

  29. Porter Lansing 2017-01-10 17:28

    REVERSE REASONING IS RARELY RECOGNIZED … I had a co-worker who was the best dog race gambler, ever. He never lost. Knew the name of every dog and that dog’s parents. Went to the practice workouts every day. He told me something that parallels bribing rural politicians. You can’t make a dog run faster and win but you can make a dog run slower and lose … especially when he’s the favorite. You don’t bribe SoDak politicians to do something FOR you. (Just ask Pat Powers and his monthly check from the Koch Brothers.) You bribe politicians not to do something AGAINST you. This is why nothing ever seems to get done in Pierre.

  30. Nick Nemec 2017-01-10 17:30

    During my 4 years as a SD legislator I went to many banquets put on by various organizations a typical table might have two legislators sitting at it along with 6 members of the organization. I don’t know what current per plate charges are at the Ramkota in Pierre, I suppose it depends on the menu, but the prorated share for the legislators I’m sure would be less than $100. The only time I ever had a meal paid for outside of some lobbying event was once when I was eating at the King’s Inn and sitting at a table next to several lobbyists we visited across tables throughout the meal and when I left to pay at the end of the evening I learned they had picked up the check for my check. It was well less than $100 even when converted to 2017 dollars. One of the biggest freebee excesses in those days was the so called “speak easy” run by the liquor lobby at the end of the first floor hallway in the King’s Inn with a wide selection of free booze and hor d’oeuvers. It would be easy for a legislator so inclined to drink 4-5 drinks every night during the legislative session and even at 1993 prices drink up over $100 worth of booze. Those types of abuses are the type of thing that disgust the average South Dakotan.

    It’s not hard to avoid the $100 limit and those crying about it need to recheck their priorities.

  31. grudznick 2017-01-10 17:59

    Nobody will ever take a legislator to eat at Parker’s over-pretentious Bistro for under $100.

    This IM #22 defined gifts as salary. Mr. Goodwin, as much of an overgodder as he might be, could not let his wife work for any hospital or chamber or retailer in the state or she would be breaking the law. In fact, it might be argued it is illegal for the legislatures themselves to be paid.

  32. grudznick 2017-01-10 18:07

    Mr. Nemec, I am an advocate that the taxpayers of South Dakota should foot the bill for the free booze and beer and keep the legislatures in the building far more to get more work done. Plus they will, in the words of my friend Bob, have their harshness mellowed.

  33. owen reitzel 2017-01-10 18:40

    You must not have eaten at Parker’s before Grudznick. My wife and I ate there and ate well for well under $100

  34. moses6 2017-01-10 18:42

    grudz if over looking e-b5 and the coop scandal counts then no

  35. grudznick 2017-01-10 18:52

    Mr. reitzel, Parker’s over-pretentious Bistro is in Sioux Falls, and I do not go to Sioux Falls. So that means I have never eaten there. But I am a member of the Gluttons’ Guild, which is not a union in any way, and reports are shared amongst our members across the state on various eateries. I have detailed reports about Parker’s over-pretentious Bistro. I am glad to hear that you and your bride, who I am sure eats like a bird, got away for under $100 but you clearly don’t understand how much the legislatures can pack away. Some of them have impressive bellies, and at least two are actually members of the Gluttons’ Guild.

  36. owen reitzel 2017-01-10 18:55

    then it’s about time those legislators either go on a diet or pay their own way.

  37. grudznick 2017-01-10 19:07

    I cannot argue with the diet and them paying their own way, Mr. reitzel, as long as they don’t raise their amounts. I have been told they are paid $150 dollars a day for food and then they get free food all day every day. If they don’t get free food will this end up costing us taxpayers another $50 a day because they will raise their take? I bet you they raise their take. Damn IM #22, that unconstitutional sloppy piece of work foisted on us by out-of-state big money interests who like to hookwink us for the hell of it.

  38. caheidelberger Post author | 2017-01-10 19:13

    Back up: the main point here is that Rep. Goodwin is misstating, either out of ignorance or deliberate deception, the actual provisions of IM22. He may not have understood what IM22, but that doesn’t prove that voters didn’t understand it. It only proves he’s an irresponsible legislator, making false arguments.

    But Mike Boswell, are you really trying to (a) justify wining and dining legislators to the tune of more than $100 every night, and (b) assert that any of the chow lines to which Goodwin may have been invited were actually spending that much per night per guest? I have never attended an event in South Dakota where an evening meal cost that much, and I’d be deeply suspicious, as would any South Dakotan not arguing for the sake of argument, of any organization that would spring that kind of money per guest for one social event intended to give lobbyists and their organizations’ members a chance to talk to legislators.

  39. caheidelberger Post author | 2017-01-10 19:15

    LSC, you miss the rest of the argument, the same logic that candidates and elected officials governed by FEC rules follow: either reimburse the organization or don’t accept the gifts. Not hard, and not requiring federal officials to skip social functions completely.

  40. Don Coyote 2017-01-10 19:23

    @Jerry: While a single $100 dinner might be hard to hit in Watertown, that wouldn’t be a problem in Sioux Falls. A surf and turf dinner with the salad bar, a couple quartinos of wine, dessert and tip will easily cost $100+ for a single person at SF Minervas.

    Go to Snooty Rick Weiland’s overpriced Parker’s Bistro and you’ll be talking even more money. $100 is a total arbitrary number pulled out of Rickie’s nether regions.

  41. grudznick 2017-01-10 19:30

    I think it is confusing. Maybe the law courts will rule on it. It is bad the sloppy drafters just wrote this in a dark secret corner instead of bringing it to the legislatures to fix all the problems. Even the Liberal-leaning partisan Council of Research told them it was unconstitutional. Shame.

  42. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 19:30

    Cory while you might be going to banquets. Lobbyist are attempting to conduct business. They usually pick up the tab. You are now expecting Legislators to track the cost of those meals. We don’t pay our legislators squat anyway now we want to nitpick over the tab over a single meal that they can only accept once a year. That’s really bogus. FEC probably needs an update.

    BTW Cory I am still waiting for your proof on Gear Up and EB5. I am not holding my breath. :)

  43. Porter Lansing 2017-01-10 19:39

    GRUDZNICK = FAKE NEWS (He just makes this stuff, folks. Ain’t he funny? he he)
    1. The drafters weren’t sloppy.
    2. It wasn’t written in a dark secret corner
    3. It was brought to the Research Council and misled by them
    4. There is no shame.
    Grudznick is a blatant liar.

  44. grudznick 2017-01-10 19:40

    I am beginning to think that many people who do not get offered to be taken out for hot dogs and free beers are just jealous of the legislatures that they do. Ethics and diverting away $5,000,000 of hard earned tax payer money under the covers of this lunch money robbery should be the big issues here, but methinks it is mostly those who don’t get the free lunches who focus on just the free lunches.

    grudznick focuses on diverting $5,000,000 of tax money away from schools. Every year. IM #22 was bad. It was sloppily bad.

  45. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 19:42

    Grudznick that is why I didn’t vote for IM22. It required the peoples tax money to pay for elections. That’s just not needed.

  46. Don Coyote 2017-01-10 19:45

    @owen reitzel: You and your’s must have dug enough coin out of your couch to spring for The 210 Burger and pomme freites chased with a glass of Bud Light® while tipping 10% to eat for two under a $100 at Overpriced Rickie’s.

  47. grudznick 2017-01-10 19:46

    I didn’t vote for the IM #22 either, Mr. Boswell, because I read the sloppily written mess and found it insaner than most. 90% of the voters are too lazy and just saw the TV commercials from that Massachusetts libbie outfit that hoodwinked them.

    I call those voters stupid.

  48. jerry 2017-01-10 20:13

    Mr. Boswell was the one who put District 5 in the mix, not me. So in Sioux Falls you can hit the hundred dollar deal, wow. I am sure the folks out on the place will be impressed knowing that while they scrimp to pay the light bill, legislators are making the trip from Pierre to Sioux Falls for some surf and turf. This is why they voted to end this crap, don’tcha get it? The folks out on the place, as well as those in Watertown, Sioux Falls and Polo, get it. They get it with the poor services, they get it with watching the corruption and the lack of ethics. They voted to put an end to it, overwhelmingly. The vote was not even close.

    For the record, the bride and I go out for a special meal and we shell out about 30 bucks with the tip. Of course, that is not surf and turf, that is a nice medium to medium rare chunk of sirloin, my favorite and she gets a smaller one, bless her heart. We don’t drink alcohol at this place so there is that, also, it does fly the state flag of another state.

    We did go to Manny’s one time in Minneapolis for the Silver Butter Knife, 28 oz. of sirloin cut at your table by the cook, damn good, as that is supposed to be the best steak in the whole US of A and it was truly something to have as an anniversary meal. The very best in the land and it cost $99.95 or just under a hundred bucks for the two of us.
    I tell you this, you tangle with a steak like that and the only thing that is on your mind is not passing bills it is passing out from a way full belly.

    The IM22 is a bill that is long overdue. I would not worry to much about how legislators will still be able to be comped for sticking it to taxpayers though. Cracks me up though that now lobbyists and special interests will actually have to work to grease the palms of these willing accomplices. The crocodile tears are moving for sure.

  49. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:19

    Jerry you were wrong on that it was a single persons , so just accept that you were wrong.

  50. jerry 2017-01-10 20:20

    Wow, that Elk Sirloin sounds damn good to this old carnivore. It is kind of higher that what we spend for beef, but as long as it comes with some fixin’s, maybe we will give it a go. I honestly did not now about this place. I will let you know how the Elk is Coyote…What kind of statement is that? I should have asked “How is the Elk, Coyote?”

  51. Porter Lansing 2017-01-10 20:20

    Ah, Jerry. I remember sirloin. Great flavor. But, alas … my teeth are too old for beef that firm. Only three I’ll buy anymore are tenderloin, ribeye or New York (of course T-Bone, since it’s tenderloin and New York). Lucky for me there’s a little shop across the street that sells their own ranch raised, independently graded, six week dry aged USDA Prime. Only for a once in a while treat, though. Way expensive steer.

  52. jerry 2017-01-10 20:22

    No, we had that there and it is a steak for two and it is $99.95 for a 28 oz. sirloin. You can check the website to see. I paid the bill there and I will put the receipt up by the screen so you can see it… There you go…Arm is getting tired from holding receipt in place…

  53. jerry 2017-01-10 20:26

    Porter, what you are saying is true. Mr. Goodwin is long in the tooth as well so there is no way in hell he could tangle with a big old chuck of beef unless it is in slow cooker soup. Besides, Mr. Goodwin is in uniform so he must keep his trim physique up to qualify to keep wearing it. The military has regulations on donelap issues… Sorry about that Porter, donelap is when your belly done lap over your belt. Can’t have that.

  54. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:27

    Jerry it could be a couple or maybe the legislator and 2 of his assistance. Facts you were wrong on is that it wasn’t for a single person. Thus your $100 argument fails. It is bogus.

  55. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:29

    Well Jerry after 23 years in the Military Let me tell you I could pack away the chow. You just have to hit the gym harder.

  56. jerry 2017-01-10 20:30

    This is good Mr. Boswell, so now the legislator has two assistants? How many do they usually have? How are these assistants paid? Do South Dakota taxpayers pay a salary for them? Who covers them for their benefits like health insurance, workmen’s compensation? Also, as this is after session, are they being paid overtime?

  57. jerry 2017-01-10 20:34

    Pizza Ranch is open and so is the China Buffet so lobbyists could take the legislator and his two assistants out for a meal there and take the change from that Franklin to the video lottery machines. Who knows, bribing…er chatting ideas..nod nod wink wink.. with that legislator could pay off big time with all those cherries lit up!

  58. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:34

    Jerry the point is that $100 doesn’t get you much and I am sure it gets you no where as far as influence. But you seem to want to say IM22 is good. That’s your opinion and you will defend it even if you are proven wrong.

  59. jerry 2017-01-10 20:35

    Good for you Mr. Boswell, what rank did you achieve for those 23? Also, it does not appear to this old soldier that Mr. Goodwin is much of a gym hitter, could be wrong, but just sayin..

  60. jerry 2017-01-10 20:39

    The voters are the ones who say it is right. The are not saying, if loving you is wrong I don’t want to be right. They and I voted for the IM22. We all read it like we were supposed to and then we voted on it. I think Marty did a good job splainin it to me and the rest of the public. There were so many of us that voted for the IM22 it is hard to not come up with something other than our complete support for IM22. Sorry son, that is the way the cookie crumbles. Had to toss that in as we are talking about bribing someone with a food platter.

  61. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:40

    I think you are getting into the petty argument. You got called on and now you want to double down. Kind of like our President Elect.

  62. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:41

    Well Jerry a judge didn’t agree with you or those who voted for it. That happens.

  63. Porter Lansing 2017-01-10 20:42

    If you’re going before a judge can you buy the judge a meal? Of course not. You’d be charged if you offered. Legislative business can be conducted in a business office. Someone is trying to get a lawmaker to do something for them and giving them ANY gifts is corrupt. It’s that way, everywhere. This is why South Dakota is one of the top five most corrupt states. Because Republicans can’t even see how wrong what they’re doing is.

  64. jerry 2017-01-10 20:43

    When we start to think of a hundred dollars as not much, then we really get to the reason of why voters voted to try to end the corruption. See, voters work their arse’s off for that hundred bucks and they know full well how much it is worth. Try going to a Walmart or any supermarket on what is left of main street to see how that hundred bucks is cherished. IM22 was the vote to make sure we are all on the same page as honestly as we can be. What is in it for you Mr. Boswell? How is the IM22 going to hurt you?

  65. jerry 2017-01-10 20:46

    So what rank did you achieve Mr. Boswell for your 23?

  66. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:50

    The point is you can’t prove corruption. The entire IM22 was based on a false belief of corruption in this state. No one has proven that EB5 or Gear UP went beyond those where were dead or charged with crimes. The Legislature already has many checks and balances in place. I am sure they will add some more because of IM22, but IM22 is a dead horse waiting for the rendering plant.

  67. jerry 2017-01-10 20:51

    The judge said no on this, okay, there is that. This does not change the fact that the IM22 is wrong to deny open corruption, it just means that a judge decided that they did not like it. Happens all the time, in fact, you can even shop federal courts to have them hear certain cases. The judge points to the very reason that IM22 was supported so widely with voters. We are sick and tired of the corruption you support Mr. Boswell.

  68. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:53

    Then prove corruption. I have been waiting for Cory to do so for quite awhile now. Lora Hubbel has said she has “something”. It’s all smoke and mirrors.

  69. jerry 2017-01-10 20:53

    You are correct on proving corruption Mr. Boswell. The corruption was proven in the court of public opinion that showed with the vote tally. Why do you think Marty is blathering so loudly about corruption?

  70. Don Coyote 2017-01-10 20:53

    @jerry: If you like venison you’ll like elk although elk is not as gamey Don’t believe anyone that says it tastes like beef. Beef gets much of it’s flavor from the marbling while elk is very lean with very little or no fat. I believe Parker’s is ala carte so your “fixin’s” are extra.

  71. jerry 2017-01-10 20:54

    What rank did you achieve for the 23? Who pays for the assistants to the legislators Mr. Boswell?

  72. Porter Lansing 2017-01-10 20:56

    Boswell from Goodwin. The state is in the top five most corrupt because there are almost NO checks on corruption. You can say there are but that’s wrong.

  73. jerry 2017-01-10 20:57

    Thanks Coyote, I have always loved deer meat. We got a nice one this fall and now I know why there was so much fat on that deer. Each one that was taken there was the same, more fat on them than I have seen in many years. I think they knew we were gonna be in for a cold one, even though it was November and warm, they knew.

  74. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 20:59

    No Porter the groups that report on corruption are funded by wealthy Liberal Sources. Hardly non-biased.

  75. jerry 2017-01-10 21:02

    Mr. Boswell, the public reads news reports on corruption in South Dakota. I may not be able to prove it, but it seems like others are reporting it. Sioux Falls paper, Rapid City paper here is this They all say we are to corrupt to be trusted. Voters voted for the IM22 because they can read and they can comprehend what it is they are reading.

  76. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 21:03

    That’s ok Jerry Cory can’t prove it either.

  77. jerry 2017-01-10 21:04

    Whoa, the Argus Leader is liberal? Damn, the Rapid City Journal is liberal. Mr. Boswell, you are a funny guy.

  78. jerry 2017-01-10 21:06

    Mr. Boswell, I think you and Evans ought to get together over a hundred dollar a plate dinner with all the fixin’s and a couple bottles of Irish Whiskey. I think you both have a lot in common.

  79. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 21:07

    I quit drinking years ago Jerry it’s not good for you.

  80. jerry 2017-01-10 21:13

    If it is not good for you then why would you include it in the hundred dollar limit to the legislator? A logical person would not try to imbibe the guest with spirits that could have an adverse effect on the way the legislator might consider a vote. That could be considered corruption, no?

  81. Mike Boswell 2017-01-10 21:14

    Jerry I think we have discussed this enough I think you know the outcome, but you don’t like it. You will live.

  82. jerry 2017-01-10 21:20

    I will live and so will the IM22 in a different form. Viva la iniciativa

  83. Roger Cornelius 2017-01-10 22:24

    The only thing wrong with IM22 is that it had to be written and passed in the first place.
    Since when did it become a part of legislators policy to expect free food, drink, and gifts in the first place?
    Voters know that when legislators, whether in Pierre or Washington, D.C. start accepting freebees they are compromised and beholden to or owned by those bearing gifts.
    Why is it so difficult for Tim Goodwin and other legislators to go to these meeting and social gatherings and expect some sort of compensation
    I’ll have a long wait, but I’m waiting for just one legislator to step forward and say they will not accept free food, drinks, gifts or money.
    If you think about it, a legislator that accepts freebees has lost his integrity and ability to represent his constituents.

  84. Porter Lansing 2017-01-10 22:55

    Perfect, Roger. Let’s hope the SDDP adopts that pledge as the main beam of the platform.

  85. grudznick 2017-01-10 23:14

    Mr. C, I say do a law bill that outlaws the free food, which you abhor. Then do another law bill that says we will take $5,000,000 out of tax payer pockets, away from teachers and such, and we will give it to politicians to run politician ads.

    I dare you to do that, young sir. You won’t because you know what will happen to the meaningful one. And when grudznick says something is more meaningful than lunch, as you well know that means it is more meaningful.

  86. james kopecky 2017-01-11 00:05

    If the politicians are confused by this I would recommend that they review their contracts that bind their overreach or resign. What part of the ethics is so hard to understand. Would it reveal that the foreign bankers are the ones being returned in favor? You had better believe it this is already argued and adjudicated in the UN Courts. This is the failure of the press to black it out. It is known world wide that the american people has had the turned against the people that are to be the served. How much more denial is tolerated, its not the persons for the person by the person. They even changed the constitution around so the people are the voted in. what more needs to be reargued.

  87. John 2017-01-11 08:21

    The voters of R30 are receiving the representation they so richly deserve.

  88. caheidelberger Post author | 2017-01-11 16:48

    Foreign banks and UN courts? Irrelevant fantasy.

  89. caheidelberger Post author | 2017-01-11 16:53

    During his visit with Aberdeen voters Monday, Rick Weiland said that he has offered to buy reporter Elisa Sand dinner or coffee multiple times when she comes to interview him. Rick said reporter Elisa has said no every time, out of her commitment to journalistic ethics.

    Hmm… what makes it so hard for legislators to conduct their important business on our behalf with a similar ethical restraint?

  90. jerry 2017-01-11 17:47

    Goodwin simply cannot read or comprehend what he is reading. Wearing that uniform for political purposes is not allowed. I am thinking he may have a Codpiece on just like W. did. Please have a lobbyist go to Goodwill and get this guy a suit and tie. Make sure that it is under a Franklin and all is good. If he is that out of sorts, get his wife a new dress from there as well. Keep it a hundred..

  91. grudznick 2017-01-25 19:00

    Gentlemen and Ladies. My granddaughter gave me this blue link you can listen to. It is hilarious. The IM #22 is so unconstitutional it sent Slick Rick into hiding! And now I know what IM stands for. Immense Monstrosity.

    Talk about sloppily written. Go to the little arrow by the 3rd thing down. Senate affairs.

  92. jerry 2017-01-25 19:12

    It actually stands for Initiated Measure #22 that was just before Initiated Measure # whatever.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.