STAFF BLOG REPUBLIC INSIDER Time to enforce 'food for votes' law?
I wrote a column last week about what I see as a need for enforcement of our state and federal voter bribery laws, aka "food for votes" laws.
Click here to read it and tell me if I'm full of it.... Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:29 AM
New courtroom policy will mean no change in practice
The South Dakota Supreme Court has approved a new policy regarding cameras and electronic recording equipment in trial-level courtrooms, but the result will be no change from the present.
A bit of background: In 2001, the state Supreme Court decided to allow cameras and other recording devices into its courtrooms. Policies were established, including the use of “pool” equipment (one TV camera that all TV stations would share). The decision has been declared a broad success.
‘Trees’ initiative has damaging wording
To the Editor:
I read with interest a letter to the editor written by former Mayor Alice Claggett, and it’s quite obvious she has not read the initiative that will be on the ballot (Nov. 2 for Mitchell voters). If she had, she is not telling the general public the consequences should this ballot measure pass.
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) - South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley says his office is investigating whether three rallies held by Democrats on American Indian reservations broke the law by offering people food in exchange for votes.
The controversy over so called “food for votes” rallies grew Thursday as high-profile Democratic candidates conducted feeds and early voting rallies on the Lower Brule and Fort Thompson reservations.
U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D., who faces Republican Kristi Noem and independent B. Thomas Marking on Nov. 2, defended the events against charges that they are illegal.
View your ad here! Cost effective targeted advertising. Contextual advertising starting as low as $79/month. This includes targeted ad delivery and search results! Add your business to the Marketplace »