And I love seeing that even his fellow Republicans are against him in this case. Attorney General Larry Long and Secretary of State Chris Nelson are saying Hunt created Promising Futures to get around the law.
And Nelson had a great quote about this in the Rapid City Journal:
The state says Hunt must disclose the donor because a state law says any
"natural person or ballot question committee" involved in a ballot measure must
file a campaign-finance report. Another law defines ballot question
committee as two or more people who raise or contribute money for the purpose of
passing or defeating ballot measures.
Hunt maintains that he is the sole officer in Promising Future, and it does
not have to file campaign-finance reports because it does not fit the definition
of a ballot-question committee.
But the Promising Future articles of incorporation that Hunt filed with the
secretary of state indicate that one of the purposes of the firm is "education
of the public concerning ballot issues."
Asked about that, Nelson said only: "Bingo."
Hahahahahaha! Chris Nelson made a funny!
Good, ol', honest Roger Hunt must've known about that two-person rule. So he formed a one-person company to get around it. The problem is that the money still came from someone who isn't him. That's two people.
The Argus is covering the trial on their blog, so I'll probably be posting follow ups. This'll be fun!
UPDATE: Apparently one of Hunt's main arguments is that the two-person rule I mentioned doesn't apply in this case.
Roger Hunt + Donor = 1 Person?
Now I was never that great at math in school, but that doesn't seem right to me.