South Dakota

Institute for Free Speech Wins Legal Challenge, Publishes Analysis of South Dakota Constitutional Amendment W and Initiated Measure 24

Alexandria, VA – Following a federal court ruling, the Institute for Free Speech released its analysis of two South Dakota ballot measures that the group says implicate First Amendment rights. The measures – Constitutional Amendment W and Initiated Measure 24 – will go before voters in November. The Institute initially concluded it could not publish […]

Filed Under: Blog, Newsroom, Press Releases, IFS v. Jackley, South Dakota

First Amendment Analysis: South Dakota Ballot Measures

PDF of analysis available here By Owen Yeates and Ryan Morrison South Dakotans face many decisions this November, including a proposed statute titled Initiated Measure 24[1] and a ballot measure to amend the state constitution, known as Amendment W.[2] Both implicate important First Amendment rights. Initiated Measure 24 is an outright ban on speech—if a […]

Filed Under: Blog, Contribution Limits Comments, External Relations Comments and Testimony, State, State Comments and Testimony, Enforcement, South Dakota

Institute for Free Speech Challenges South Dakota Law Regulating Speech about Ballot Measures

South Dakota law unconstitutionally restricts core First Amendment speech, press rights Alexandria, VA – The Institute for Free Speech yesterday filed a lawsuit in federal court saying that a South Dakota law regulating speech about ballot measures is unconstitutional. The Institute seeks to publish an objective analysis of two ballot measures – Constitutional Amendment W and […]

Filed Under: Blog, Newsroom, Press Releases, IFS v. Jackley, South Dakota

What would happen if the media talked about itself the way it talks about “dark money” groups?

A shadowy organization based in Washington, D.C., recently spent an undisclosed sum attempting to swing elections in far-off places such as South Dakota and California. Due to a loophole in campaign finance law, this spending does not have to be reported to the Federal Election Commission. That means the public will never know who is […]

Filed Under: Blog, Disclosure, Disclosure Press Release/In the News/Blog, Dark Money, federal election commission, The Washington Post, California, Maryland, Missouri, South Dakota, Washington

CCP Releases Analysis of Initiated Measure 22: The “South Dakota Government Accountability and Anti-Corruption Act”

Alexandria, VA – The Center for Competitive Politics, America’s largest nonprofit focusing on public education and defense of First Amendment political speech rights, released an analysis today by Senior Fellow Eric Wang regarding South Dakota’s Initiated Measure 22, otherwise known as the “South Dakota Government Accountability and Anti-Corruption Act.” To read the analysis, click here […]

Filed Under: Blog, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Press Release/In the News/Blog, Disclosure, Disclosure Press Release/In the News/Blog, External Relations Press Releases, Press Releases, State, State Press Releases and Blogs, Tax Financed Campaigns Press Release/In the News/Blog, Tax-Financing, 2016 Initiated Measure 22, 501(c)(3)s, South Dakota Democracy Credit Program, South Dakota Government Accountability and Anti-Corruption Act, South Dakota

Analysis of the “South Dakota Government Accountability and Anti-Corruption Act” (2016 Initiated Measure 22)

PDF of analysis available here By Eric Wang, Senior Fellow[1] This November, South Dakotans will be asked to approve or reject ten statewide ballot questions. Among these is Initiated Measure 22, which would make approximately 70 changes to the state’s campaign finance and lobbying laws. While some of these provisions are minor, others set forth […]

Filed Under: Blog, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Comments, Contribution Limits State, Disclosure, Disclosure Comments, Disclosure State, External Relations Comments and Testimony, State Comments and Testimony, Tax Financed Campaigns Comments, Tax Financed Campaigns State, Tax-Financing, 2016 Initiated Measure 22, South Dakota Democracy Credit Program, South Dakota

Citizens United, States Divided: An Empirical Analysis of Independent Political Spending

This study examines the effect the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. FEC has on independent spending in American politics. Previous attempts to answer this question have focused solely on federal elections where there is no baseline for comparing changes in spending behavior. The authors, Douglas M. Spencer and Abby K. Wood, overcome […]

Filed Under: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Independent Speech, Issues, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Super PACs, 50 States, Abby K. Wood, Center for Competitive Politics, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Corporate spending, Douglas M. Spencer, Independent Expenditures, Indepent Spending, Indiana Law Journal, money in politics, Supreme Court, Union spending, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

Policy Primer: The National Popular Vote Proposal – A Step Away from Federalism and a Step Towards Chaos

This Policy Primer briefly reviews and summarizes five key shortcomings of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPV) and debunks the four most common myths associated with this plan for electing the President, which is quietly being signed onto in state legislatures across the country. The NPV proposal is an attempt to get states to agree […]

Filed Under: Electoral College, Research, Center for Competitive Politics, Checks and Balances, Electoral College, Founding Fathers, National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, npv, Policy Primer, Tara Ross, Electoral College, Electoral College, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District Of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

Election Law Handbook for Legislators and State Policymakers

This Election Law Handbook provides an informative guide to a variety of topics in campaign finance and election law likely to arise in any state legislative session. A useful tool for anyone interested in topical election law issues, in addition to original content, this Handbook suggests recommended reading for more in-depth analysis of the subjects discussed […]

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contribution Limits State, Contributions & Limits, Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure Handouts, Disclosure State, Electoral College, External Relations Sub-Pages, State, Tax Financed Campaigns Handouts, Tax Financed Campaigns Research, Tax Financed Campaigns State, Tax-Financing, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Contribution Limits, Disclosure, Electoral College, Contributions & Limits, Disclosure, Electoral College, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District Of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

Issue Analysis No. 7: Do Limits on Corporate and Union Giving to Candidates Lead to “Good” Government?

Since the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citi­zens United v. FEC, which freed corporations and labor unions to finance independent expen­ditures in support of federal candidates, the is­sue of corporate and union spending in elections has become a frequent and impassioned topic of political discussion. Most states treat limits on corporate and union giving to […]

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contributions & Limits, External Relations Sub-Pages, Research, Big Labor, Campaign Contribution Limits, Center for Competitive Politics, Corporate Donations, Corporate Political Spending, corporations, Good Government, Grading the States, Labor Unions, Matt Nese, Pew Center on the States, Union Campaign Donations, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District Of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

The Center for Competitive Politics is now the Institute for Free Speech.