Kudos to Spot for highlighting unethical behavior on either side of the aisle.
Sloppy, yes. Highly unethical? Nope.
Dave did write "highlighting" not highly, but MNO is right. The linked AP article said that the Board did not make a finding of "probable cause" of an intentional violation.
Apparently, Entenza's boys and girls are out doing some backing and filling this
AM.
The "no lobbyist contributions during session" was designed to prevent the unseemly practice of milking the lobbyists at the time legislation might be pending in front of the elected officials getting the money.
Entenza isn't currently an elected official and is making no official decisions on any legislation, making the violation a bit far from its intended purpose in my book. The arcane and voluminous rules on this stuff makes it nearly impossible to avoid a technical goof up from time to time.
I think that the campaign's self-reporting and owning up to this shows their commitment to doing it right. For that they deserve credit. As opposed to, say, the Republican Party of Minnesota's cavalier attitude toward reporting to the Federal Election Commission.
Yep, probably a mistake made by some low level campaign worker- donations tend not to be handed directly to a candidate.
I recently got a crash course in campaign fund raising laws and I will be the first to admit that it is incredibly complex. Entenza's mistake could have been just that, an innocent mistake.
But as Spot points out, the guy was trying to get elected as the top cop in the state.
Dyna,
I don't like the "it was just the little people" defense. You get this in business all the time: "my secretary failed . . . " or "this system or that system malfunctioned . . . "
Never blame the help. You picked them and were responsible for their traning. It's just like the time last season when the Viking coach, whose name I can't remember, held a press conference to blame the quarterback, whose name I can't remember either, for a loss.
Complete and utter bull feathers, yet that is apparently what the Entenza campaign is doing this morning.
I doubt low-level campaign employees are the only ones on the campaign who know when a $500 check from a multinational corporation's lobbyist (since 2001) comes in. As a matter of fact, I just got a personal letter from a candidate for a measley $100 contribution. Furthermore, why should anyone believe Entenza's version of events with his track record of lying?
It could be worse Spot. He could be doing the "I take full responsibility and will now give you all the embarrassing details" Guv Sanford approach.
MNO's point is interesting though, that he violated the letter of the law but not the spirit or intent of it. Do you think there is too much campaign finance law or not enough?
Think quick. In a race between Geoff Michel and Matt Entenza (and no IP candidate) for whom would you vote?
Frontrunners have to stay ahead of the game. Mr E. will do a wonderful job as long as he gets a good accountant (not Franken's) to handle all the money that is pouring into his campaign. At least he isn't in office thus requiring a taxpayer- funded inquiry...
tom,
The Campaign Board is publically financed. And Al Franken's accountant has nothing to do with Minnesota campaign law.
Dave,
Spot doesn't really have a strong opinion on the law that Entenza violated. But it is the law, and its violation is not exactly first degree murder, but it is a bright line rule that shouldn't be violated. As stated in the original post, the Man from Cheerios should have known better, too.
Peter,
Silly question. Would you prefer to be shot or hung?
Moreover, Geoff Michel will never be the Republican candidate: he voted against conceal and carry. That's a crucifiable offense in the Republican Party as presently constituted.
Regarding specifically the "little people" defense, Dave says:
"It could be worse Spot. He could be doing the "I take full responsibility and will now give you all the embarrassing details" Guv Sanford approach."
In Mark Sanford's case Dave, there was only one "little person" available to blame.
Commenting by HaloScan
