SC

Kirkman Finlay Rolls Out Ethics Bills

LAWMAKER TIGHTENS CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS IN RESPONSE TO SCANDALS S.C. Rep. Kirkman Finlay (R-Richland) has been championing stronger anti-corruption laws ever since he was elected to the S.C. State House in 2012.  Last year, for example, he led the charge in support of expanded income disclosure – which is absolutely critical in…

LAWMAKER TIGHTENS CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS IN RESPONSE TO SCANDALS

S.C. Rep. Kirkman Finlay (R-Richland) has been championing stronger anti-corruption laws ever since he was elected to the S.C. State House in 2012.  Last year, for example, he led the charge in support of expanded income disclosure – which is absolutely critical in ascertaining whether Palmetto State politicians have been purchased in secret.

You know, like Nikki Haley was … 

Anyway, Finlay is stepping up his game in 2014 – dropping six new ethics bills last week aimed at clarifying

“Ethics Legislation needs to be passed this session. I introduced several bills that begin the process of upgrading our ethics laws in important ways,” Finlay told FITS. “Strong ethics laws ensure that politicians are doing the people’s business.  Passing tough ethics laws should be our top priority this year.”

Finlay’s bills do various things. One of them – H. 4452 – deals with campaign reporting, tightening the definitions of what constitutes a campaign expense.  Another bill – H. 4453 – would force elected officials to personally reimburse their campaign accounts within thirty days in the event an improper expense is uncovered.

Finlay has also proposed legislation clarifying how campaign bank accounts are to be managed (H. 4455), as well as a bill eliminating the receipt of cash contributions (H. 4456).

Finally, he’s closing a key loophole that enables lawmakers to pay their fines out of their campaign accounts – which is another way politicians leverage special interests. Under Finlay’s bill (H. 4457), lawmakers would be forced to pay ethics fines out of their own pockets.

Are any of Finlay’s campaign finance reforms groundbreaking legislation? No.

Are they sexy? Clearly not.

But they are necessary reforms seeing as the state’s Lieutenant Governor was bounced from office in 2012 for a campaign finance scandal, and its most powerful legislative leader is currently facing a grand jury over his corruption case.

While some politicians are busy paying lip service to real ethics reform, Finlay has gotten busy tightening up the laws that are most frequently abused.  We encourage the S.C. General Assembly to pass each of his reforms … although we suspect there will be resistance given the extent to which many state lawmakers (most of them rural Democrats) live off of their campaign contributions.

Related posts

SC

South Carolina’s Blue Crab Bill On Hold

Dylan Nolan
SC

Residents: Forgotten Gullah Cemetery Desecrated During ‘Clean-up’

Callie Lyons
SC

Southern Charm Saga: Kathryn Dennis Arrested For DUI

FITSNews

29 comments

Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 10:24 am

There’s only one way to “fix” government, that’s by getting rid of it.

Reply
Bill January 21, 2014 at 10:39 am

Then I suggest you move to South Sudan. There you can experience first hand what life without government is like. Perhaps you should try it out before you inflict on the rest of us your Teanutarian ideas.

Reply
Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 11:04 am

“Officially the Republic of South Sudan,[8] is a landlocked country in northeastern Africa.[9]. On January 21st 2014, the CEO of Microsoft, Bill Gates purchased the nation.”

It looks like things are looking up for them. Maybe you can try another causal fallacy.

Reply
Bill January 21, 2014 at 11:57 am

If things are looking up for them it is because one side is winning the war and they will have a government. The cost of no government is perpetual war over resources. But if you believe things are looking up for them, as I said give it a shot; or try Somalia. Still the best examples of what a country is like without effective government.
Besides if you feel we don’t need government you obviously do not need infrastructure to make money, so you should be able to do it from anywhere.

Reply
Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 12:08 pm

Do you ever research anything you post on? Do you not realize Somalia, like Zimbabwe, has a government?

Bill January 21, 2014 at 12:39 pm

Just because a country professes to have a government does not mean it does. These countries have spent decades in perpetual civil war and lawlessness. If you think South Sudan is not governmentless enough for you, try Nigeria, or Mali. In the end, they all show the same thing. Absent effective government no one has rights. Something our country has known since its foundation.
Our nation was not founded on libertarian or anti-government principals.

Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 12:51 pm

“Absent effective government no one has rights.”

Really?

“Just because a country professes to have a government does not mean it does.”

Oh, so now you get to make your own definition of what a government is?

lol…good luck with your views partner. Keep chasing that carrot on a string of “good & effective” government, I’m sure you’ll get it eventually. I can’t wait for the day FITSnews goes a week without a story of government corruption.

“Be thankful we’re not getting all the government we’re paying for.”- Will Rogers

“Government is not a solution to our problem government is the problem.”- Reagan (even if he didn’t mean it)

Bill January 21, 2014 at 1:51 pm

The only people who are not subject to some form of “government” (the verb) are people who live in the wilderness and have no contact with other people and absolute dictators. Whenever people are in contact with each other there must be rules to follow; and if there are rules, there must be someone to enforce the rules. If there are no rules you have no rights, because your right to possess something or to do something are defined by the rules of what other people cannot do to you are take from you.
A Government (the noun) in the sense you are describing means a body of people who control rule making and enforcement within a geographical region. The nations I mentioned have people who claim to be the Government, but who cannot really make and enforce the rules within the regions they claim. Therefore they are not really governing the geographical region that makes up the nation as recognized internationally.

Bill January 21, 2014 at 1:54 pm

Excuse me,
Your right to possess something or to do something is defined by the rules of what other people cannot do to you or take from you.

Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 4:11 pm

Do you not recognize that our government is the biggest property rights violator in the world? In terms of raw dollars, there is simply no one bigger.

Bill January 21, 2014 at 5:57 pm

I do not recognize that. Taxation is not theft. Taxes are the cost of civilization, and I want to live in a civilized nation. There are plenty of uncivilized places for those who do not care for the infrastructure and rule of law in civilized countries.

Polishing Turds January 22, 2014 at 1:07 pm

“I do not recognize that. Taxation is not theft.”

I’m sorry, you are an idiot.

If it’s not theft it wouldn’t have to be codified and enforced by the barrel of a gun, they could just say to everyone “we expect you to pay us for services rendered”(like war and welfare)

“Taxes are the cost of civilization, and I want to live in a civilized nation.”

So prior to 1913 the US wasn’t civilized? You mean that period of the largest economic growth?

Kirkman's Corn Crop January 21, 2014 at 11:30 am

I look forward to the full realization of our government in its movement towards Zimbabwe myself.

Reply
shifty henry January 21, 2014 at 2:07 pm

Yes, and he can enjoy such pleasures of sleeping under a malaria net, boiling water for drinking, suffering through bouts of dysentery, and so forth……..

Reply
Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 4:10 pm

and all of that is because they have a government Bill doesn’t like?

Reply
Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 4:24 pm

So in Shifty’s world, the government in the United States was what made it great early on, not the people.

Got it.

Naturally the growth in government seems to be corresponding to our greatness, no?

Reply
shifty henry January 21, 2014 at 6:48 pm

No, I disagree with the comment that eliminating government is the answer because that would result in chaos and anarchy.

Polishing Turds January 22, 2014 at 1:04 pm

nah….just go back to our nations inception and you’ll see that it was having virtually no government that allowed people to thrive. Prior to 1913 when you asked people what their interactions were with the Feds they’d have to stop and think, then say, “Well, I send the mail.”

venomachine January 21, 2014 at 2:50 pm

How do you propose we maintain strong property rights, the linchpin of economic success, without a government?

Reply
Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 3:17 pm

The free market will provide all, if only given a chance. Private arbitration, ADR, etc. et al

Reply
Bill January 21, 2014 at 3:56 pm

Who will enforce the arbitration award? .

Reply
Polishing Turds January 21, 2014 at 4:08 pm

They would have their own enforcers under one scenario, but there are many out there we have yet to dream of.

Bill January 21, 2014 at 5:51 pm

Then why bother to arbitrate. Simply tell the other side what they owe you and send your enforcers to collect. As long as your enforcers are more in number and better armed than his protectors you will get what you want.

Of course this all sounds a lot like what happens between warlords in South Sudan, Nigeria, and Somalia .to me.

Polishing Turds January 22, 2014 at 1:11 pm

Nah, war is expensive-there is professional courtesy as well, etc.

You are painting yourself in a box where the current paradigm is what you are limited to.

Feel free to chase the unicorn fantasy of good governance though.

venomachine January 21, 2014 at 10:40 am

The results of a political ‘dynasty.’ Aside from being an obvious thorn in the side of T-bone, he hasn’t been all that impressive.

Reply
Paid to Post January 22, 2014 at 4:15 pm

So, how much are these fluffer posts costing Finlay? Because we know your not doing them for free, otherwise this new member and these non-newsworthy subjects wouldn’t even have been on your radar. At least this post had something of substance to it, unlike the last wet sloppy one you gave Finlay on this site.

Seriously, how much is it costing him, for what, one post every month? Every 2-weeks? If it’s not too much, I’d be willing to shell it out to have you write me up as if I’m the 2nd coming too.

Reply
9" January 21, 2014 at 7:26 pm

Grrrrrrr

Reply
9" January 22, 2014 at 12:23 am

I have some ideas and thoughts….http://www.kirkmanfinlay.com/

Reply
jack January 22, 2014 at 11:55 am

Pompous Ass. Hopefully this “legislation” will also allow for more scrutiny of elected officials and everyone else for that matter who recieve farm subsidies, as he does.

Reply

Leave a Comment