


A national teachers union has provided most of the money used by a committee to fight a ballot measure that would ban government-funded lobbying and prevent many people from making donations to political campaigns.
The National Education Association is providing about $1.1 million to the No on 10 Committee, a coalition of 66 organizations representing unions, business groups, local governments and farm groups, said Steve Willard, a leader of the effort against Initiated Measure 10.
Related videos:
"YES on 10 / Stop the 'Pay to Play' Scheme"
"Stop the corruption, South Dakota"
"It isn't being funded by taxpayers' dollars," Willard said.
The No on 10 Committee spent about $1.3 million in the campaign, with the NEA's $1.1 million donation paying most of the bills, Willard said. The committee spent heavily on television ads.
The NEA and the South Dakota Education Association, which has 7,000 members, donated money to fight the ballot measure because the proposed law would prevent teachers and others who work under collective bargaining agreements from making campaign donations to candidates, SDEA officials said.
The campaign committee supporting the ballot measure, South Dakotans for Open and Clean Government, has received nearly all its money from the South Dakota Conservative Action Council, a nonprofit corporation that has not reported where it receives its funding. The council has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to the campaign.
Campaign finance reports were due Friday but had not yet been posted by the secretary of state's office late in the day.
Dena Espenscheid, a spokeswoman for South Dakotans for Open and Clean Government, said the committee's funding has all come from South Dakota people and organizations, except for a $10,000 donation last year from Americans for Tax Reform.
Espenscheid said her committee does not know where the South Dakota Conservative Action Council gets its money. "How should we know? We're not the Conservative Action Council."
Lee Breard, executive director of the Conservative Action Council, said his group and other nonprofit organizations do not have to report who donates to them.
"The funding for the Conservative Action Council is just raised from good conservatives who support our principles across South Dakota," Breard said, adding that the organization gets donations from outside the state.
Breard and Espenscheid asked whether the NEA and other groups opposing the ballot measure, such as the South Dakota Chamber of Commerce and Industry, listed everyone who donated to them.
"In fact, the powerful, ultraliberal, out-of-state union bosses whose left-wing agenda is hostile to South Dakota values are the ones paying for the no-truth campaign, the no-truth committee's big-lie campaign," Espenscheid said.
Bryce Healy, executive director of the SDEA, said the national teachers' union got involved in the South Dakota campaign because similar ballot measures are being attempted in other states.
The money for the South Dakota campaign comes from a fund supported by contributions of 50 cents a month from teachers and other school employees, which includes 3.2 million NEA members and 7,000 SDEA members, Healy said.
The NEA's Ballot Measure Fund is intended partly to protect members from proposals such as Initiated Measure 10, which are attacks on the free speech rights of teachers, firefighters and others, Healy said.
Initiated Measure 10 would ban the use of government money for lobbying, prevent holders of some no-bid contracts and their relatives from contributing to candidate campaigns, and require details of some state contracts to be placed on the Internet.
Because the measure's definition of no-bid government contracts includes collective bargaining agreements, it would prevent teachers from making political donations, according to opponents of the measure.
Breard said the teachers' union money could be considered tax money because schools deduct union dues from payrolls.
Opponents argue the measure would mean that associations representing local governments could not testify in legislative committee hearings, and business people and their relatives would not be able to make political donations if they hold even relatively small government contracts.
Supporters contend it would create a more open and clean government and would prevent government officials from handing out contracts in exchange for campaign money.
Willard noted that the measure is opposed by 66 groups with widely different interests. Opponents include the state Republican and Democratic parties, the Farm Bureau and Farmers Union, various unions, the South Dakota Retailers Association, the South Dakota Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and associations representing local governments.
"It's been fun," Willard said. "We've had people that disagree on so many different things, but on this we are sitting at the same table."
Opponents argue the measure is intended to give out-of-state interests more influence over South Dakota government.
"If it takes everybody out that's participating today, it doesn't do anything to hurt the out-of-state interests," Willard said.
(siouxcityjournal.com)