Ethics Commission: Mystery Billboard Sponsor Legal
A 2011 S.C. Supreme Court ruling allows committees, unaffiliated with campaigns, to promote candidates without filing with ethics commission.
A billboard along Interstate 26 promoting S.C. Senate District 38 candidate Sean Bennett has raised some eyebrows in the heated election battle, but is legal, according to top state ethics officials.
The billboard is paid for by Dorchester One LLC, which has not and does not need to file with the ethics commission since it is unaffiliated with the Bennett campaign, according to S.C. Ethics Commission Director Herbert Hayden
"I have no idea who or what it is," Bennett said Friday, adding that he had learned of it the week prior. "I'm flattered that people like our message. I just have no connection with it."
See what other signs have ruffled feathers during this election season. Click here.
Under previous S.C. law, committees had to file with the ethics commission, but after a 2011 state Supreme Court ruling, unaffiliated committees do not have to file, Hayden said.
"At the present time, there is no such thing as a committee in this state and no reporting requirements," Hayden said.
Dorchester One LLC is not registered with the state of South Carolina as a registered business in the state. A company called Dorchester One Inc. is filed with the state, but is in forfeiture.
When Patch called the owner J. Stanley Claypoole to ask if there is a connection, the call went unreturned. Hayden said the company could be registered in any state.
IDA Benfarting
9:09 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
O My God, someone exercising their Constitutional Rights and the State of South Carolina Supreme Court agrees. I guess blogland and the rest of his elite Republicans and now Liberty Caucus members can go find another windmill to attack.
Transparency is clear
11:43 am on Friday, June 1, 2012
Nice dodge trying to use the 1st Amendment. Why make such a earnest attempt to hide whom you are unless your goal is personal gain in Columbia? This group has clearly dropped more money than ethics rules would allow IF they were required to follow them. Their goal is clearly a seat for their special interests in Columbia. And giving credit to a SC Supreme Court that is appointed and beholding to the Legislature is weak at best!