Campaign Disclosures Due

[surepip]

OK, a campaign disclosure form is required from all candidates for money collected and banked through today.

 

Of course like all other "Ethics" related regulations in Georgia, the candidate can wait until the 9th or 10th as well.

 

I would like to issue a challenge to ALL of our candidates to file their reports today, or tomorrow morning, and send word to p.com that they have done so. And we will see if Pubby, et al, can post them here as well.

 

Candidates: Are you willing to step forward and file your disclosures as soon as they are due ?

[dapandlap]

Are you "stirrin the poodin" there a little bit?

[TwoKidCircus]

Actually, the grace period extends to July 8. Fines begin after midnight on the 8th.

[surepip]

Are you "stirrin the poodin" there a little bit?

 

Not nearly as much as I would like to.

 

The candidates can actually hold onto the money and not deposit it until after the deadlines and not have to show who gave what until AFTER the election.

 

I am curious to see who has collected what funding from whom.....

[dapandlap]

Not nearly as much as I would like to.

 

The candidates can actually hold onto the money and not deposit it until after the deadlines and not have to show who gave what until AFTER the election.

 

I am curious to see who has collected what funding from whom.....

good point

Edited June 30, 2010 by dapandlap

[lotstodo]

OK, a campaign disclosure form is required from all candidates for money collected and banked through today.

 

Of course like all other "Ethics" related regulations in Georgia, the candidate can wait until the 9th or 10th as well.

 

I would like to issue a challenge to ALL of our candidates to file their reports today, or tomorrow morning, and send word to p.com that they have done so. And we will see if Pubby, et al, can post them here as well.

 

Candidates: Are you willing to step forward and file your disclosures as soon as they are due ?

I wonder if any candidates would consider actually posting them here? It would be an opportunity for some accused here of being in a single industry or special interest group pocket to prove their accusers wrong, at least from a financial support standpoint.

[surepip]

I wonder if any candidates would consider actually posting them here? It would be an opportunity for some accused here of being in a single industry or special interest group pocket to prove their accusers wrong, at least from a financial support standpoint.

 

That is exactly what I was hoping for. If not, I was going to see about obtaining them and giving them to Pubby to post. My scanner files are too big to post and I have not figured out how to shrink them.

 

I am very curious to see Anivitarte's, Cochran's, Crowe, and Collet. I saw Barnett's and Pownall's previous reports and was pleased with what I did not see. I think they will volunteer theirs. If not, I will see about getting them as well.

 

Stout's, Braddock, and Golden's will be interesting as well.

[surepip]

Any candidates ready to post their disclosure forms ?

[workingforaliving]

Actually, the grace period extends to July 8. Fines begin after midnight on the 8th.

I really never understood the point of a "deadline" of July 1st, when it really doesn't have to be in until the 8th.

[tmilanese]

That is exactly what I was hoping for. If not, I was going to see about obtaining them and giving them to Pubby to post. My scanner files are too big to post and I have not figured out how to shrink them.

 

I am very curious to see Anivitarte's, Cochran's, Crowe, and Collet. I saw Barnett's and Pownall's previous reports and was pleased with what I did not see. I think they will volunteer theirs. If not, I will see about getting them as well.

 

Stout's, Braddock, and Golden's will be interesting as well.

 

Barnett's and Pownall's previous report was March 31st close-date. Not even sure if they had announced their campaigns yet at that point. I would think the majority of their donations would have come between April 1st and June 30th which is this coming report. Funny how you're not interested in seeing the candidates you support. No bias there.

[feelip]

Barnett's and Pownall's previous report was March 31st close-date. Not even sure if they had announced their campaigns yet at that point. I would think the majority of their donations would have come between April 1st and June 30th which is this coming report. Funny how you're not interested in seeing the candidates you support. No bias there.

 

 

Just a wild ass guess here, but I doubt Jerry contributed to Pownall's campaign. And having Shearin's support is an automatic NO for me. We have had all of that guys influence we can afford for a lifetime.

[rednekkhikkchikk]

Barnett's and Pownall's previous report was March 31st close-date. Not even sure if they had announced their campaigns yet at that point. I would think the majority of their donations would have come between April 1st and June 30th which is this coming report. Funny how you're not interested in seeing the candidates you support. No bias there.

 

It's called trust...

[solosoul]

That is exactly what I was hoping for. If not, I was going to see about obtaining them and giving them to Pubby to post. My scanner files are too big to post and I have not figured out how to shrink them.

 

I am very curious to see Anivitarte's, Cochran's, Crowe, and Collet. I saw Barnett's and Pownall's previous reports and was pleased with what I did not see. I think they will volunteer theirs. If not, I will see about getting them as well.

 

Stout's, Braddock, and Golden's will be interesting as well.

 

I really do not think it would do any of them any good to post it. After all you will just say they are "holding" the checks as you have already stated that they can do. Sort of a no win situation ...damned if they do and damned if they don't. So why even bother to give you another place to attack?

[surepip]

Barnett's and Pownall's previous report was March 31st close-date. Not even sure if they had announced their campaigns yet at that point. I would think the majority of their donations would have come between April 1st and June 30th which is this coming report. Funny how you're not interested in seeing the candidates you support. No bias there.

 

Or the possibility I have already seen Pownall's and Barnett's ? I know they both filed theirs yesterday.

[markdavd]

I really never understood the point of a "deadline" of July 1st, when it really doesn't have to be in until the 8th.

Simple, it's just like in business. The period 'closes' on one date, but it takes a week or so to verify that all transactions have come in and are posted, check against bank records, etc. before they can close the books.

 

I guess Surpip always closes the books for his business on the same day the period ends.

[surepip]

Simple, it's just like in business. The period 'closes' on one date, but it takes a week or so to verify that all transactions have come in and are posted, check against bank records, etc. before they can close the books.

 

I guess Surpip always closes the books for his business on the same day the period ends.

 

What are you talking about ?

 

There is no verification process. And generally even after filed on the last possible day, many candidates come back and do an amended report.

 

How hard is it to list all donations, cash or "In Kind" of more than $101 and total them up ?

[WHITEY]

What are you talking about ?

 

There is no verification process. And generally even after filed on the last possible day, many candidates come back and do an amended report.

 

How hard is it to list all donations, cash or "In Kind" of more than $101 and total them up ?

Surepip

Really not difficult at all you deposit a check; you list it on the form, complete with who the check is from along with the amount and the donor’s occupation

If you spend that donation, you simply list what it was spent for and the amount spent.

Same applies for cash or in kind donations.

Does not require a CPA, Just good common sense, Of course some will simply not list who paid for the thousand signs until they have to

[lotstodo]

Surepip

Really not difficult at all you deposit a check; you list it on the form, complete with who the check is from along with the amount and the donor’s occupation

If you spend that donation, you simply list what it was spent for and the amount spent.

Same applies for cash or in kind donations.

Does not require a CPA, Just good common sense, Of course some will simply not list who paid for the thousand signs until they have to

Unfortunately what makes the process so "difficult" is cooking the books. We have some of the weakest reporting requirements in the nation, and absolutely no established process to police the accuracy of the reports until the candidate is caught otherwise with their hand in the cookie jar or is turned in by a disgruntled employee or "contributor" who didn't get what he thought he paid for. And then if there is an ethics investigation, it is stonewalled until after the election. And before anyone starts, that is not a partisan statement, every durn one of them plays the same game, and the more powerful, the more likely it is that they are beholden.

 

Ethics reform requires the reformers to have ethics in the first place, and Georgia politics isn't exactly a nursery for propriety.

[lowrider]

It's called trust...

 

 

Surely, ye jest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately what makes the process so "difficult" is cooking the books. We have some of the weakest reporting requirements in the nation, and absolutely no established process to police the accuracy of the reports until the candidate is caught otherwise with their hand in the cookie jar or is turned in by a disgruntled employee or "contributor" who didn't get what he thought he paid for. And then if there is an ethics investigation, it is stonewalled until after the election. And before anyone starts, that is not a partisan statement, every durn one of them plays the same game, and the more powerful, the more likely it is that they are beholden.

 

Ethics reform requires the reformers to have ethics in the first place, and Georgia politics isn't exactly a nursery for propriety.

 

 

[mrshoward]

Or the possibility I have already seen Pownall's and Barnett's ? I know they both filed theirs yesterday.

 

And... why are they not posted here ???

[WHITEY]

And... why are they not posted here ???

mrshoward

I have seen Jason Anavitarte campaign disclosure that he filed in 2006 when he ran as a Democrat in house District 81 Would you please taxe a few minutes of your time and explain it to the readers?

 

http://www.ethics.ga.gov/Reports/Campaign/Campaign_Name.aspx?NameID=558&FilerID=C2006000219&Type=candidate

[surepip]

And... why are they not posted here ???

 

They will be. They are working on getting them scanned and sent to Pubby.

[markdavd]

Surepip

Really not difficult at all you deposit a check; you list it on the form, complete with who the check is from along with the amount and the donor’s occupation

If you spend that donation, you simply list what it was spent for and the amount spent.

Same applies for cash or in kind donations.

Does not require a CPA, Just good common sense, Of course some will simply not list who paid for the thousand signs until they have to

You're saying it's still done the old fashioned way - that there are no other form of donation other than paper checks sent to the candidate or their book keeper? No paypal type donations, no electronic checks or other forms that take a few days to be reconciled?

 

If it's true that it's 100% paper checks, a day or two should be enough to get it done for local elections.

[surepip]

You're saying it's still done the old fashioned way - that there are no other form of donation other than paper checks sent to the candidate or their book keeper? No paypal type donations, no electronic checks or other forms that take a few days to be reconciled?

 

If it's true that it's 100% paper checks, a day or two should be enough to get it done for local elections.

 

My point is with the early voting many will cast their vote with no idea of what, if any, of the BIG MONEY is riding on which candidates. And of the candidates I know, 95% of their dontations are by check. With any type of decent bookkeeping it should not take 30 minutes to total them up and list them out, along with the expenditures......unless you want to wait until the last possible moment to keep them under wraps as long as possible.

[tmilanese]

My point is with the early voting many will cast their vote with no idea of what, if any, of the BIG MONEY is riding on which candidates. And of the candidates I know, 95% of their dontations are by check. With any type of decent bookkeeping it should not take 30 minutes to total them up and list them out, along with the expenditures......unless you want to wait until the last possible moment to keep them under wraps as long as possible.

 

BIG MONEY?

[markdavd]

My point is with the early voting many will cast their vote with no idea of what, if any, of the BIG MONEY is riding on which candidates. And of the candidates I know, 95% of their dontations are by check. With any type of decent bookkeeping it should not take 30 minutes to total them up and list them out, along with the expenditures......unless you want to wait until the last possible moment to keep them under wraps as long as possible.

When you ran your business you were able to close the books in 30 minutes?

[surepip]

When you ran your business you were able to close the books in 30 minutes?

 

Yes, we could close out a month, or a quarter on the day we ended it. It was all on the computer and running reports was a relatively simple deal.

 

Pownall and Barnett have both filed. So what is the problem with all the others filing "timely" instead of waiting until the last day ?

[markdavd]

Yes, we could close out a month, or a quarter on the day we ended it. It was all on the computer and running reports was a relatively simple deal.

 

Pownall and Barnett have both filed. So what is the problem with all the others filing "timely" instead of waiting until the last day ?

I guess it partly depends on how many amendments they will be forced to file later. If waiting until the deadline provides more accurate reporting, then great.

 

If filing quickly ends up having errors and omissions to be corrected later, what good is it? What if the amendments involve last minute donations by the 'big money' you're talking about?

 

Obviously, filing quickly and accurately would be the best, but isn't always possible.

 

Maybe they're just holding out until the last minute to aggravate certain folks.

[surepip]

I guess it partly depends on how many amendments they will be forced to file later. If waiting until the deadline provides more accurate reporting, then great.

 

If filing quickly ends up having errors and omissions to be corrected later, what good is it? What if the amendments involve last minute donations by the 'big money' you're talking about?

 

Obviously, filing quickly and accurately would be the best, but isn't always possible.

 

Maybe they're just holding out until the last minute to aggravate certain folks.

 

And so they don't have to show where their funds are coming from until the last minute.

[tmilanese]

Nobody cares how man days early someone files. Nobody.

[feelip]

Nobody cares how man days early someone files. Nobody.

 

 

You are wrong,as usual. Deadlines are made to keep lazy people on schedule. Most responsible people are going to beat deadlines.

[feelip]

Nobody cares how man days early someone files. Nobody.

 

 

You are wrong,as usual. Deadlines are made to keep lazy people on schedule. Most responsible people are going to beat deadlines.

[tmilanese]

You are wrong,as usual. Deadlines are made to keep lazy people on schedule. Most responsible people are going to beat deadlines.

 

You can't read, as usual. I didn't say nobody cares if they're late.

[tmilanese]

mrshoward

I have seen Jason Anavitarte campaign disclosure that he filed in 2006 when he ran as a Democrat in house District 81 Would you please taxe a few minutes of your time and explain it to the readers?

 

http://www.ethics.ga.gov/Reports/Campaign/Campaign_Name.aspx?NameID=558&FilerID=C2006000219&Type=candidate

 

Whitey, you got proof he ran as a Democrat? Actually did he even end up running or qualifying? I can't find any links.

[lotstodo]

Whitey, you got proof he ran as a Democrat? Actually did he even end up running or qualifying? I can't find any links.

http://www.ethics.ga.gov/Reports/Campaign/Campaign_Name.aspx?NameID=558&FilerID=C2006000219&Type=candidate

 

Make sure that the "registration information" tab is the active tab. Under Candidate Information, sixth line down. Very Interesting, he qualified as a Democrat in Democratic Doraville and Chambodia four years ago, and as a Republican now in Paulding. I wonder why? Maybe somebody should ask him.

[feelip]

You can't read, as usual. I didn't say nobody cares if they're late.

 

Oh I read it. Why are you such a prick? Do you not posses the common sense to debate a topic without going into some third grader tirate? And you ARE the Paulding Republican Party? Jerry must be so proud of you and Ithy.

[tmilanese]

http://www.ethics.ga.gov/Reports/Campaign/Campaign_Name.aspx?NameID=558&FilerID=C2006000219&Type=candidate

 

Make sure that the "registration information" tab is the active tab. Under Candidate Information, sixth line down. Very Interesting, he qualified as a Democrat in Democratic Doraville and Chambodia four years ago, and as a Republican now in Paulding. I wonder why? Maybe somebody should ask him.

 

I don't believe he qualified. Wasn't on the ballot. You can register prior and start raising money and then later decide not to qualify or run.

 

http://www.sos.georgia.gov/elections/election_results/2006_0718/house.htm

 

STATE REPRESENTATIVE - DISTRICT 81

Democrat

100 % of precincts reporting

BOB ROCHE 1,168 100.0 %

 

 

STATE REPRESENTATIVE - DISTRICT 81

Republican

100 % of precincts reporting

JILL CHAMBERS 599 100.0 %

[surepip]

So Jason dropped out before the race was over, but chose to NOT disclose where his $17,500 in campaign money came from ? He shows paying back personal loans, but not with money he disclosed where it came from ???

[WHITEY]

Whitey, you got proof he ran as a Democrat? Actually did he even end up running or qualifying? I can't find any links.

Google is your friend, I have better things to do other than search for your information,you are being silly now.

[surepip]

I don't believe he qualified. Wasn't on the ballot. You can register prior and start raising money and then later decide not to qualify or run.

 

http://www.sos.georg..._0718/house.htm

 

STATE REPRESENTATIVE - DISTRICT 81

Democrat

100 % of precincts reporting

BOB ROCHE 1,168 100.0 %

 

 

STATE REPRESENTATIVE - DISTRICT 81

Republican

100 % of precincts reporting

JILL CHAMBERS 599 100.0 %

 

I believe this shows Jason did qualify to run as a Democrat.

 

registration

 

 

 

And if you review all 6 of the campaign disclosures filed from March 2006 through January 2007, after the election, he collected $17,500 in donations, but never reported where they came from. He paid back his loans to the campaign, but nothing shows where the money came from.