There
have been few changes to South Dakota’s
campaign disclosure program in the past
year, but a drop in the state’s web
site usability grade, combined with the
fact that many other states have advanced
considerably, caused South Dakota’s
overall rank to fall from 43 to 48. Especially
in the areas of law and accessibility,
there is much room for improvement.
South
Dakota's campaign disclosure law is still
among the worst in the country. Candidates
are required to file once annually, and
once prior to each election. South
Dakota requires candidates to report details
about contributors who give $100 or more,
but is the only state in the nation that
does not require disclosure of the date
a contribution was made. Information
about a contributor’s employer, but
not occupation, must be disclosed. Last-minute
contributions of $500 or more must be disclosed
prior to the election. Expenditures
are reported, but the information required
does not include subvendor details, and
there is no reporting of independent expenditures. South
Dakota does not have an electronic filing
program.
The
Secretary of State’s web site
offers access to all campaign finance reports
filed by state candidates, but those filings
are available only as PDF documents and
cannot be sorted online or downloaded. The
lack of any searchable data online results
in another F in the Disclosure Content
Accessibility category, even though reports
are posted on the Internet quickly. Access
to paper records is good, but South Dakota
charges more than almost every other state
in the country – $1.00 per page – for
copies.
South
Dakota’s usability testing
score dropped significantly in 2004, which
was the main reason for the drop in the
state’s Online Contextual and Technical
Usability grade from a B- to a C. Otherwise,
there have been few changes – positive
or negative – in the usability of
the Secretary of State’s web site. The
agency offers comprehensive information
about contribution limits and disclosure
requirements online, and now posts summary
data so that site visitors can compare
the campaign finance activity of 2002 legislative
candidates. Other strengths in this
area include a list of candidates with
office and party affiliation information,
and the inclusion of both original and
amended reports.
