It seems that Republican Senate Candidate Jim Roers has a terrible time following the law when it comes to political activity.
We’ve just discovered that an televised attack ad unleashed against Senator George Sinner illegally misrepresents the sponsor of the ad.
The ad is laughable in one respect. It refers to Senator Sinner as a ‘career politician’. Let’s see, is one term in the ND Senate is a ‘career’? Really Jim? Perhaps you were referring to Jim Kasper who has been in the ND House for 15 years!
At the end of the ad, the disclaimer reads, ‘PAID FOR BY DISTRICT 46 REPUBLICANS, MARK THELEN, CHAIR.’
The only problem is that the disclaimer if ABSOLUTELY FALSE!
A quick check of the Federal Election Commission public inspection files for WDAY, KVLY, and KX4, clearly show that the sponsor paying for the was JIM ROERS FOR SENATE.
So, what is the penalty for violating the law when it comes to proper campaign disclosures?
For small items, failure to have a disclaimer on a brochure (which D46 Republicans have already done this year), it is unlikely that authorities would do anything.
This, however, is a much bigger issue. The reason Jim Roers didn’t want to claim his purchase is because some people might not think kindly of him for sponsoring a nasty attack ad. By diverting attention, he can try to look like a ‘good guy’. This is, of course, precisely why state law requires disclaimers on ads – so voters know who is actually sponsoring political advertising.
Jim Roers needs to apologize for attempting to deceive voters in the District for violating the law.
If not for the District 46 Democratic-NPL shedding light into the matter, nobody would know this rule breaking was going on. But then again, we are used to Roers breaking campaign rules.
You’ve already read about sign violations in this campaign. (A Matter of Respect)
In 2012, Roers violated city sign ordinances by placing mobile billboards within the district. It took numerous requests from the city to get Roers to remove them.
In the same campaign, Roers appeared to have violated state law prohibiting corporate contributions. Those trailers belonged to Roers Construction. His campaign website was hosted by Roers Construction, and Roers Construction pickups were regularly seen within the district as employees were distributing campaign literature. None of these contributions from Roers Inc. were reported. And frankly, it appears that this activity allowed Jim Roers to deduct campaign expenditures as a business expense – and that also would be illegal.
Certainly, Jim Roers should have known better. And his corporate attorney, Shannon Roers-Jones, should have known better too.
Finally, it is important to point out that Roers’ television buy of $35,250 unprecedented by one candidate in a ND State Senate race.
The ND Secretary of State’s website shows a Jim Roers Senate campaign received an astounding $40,000 contribution from one wealthy California businessman. Clearly, this was intended to finance the television media buy. (For more on the Roers-Challey connection, click here.)
It seems that Roers and his friends are intent on purchasing a ND Senate Seat in 2016. District 46 Democratic-NPL is committed to keeping that from happening. We need a Senator who represents District 46, not a wealthy California businessman.