Hunt back in court.........again

The Argus reported today that Roger "What do you mean, 'Spirit of the law'??" Hunt is going back to court on Monday.

If, like me, you can't believe this case is still going on, here's a quick recap of where we're at:

*2006: Roger Hunt sets up corporate shell, to hide identity of $750,000 donor.

*Also 2006: Chris Nelson notices, and sues.

*2007(ish?): Circuit Judge Kathleen Caldwell rules in Hunt's favor. Nelson appeals.

*Fall 2008: Supreme Court heard case, ruled in Nelson's favor. Ordered Caldwell to rule whether or not Promising Future, Inc. constitutes a ballot question committee.

*Monday: Hearing in circuit court about the ballot committee issue.


In my opinion, Promising Future, Inc. absolutely constitutes a ballot question committee. Legally, a ballot question committee is "a person or organization that raises, collects, or disburses contributions for the placement of a ballot question on the ballot or the adoption or defeat of any ballot question." (Although there were some changes to campaign finance statutes in 2007, I'm pretty sure this definition didn't).

Had the donor given directly to VoteYesForCupcakes, this wouldn't have been an issue. However, as the donor clearly gave the money to the shell corporation that existed entirely to alter the outcome of a ballot question, it seems pretty clear to me that it's a committee, and is therefore legally required to file finance reports (with, among other things, the name of the $750k donor).


In other words, Hunt is toast. Man, I love the circus.