Bill seeks to strengthen North Dakota law against false political ads
A bill that expands North Dakota law against false political advertisements via social media, text message or phone calls passed the Senate on Wednesday.
House Bill 1204, sponsored by Rep. Mike Schatz, R-New England, passed on a 45-1 vote and will be sent back to the House for approval of an amendment introduced by Sen. Sean Cleary, R-Bismarck. The amendment added text messages and phone calls to the original bill that included social and commercial media posts.
'As election communications evolve, I think our laws need to change with it,' Cleary said.
Fedorchak claims 'election interference' over false text messages
Cleary was the campaign manager for U.S. House of Representatives candidate Julie Fedorchak during the 2024 election. On the day of the primary election, anonymous text messages were sent to North Dakota voters saying she had dropped out of the race, which she did not.
After news of the text messages broke, Fedorchak called a press conference and said, 'This is, at minimum, election fraud, and it's a desperate tactic to influence and discourage voters.'
Fedorchak won the primary that night with 46% of the vote, beating four other candidates for the Republican nomination and now represents North Dakota in Congress.
'Knowingly spreading falsehoods about an opponent undermines the integrity of our elections,' Cleary said. 'As you can see in the current law, there is a phrase 'electronic transmission,' but given the expansion and use of these in communicating with voters, I felt it was appropriate to make that explicitly clear in Century Code.'
During debate on the bill, Sen. Janne Myrdal, R-Edinburg, asked the bill's carrier, Sen. Ryan Braunberger, D-Fargo, who would make the determination on what is 'deceptive' or 'misleading' for those communications.
Braunberger responded that a state's attorney's office and, if warranted, a court would make that determination.
If the House agrees to Cleary's amendment, the bill would head to the House floor for a final vote before going to the governor's desk for his signature. A disagreement on the amendment would lead to the bill being debated by a conference committee between the House and Senate.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
7 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump survived many scandals, but the Epstein story poses a new test
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But Epstein clearly has posed a problem for the White House. At minimum, it has been a distraction at a time when Trump wants to tout his legislative victories. If it continues to grab public attention, it could pose a more significant threat at a time when Trump's standing with the public already has been on the decline, though polling shows him steady with his own party. Advertisement Trump lashed out at the Journal's story after it was published, threatening to sue both the newspaper and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, who has been an important, although inconstant, political ally. The next day, he filed a libel lawsuit in federal court in southern Florida, alleging the article defamed him. Advertisement Trump's handling of concerns related to Epstein, the wealthy child sex predator who died in jail in 2019, recently provoked a rare eruption among the president's most loyal supporters, prompting MAGA leaders to caution that some in Trump's base could become disillusioned enough to sit out the midterm elections. Many Americans believe the U.S. government has hidden information on possible associates of Epstein who may also have committed sex crimes against minors. Some have questioned the official ruling that Epstein's death was a suicide. A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted Tuesday and Wednesday found 60 percent of Americans think the 'government is hiding details about Epstein's death,' including 55 percent of Republicans. And 69 percent said the federal government is hiding details about Epstein's clients, including 62 percent of Republicans. The belief that others took part in Epstein's abuse of minors was especially prominent among some of the president's strongest supporters, who believed Trump would expose the corruption upon retaking office. The Justice Department's announcement this month that there were no more files from Epstein's case that warranted release caused intense anger among those people and among some MAGA influencers. At least among prominent MAGA figures, however, the Journal article has triggered a now-familiar reaction - causing Trump's fractured base to quickly rally around him as a victim. That has quieted much of the recent MAGA frustration. At least for now. 'This is primarily a within-MAGA problem,' Whit Ayres, a longtime Republican pollster, said of the Epstein situation. 'The vast majority of Americans don't spend every waking moment wondering what happened to Epstein.' Advertisement The other group of Americans among whom the Epstein case could pose a problem for Trump, however, are the less-partisan, more disengaged, occasional voters among whom Trump did extremely well during the 2024 campaign. Even before the Epstein case, Trump had been losing ground among such voters. A characteristic quality of such voters is disaffection from the political system and suspicion that it favors the wealthy and well connected. The Epstein case plays into those voters' existing feelings and could cause some who have supported Trump to lose faith in him. Democrats have tried to capitalize on that, seizing on the issue and calling for the Trump administration to release files about the Epstein case. At least so far, however, not many voters have been closely tuned in to news about the case, although online search traffic has increased sharply in recent days. A Quinnipiac University poll conducted over the past week found that a relatively small share of voters, 2 in 10, said they were following news about the Epstein files 'very closely.' Top right-wing commentators over the past week issued negative predictions, some dire, about Republicans losing down-ballot seats in next year's midterm elections. Some longtime MAGA supporters felt betrayed that Trump was not sufficiently going after the so-called Deep State, they warned, while other newcomers to the movement, including young men who were not previously politically active, would simply be disenchanted and not bother to show up again to the polls. By the end of the week, most of those warnings from prominent Trump supporters had quieted, replaced by solidarity behind the president. Among those recently sounding the alarm was Stephen K. Bannon, Trump's former adviser who hosts a daily talk show popular with Trump's MAGA supporters. Bannon and other prominent right-wing commentators Friday were still calling for the administration to release more files on Epstein, and to appoint a special counsel - which the White House has said Trump will not do. But they directed their chief ire at a familiar enemy: the news media. Advertisement This time, it was toward Murdoch, the owner of the Wall Street Journal and a number of other conservative-leaning news outlets, including Fox News. Bannon has long argued that Murdoch, despite his conservative credentials, was out to take down Trump politically. 'MAGA is now united, because they can see there's a common enemy. They see exactly what the reality is - it's the Deep State, with their media partners, led by Murdoch, that's out to destroy Trump,' Bannon told The Washington Post, framing the saga as a conspiracy against the president, rather than about the White House's decision-making on Epstein. 'And that's been obvious from the beginning.' Prominent conservatives were quick to mock the allegations raised against Trump, posting their own stick-figure drawings of women as a nod to the Journal's reporting that Trump's 50th birthday card to Epstein included an apparent hand-drawn outline of a naked woman. Trump allies - and even one recent high-profile enemy, Elon Musk - also quickly dismissed the alleged text included in the card, saying it did not sound like something Trump would write. Trump and his White House advisers have expressed annoyance for much of the past two weeks at the continued focus on Epstein. Fresh off a July 4 signing of Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' which the White House has touted as the fulfillment of some of Trump's campaign promises, the president and his team have wanted to talk about anything else. Advertisement 'I have had more success in 6 months than perhaps any President in our Country's history, and all these people want to talk about, with strong prodding by the Fake News and the success starved Dems, is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax,' Trump wrote on Truth Social earlier in the week. By Thursday night, that aggravation had turned to anger, with Trump vowing to sue Murdoch and the Wall Street Journal over the reporting on a letter he said was 'fake.' While Trump and his administration have insisted that the general public is not concerned about Epstein or their review of documents related to him, recent polling shows that voters across the spectrum question his handling of the case. The Reuters/Ipsos poll found 54 percent of Americans disapproved of how Trump was handling the issue, while just 17 percent approved. Republicans were split on Trump's handling of the issue, with 35 percent approving, 30 percent disapproving and 35 percent unsure or not answering the question. 'President Trump is the proud leader of the MAGA movement and currently has record-high support among Republicans,' White House spokeswoman Liz Huston said in a statement, adding that Trump is 'quickly delivering' on promises, and describing America as 'the hottest country ever as a result.' White House officials in recent days have repeatedly touted a recent CNN poll that shows Trump's approval rating notching up slightly among Republicans. The same survey, however, shows just over 60 percent of all voters opposing Trump's new spending bill. 'I don't know that he's worried about the general electorate at all at this point,' Ayres said, adding that the latest news story about Trump and Epstein seems to help Trump with his base, 'because it creates a typical enemy.' Advertisement 'But it doesn't resolve the fundamental issue of the Epstein files,' Ayres continued, 'and what they will or will not release to the public.' - - - Emily Guskin and Scott Clement contributed to this report.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
GOP State Sen. Dan Innis announces run for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire
Dan Innis, a Republican state senator from Bradford, confirmed his decision to run for New Hampshire's open U.S. Senate seat with News 9.
Boston Globe
4 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Edwin Feulner, ‘Heritage Foundation's George Washington,' dies at 83
Weyrich went on to found several other conservative groups. Dr. Feulner ran Heritage from 1977 to 2013, and he became interim head again for a brief period in 2017. Two years ago, during a 50th anniversary celebration at Mount Vernon, the organization's current president, Kevin Roberts, called Dr. Feulner 'the Heritage Foundation's George Washington.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up As Dr. Feulner described it, the foundational principles of Heritage included 'free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional values and a strong national defense,' The New York Times reported in 2018. Advertisement The group was in the news during the last presidential election, when Kamala Harris and other Democrats argued that a Heritage document called Project 2025 would become a shadow agenda for Donald Trump's second term. Trump strenuously sought to dissociate himself from the nearly 900-page list of policies, which included doctrinaire right-wing positions on such politically delicate subjects as abortion. Advertisement What rarely came up during the public debate is how Project 2025 belonged to a long tradition of striking success that Heritage has enjoyed in shaping Republican presidential administrations. The document was the latest iteration of the Mandate for Leadership, a wish list for new presidents that Heritage has habitually issued around election cycles since Ronald Reagan took power in 1981. Dr. Feulner explained how the tradition got started in Project 2025's afterword, which he wrote, titled 'Onward!' In the fall of 1979, senior officials of the Nixon and Ford administrations, William E. Simon and Jack Eckerd, told Dr. Feulner that, upon assuming office, they had received no practical guidance on how to institute conservative policies on issues such as free markets, government size, and national security. They added that their briefings came from liberal predecessors or career civil servants who favored the status quo. Dr. Feulner and others at Heritage were early supporters of Reagan's. Long before Reagan beat Jimmy Carter in the 1980 election, Heritage decided to spend $250,000 to put together a guidebook for a Reagan presidency. The result, weighing in at 1,093 pages, was distributed by Reagan at his first Cabinet meeting, Ed Meese, later Reagan's attorney general, told the Times in 2018. Dr. Feulner described the document to The Washington Post in 1983 as 'the nuts and bolts of how you make the kind of changes that philosophers and academics have been talking about.' Heritage soon reported that about 60 percent of its suggestions had been acted on by the new administration in its first year in power. The foundation was generally a booster of Republicans, but it also saw its mandate as condemning Republicans when they failed to live up to principle. Advertisement In 1987, after Reagan signed an arms control agreement with the Soviet Union and praised reforms undertaken by Mikhail Gorbachev, Dr. Feulner told the Times that conservatives felt 'Ronald Reagan walked away from them in the end.' He was harsher still on George H.W. Bush, whose tax increases constituted a cardinal sin. Meese discovered what inducements were possible by staying loyal to the cause. After Reagan's second term, Meese joined Heritage as a fellow making an annual salary of $400,000. Soon after George W. Bush assumed office, Dr. Feulner dispensed the ultimate praise. 'More Reaganite than the Reagan administration,' he told the Times. He added that he and Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, spoke a couple times a week. A new measure of the power of the Heritage Foundation came in 2013, when Jim DeMint, a Republican senator from South Carolina, resigned in order to succeed Dr. Feulner. 'There's no question in my mind that I have more influence now on public policy than I did as an individual senator,' he told National Public Radio in 2013. DeMint was associated with the Tea Party, which Heritage had helped to finance and organize. During the 2016 presidential campaign, as other members of the Republican establishment turned against Trump, DeMint pursued a collaborative relationship with the campaign. When Trump won, Dr. Feulner became head of domestic policy for the incoming president's transition team. Heritage was ready with a database of thousands of loyal conservatives to appoint to political offices. 'By betting long odds on Trump, he succeeded,' Daniel Drezner, then a columnist at The Washington Post, wrote of DeMint. 'Heritage has easily been the most influential think tank in the Trump era.' Advertisement In 2017, during a White House dinner for grassroots leaders of the conservative movement, Dr. Feulner was the only think tank official invited — and he sat next to Trump. 'In some respects, Trump the nonpolitician has an incredible advantage, even over Ronald Reagan,' Dr. Feulner told the Times in 2018. Reagan 'knew there were certain things government couldn't do,' he added. Trump, on the other hand, has had a different mentality: 'Hell, why can't we do that? Let's try it.' Edwin John Feulner Jr. was born in Chicago on Aug. 12, 1941. His father was a self-made success in real estate, getting a college degree in night school and later helping to develop downtown Chicago. His mother, Helen (Franzen) Feulner, doted on Eddie, the eldest son, as her favorite, his three younger sisters later told Lee Edwards, author of 'Leading the Way: The Story of Ed Feulner and the Heritage Foundation,' a biography. He grew up saying grace before meals and serving as an altar boy at a local Catholic church. In 1963, he earned a bachelor's degree in English and business from Regis University, a Jesuit institution in Denver. While there, he experienced an ideological awakening while reading Russell Kirk's book 'The Conservative Mind' and Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn's 'Liberty or Equality.' In his spare time in Washington, he studied by correspondence for a doctorate in political science from the University of Edinburgh. He earned the degree in 1981. As a young man, he was an aide to two Republican members of the House of Representatives: Melvin Laird, from Wisconsin, and Philip Crane, from Illinois. Advertisement The Heritage Foundation was launched by a $260,000 donation from beer baron Joseph Coors. His seed money for Heritage was 'arguably the most consequential that's ever been spent in the world of public policy,' John J. Miller wrote in a remembrance for The Wall Street Journal in 2003. Richard Mellon Scaife, a banking and oil scion, became another major early donor. But wary of charges that Heritage was a tool of a few rich men, Dr. Feulner built a substantial membership list with the help of Richard Viguerie, a conservative marketer. By 1984, The Washington Post described Heritage's annual budget of over $10 million as 'the biggest of any think tank in Washington, left or right.' In 2023, its revenue was $101 million. The Times reported that Dr. Feulner's 2010 salary was $1,098,612. In 2005, The Washington Post found that Heritage swerved from criticizing the government of Malaysia to praising it around the time that a Hong Kong consulting firm cofounded by Dr. Feulner and advised by his wife, Linda, began representing Malaysian companies. In a statement, the Heritage Foundation denied that its reports were influenced by Feulner family business interests or any other external factor. Dr. Feulner's survivors include his wife; his children, Edwin III and Emily V. Lown; and several grandchildren. Flush with power in 1984, Dr. Feulner told the Times about the value of political irrelevance. 'The years in the wilderness gave us the time to work out challenges to the prevailing orthodoxy,' he said. He saw 'intellectual ferment' happening on the left — new ideas, new institutional energy. 'Now we are in the mainstream,' he cautioned, 'and we will suffer for that like the liberals before us.' Advertisement This article originally appeared in
