Kristi Noem received $80,000 from dark money group while governor
- While governor, Kristi Noem received $80,000 from the American Resolve Policy Fund, a dark money organization.
- The payment was made to her personal company, Ashwood Strategies, raising concerns about ethics violations due to lack of disclosure.
- Experts warn that such arrangements could create dangerous dependencies between politicians and undisclosed donors.
In 2023, Kristi Noem, while serving as the Governor of South Dakota, received significant funds from a nonprofit named American Resolve Policy Fund, characterized as a dark money group. This organization transferred $80,000 to Noem's personal company, Ashwood Strategies, as a payment for fundraising services. The arrangement raised eyebrows since this payment represented a considerable financial boost to her existing government salary of approximately $130,000. Noem's acceptance of these funds was not disclosed on her federal financial disclosure forms, an omission that experts regarded as a potential ethics violation. The dark money group raised a total of $1.1 million in that year, and Noem's compensation was noted as a 10% cut of the overall funds raised by the group. The lack of transparency regarding the origins of the funds is concerning, especially since dark money groups do not have to disclose their donors, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest. The situation escalated as Noem later became the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, which required her to file detailed financial disclosures, yet the $80,000 payment remained unreported. Her attorney defended her actions by asserting that she complied with the legal expectations regarding income disclosures. However, the ethical implications of accepting political donations directly as personal income remain troubling according to experts. Critics argued that this conduct sets a dangerous precedent, wherein politicians could become financially beholden to undisclosed donors, undermining the integrity of elected officials. The entire episode portrays a complex intersection of politics and personal business, illustrating the need for greater transparency in political financing and the ethical responsibilities of public servants.