Karin Housley
Karin Housley

Minnesota DFL party chair Ken Martin wanted to know what GOP lieutenant governor candidate Karin Housley was “hiding.”

In a news release, Martin pointed out that Housley, a state senator from St. Mary’s Point who is running for the office as Scott Honour’s running mate, had not yet filed a “statement of economic interest” with the state campaign finance board. 

Candidates are required to file an economic interest statement within two weeks after their filing, and Housley filed for office on June 2. 

“It was a campaign oversight and it has now been filed,” Housley said Monday. “My statement of economic interest was on file with the state for being a state senator. Nothing’s changed from that one. So we processed it and re-filed it.”

Housley’s economic interest statement from her senate filing shows an array of securities investments including Apple, Merck, Pfizer, and Berkshire Hathaway as well as ownership of properties in Afton, St. Paul, St. Mary’s Point and Walker.

In 2012, the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure board investigated a complaint against Housley brought by the Senate DFL Caucus claiming she failed to report in-kind campaign donations to her Senate campaign. The board cited Housley’s failure to file a complete report, but also said the errors were inadvertent and did not warrant a penalty.
Reports of the economic interests of all candidates running for office can be viewed at the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board’s website. 

Join the Conversation

12 Comments

  1. Well she probably doesn’t

    need a job.

    She could perhaps listen to the head of Berkshire Hathaway a little more often. Especially his view on taxation.

    1. That would be..

      your party Mr. Tester. Actually it is a war on competence because she should have filed this long ago, and it doesn’t look good to claim to be the representative of business and not be able to fulfill simple reporting requirements.

    2. Excuse me?

      Putting aside the fact that the article is about a legislator who forgets to follow the law, how exactly is this–or any other DFL effort–part of a “War on Women”? I’d really like to know how you came up with that.

      1. Tester has his own parameters

        On the war on women. Does not include their health care into the equation.

    3. Riiight…..

      getting all up in ladies private parts with vaginal ultrasounds, limiting their ability to make their own reproductive heath decisions and questioning their morality if they want to have sex outside of marriage…no problem. Holding a conservative woman accountable for not filing the proper financial disclosure paperwork on time equates to a war on women….got it. Good luck at the polls….as you continue to alienate more and more people from your tent, the only time a republican is ever going to see the inside of the White House again is if they take the tour.

Leave a comment