Many lawmakers tap campaign funds
Per diem pay for expenses often pocketed
AUSTIN — Texas legislators get more than the $7,200 a year in pay they often refer to as paltry.
But they draw much more in per diem payments to cover living expenses in Austin. And many lawmakers also use campaign contributions to cover costs.
They received $190 for each day of this year’s regular session in per diem payments. They’re collecting the same amount in the 30-day special session that grinds to a halt on Wednesday.
Combined, it’s an extra $32,300 per lawmaker.
It’s unclear whether those per diem funds — which are paid from tax dollars — are being spent solely on Austin living expenses.
A Houston Chronicle analysis found that legis-
lators spent $1.1 million from their campaign accounts, in large part on rentals of apartments, condos and houses in and near downtown Austin, during the 140-day regular session earlier this year.
The practice of legislators using campaign money to cover certain living expenses when they are away from home is legal, but it raises questions about whether they are using per diem — which translates from Latin as “for each day” — as a boost to their salaries.
“There’s been very little scrutiny in this area, and so most people probably see it like a type of salary; money that goes to them for their service and to be used as they see fit,” said Andrew Wheat, research director for Texans for Public Justice, a nonprofit watchdog group.
The issue is magnified by complaints about the cost of the special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott, who said legislators had unfinished business from the regular session. The special session is expected to cost taxpayers more than $1 million in per diem payments alone to legislators.
Of the 181 House and Senate members, 106 tapped campaign dollars to pay for Austin living expenses during the regular session — or an average of $10,377 per legislator, a review of campaign finance records by the Chronicle found. Two legislators, Rep. Ron Reynolds, D-Missouri City, and Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth, did not file campaign reports.
Rep. Richard Pena Raymond, D-Laredo, ranked first among legislators in the amount of campaign dollars spent for that purpose. He said the per diem does not cover all of the costs of living in Austin when the Legislature is in session. He said if he were a millionaire, he’d pay for all of his expenses, but said the wealthy should not be the only ones who can serve in the Legislature.
The state Ethics Commission, which sets the per diem amount for legislators, is reviewing the issue as it prepares to decide how much legislators should receive for the cost of living during the 2019 regular session.
The commission in 2014 released a guide to per diem that says legislators who don’t live in Austin can use campaign contributions to pay “reasonable household expenses” during regular and special sessions. Allowable expenses include rent and telephone service for an Austin residence, as well as expenses for meals, gas, parking, tips, tolls and cellphones that are used “in connection with state business,” the ethics commission said.
Legislators cannot spend campaign dollars to pay for meals that are not in connection with state business or that would convert political dollars to “personal use,” such as dry cleaning, family recreation or entertainment, or spouses’ social events, the guide said.
Hard to pinpoint
Chase Untermeyer, a former House member who serves on the ethics commission, has asked the staff to compile the amount of money legislators have used in campaign dollars on Austin living expenses. In 2014, the commission added a box on the campaign finance report that should be checked if an expenditure is an Austin “living expense.”
“Per diem, in its ordinary sense, is meant to cover living expenses. So therefore, it might influence the Ethics Commission the next time they have to set per diem if in fact people use their campaign funds to pay for living expenses rather than per diem,” Untermeyer said.
It’s not always easy to pinpoint how much campaign dollars are being used for living expenses.
Raymond, a House Democrat from Laredo, paid Austinbased Sinclair Properties $15,800 in campaign dollars for rental housing. Those payments were
checked as Austin living expenses. Then he used $14,200 in campaign funds to rent “housing in Austin for officeholder” from a San Marcos resident, but the boxes were not checked to denote them as an Austin living expense.
In response to questions from the Chronicle, Raymond said he had made a mistake on the $14,200 in expenditures and corrected his campaign finance report filed to show them as Austin living expenses.
He said he had to rent two places after the landlord of the first one told him he had to move back into his house.
Raymond used funds from contributors to pay $3,452 for apartment utilities, $3,041 for rent insurance, $1,385 on cable and phone service, $770 to repair a broken window, and $227 for pest control.
“I don’t think anybody has more roaches and more rodents and more bugs than Austin,” he said.
He said he does not keep a ledger keeping per diem payments separate from his other personal funds, and so he said he doesn’t know if he spends all of his per diem on Austin living expenses.
Other top spenders were Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound; Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls; Rep. Byron Cook, R-Corsicana; Rep. Jim Murphy, R-Houston; and Rep. Todd Hunter, R-Corpus Christi.
Most legislators don’t report paying for food as an Austin living expense, but some do.
One who does is Rep. Garnet Coleman, a Houston Democrat whose campaign finance report topped out at 172 pages as he listed dozens of meals in small amounts at everywhere from the Texas Capitol cafeteria to an ExxonMobil convenience store.
Asked if he spends his per diem payments on Austin living expenses, Coleman replied: “I spend the per diem payments within the allowable use of per diem payments. It’s my money. Once it’s given to me, it’s my money, and I spend it within that context.”
Disclosure not required
Lawmakers are not required to disclose how per diem payments are spent.
They say it can be tricky to keep campaign spending on living expenses separate from per diem funds.
Rep. John Raney, R-College Station, spent $12,659 from his campaign account on Austin expenses during the regular session. Raney said he transferred his per diem payments into his campaign fund and then tapped it for his living expenses.
“I hope I’m doing it right; I know the intent is right. I’m not aware of the exact guidelines, but when I talked to my accountant, that’s what we decided to do,” Raney said.
Over six months, Raney spent $12,000 to rent a downtown condo and $659 for utilities. The condo is owned by state Sen. Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa, a McAllen Democrat. Raney said he’s lived there during sessions since he took office in 2013.
Ian Steusloff, general counsel of the state Ethics Commission, said there’s no prohibition against moving per diem payments into a campaign fund, but the money should be disclosed as a loan from the lawmaker.
Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, said she keeps her per diem payments separate from her campaign account.
“I don’t want to start mixing stuff up and then have to figure out this and that; it’s easier for me,” she said.
Thompson used $12,000 in campaign funds over six months to rent an apartment in the Cambridge Tower, on the edge of the University of Texas campus. She said she uses her per diem payments for other living expenses.
She also said lobbyists pay for food, and they also pay for meals for her staff “because they work the hell out of them,” often waiting in her office when the House meets late into the night.
It’s unclear how many legislators don’t have to use per diem for meals and drinks because lobbyists pay. Lobbyists often split checks to avoid disclosing who they’re paying for and how much they’re spending. It’s welcomed by many lawmakers who don’t want disclosures to create campaign fodder for their opponents.
Per diem payments are a “backdoor way of paying legislators far too little,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of special projects for the Texas office of Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer and environmental group.
The cost of that practice is more than half of the legislators rely at least partially on campaign donors to cover their living expenses. For some legislators, donors enable them to rent apartments for more than $2,000 a month.
“Until such time we realize they’re either going to get paid by us or get paid by lobbyists, the benefits to the lobby are going to be enormous,” Smith said.