Political Contributions Take On Yet Another Murky Role

Federal election law allows retired elected officials to donate campaign funds that remain in their election accounts to charities, political parties, and candidates. The law prohibits such officials from using the funds for personal expenses. Despite this prohibition, the use of campaign funds by retired elected officials is a cause for concern. Former United States Senator Bob Torricelli (D-NJ) is a case in point.

After retiring from the Senate under an ethical cloud in 2002, Senator Torricelli had accumulated $2.9 million of unused campaign funds. Since 2002, he has spent approximately $900,000 of that sum and retains about $2,000,000. While a good chunk of the $900,000 has been donated to charities, Mr. Torricelli spent at least $65,000 in donations to politicians and affiliated organizations that directly or indirectly had business dealings with the former Senator or his clients. His donations range from contributions to Harry Reid, United States Senator from Nevada, to local politicians in Trenton. The common thread is that each of the recipients had a direct or indirect link to a business interest of Mr. Torricelli from which the Senator profited shortly before or after the donation.

When someone donates to a candidate, he expects that candidate to spend the money on his own campaign and to promote his candidacy. When candidates retire with large sums in their campaign accounts, why should those donations be able to be used by the candidate to fuel his business interests or reward his political allies? If a donor wanted to aid the former official’s business interests or political allies, he could easily do so by writing a check directly to those business interests or political allies. It is clear that the intent of a political donor is not to fund such interests but rather to assist the candidate in his campaign.

A retired elected official should have only two choices regarding unused campaign funds: return them to the donor or contribute them to the federal or state programs that currently provide matching funds through income tax check-offs to candidates who accept certain campaign fundraising restrictions. In this way, either the donor receives his money back or his money is donated to benefit the political system as a whole. These are avenues that are closest to the original intent of the donor and would best abide by the wishes of most donors. Although it is difficult to locate donors to return their contributions and the matching funds programs have weaknesses, the current system of allowing retired officials to donate funds to advance their personal and business interests is ripe for abuse and flies in the face of the intent of the donor. It is time to reform the system.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and as Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com