Former state Treasurer Robert Vigil continued to spend leftover campaign money even while he was in the process of being convicted of attempted extortion last year – a conviction that, unless overturned, prevents him from running for office again.
As if this state needed another reason to approve campaign finance reform, the Associated Press is reporting today that Vigil spent more than $37,000 from his campaign account on cellular telephone, car and other expenses in the last year.
The situation shows that vague state laws governing how campaign funds can be spent need to be reworked. Reporting requirements need to be tightened.
Vigil resigned in October 2005 to avoid being impeached by lawmakers. He was convicted on the one count and acquitted on 23 others, and is currently serving time in federal prison while he appeals.
Between May and September 2006, while he was going through two trials, he spent about a fifth of the $37,000, the news service reported.
State law only allows the spending of campaign funds for “expenditures of the campaign,” retiring campaign debt, donation to tax-exempt charities and contributions to candidates or political parties.
The money can also be returned to the donors or given to the state.
But apparently all you have to do, even after your career is likely over, is say you’re thinking about running for another office, and you can justify spending campaign money.
Vigil reported $7,179 for a “vehicle expense” – a monthly payment to a bank from May to October 2006.
Was that vehicle used to drive to court?
He also spent $905 on a phone, $1,069 for computer equipment, $85 for “printer supplies,” and $3,206 to the attorney who represented him during his criminal trials for “campaign legal fees.”
What campaign? What legal fees related to a campaign? Before he resigned, Vigil had been raising money to run for re-election, but he never filed to run. He said last year he was thinking about running if he was acquitted.
He also donated about $20,000 to charity and almost $3,500 to other candidates. In the last year, Vigil has drained his campaign account from about $95,000 to almost $58,000, the news service reported.
It’s not that someone who is under indictment shouldn’t be allowed to run for office. But the situation raises questions and is further evidence that the state needs increased reporting requirements and more clearly defined limitations on how campaign funds can be spent. The new requirements should apply to all candidates to ensure the system isn’t being abused.