Q: 10 - You say that you will provide an expense account to each candidate. May
a candidate request a check for $750 to use as they see fit and provide
receipts? If not, why not? What in the regulations prohibits this? It is
unfair to expect candidates to pay out of their own pockets if they are not
allowed to fund raise. This would discriminate in favor of wealthier
candidates and would definitely be grounds to challenge the election.
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE: We think this is reasonable. Once nominations are closed,
a candidate could put in a request for $750 from the state treasurer. The
elections committee will warn Gilda that these will be coming. Still, the
first couple weeks would probably have to be fronted by the candidate
(although if they put it on a credit card the check should arrive before the
bill). Receipts would definitely be needed at the end of the elections period
as well as the remainder of the $750 if there were any. Any expense not able
to be tied to the election (not being super strict here just putting it to the
plausibility test: airfare to Nebraska where we don't have any members
shouldn't be able to be passed off as campaigning expense) and any purported
campaign expense without a receipt ... well, the candidate would be
responsible for getting that money back to CUE.
Q: #11 - You say that no fundraising is allowed, but it states in #11 that a
candidate can raise money to pay phone bills. You have not placed any
restrictions on where that money can come from. Is money raised for phone
bills the only fund raising that is allowed? Will candidates be expected to
provide documentation on where money to pay phone bills was obtained? Will
candidates be expected to document that the money was spent for phone bills?
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE: Thanks for pointing this out. This definitely
needs clarification. We would say that you are correct that money could be
raised to pay for phone bills. Candidates should be able to document where
money to pay phone bills was obtained (including personal resources), and to
document that the money was spent on phone bills. Our sense is that this
documentation would be asked for only if there was suspicion that the
candidate's non-phone bill expenses were clearly out of the $750 range.
Q: #11 - The only part of this paragraph that I understand is the part that
allows a candidate to raise and spend money for phone bills. I don't
understand the second paragraph at all - can you explain?
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE: An office that donated (or rented out) evening time to a
particular campaign and the phone bills resulting from that would count toward
the $750. Similarly, if someone's personal home had more than 2 phone lines
dedicated to the campaign at any given time that would be treated the same as
an office donation. This is so that the rule against donated phone banks can't
be skirted simply by installing 20 phone lines in someone's basement as
campaign central and not consider that a campaign expense.
Q: Sentence 1 of #12 - Does this mean that a candidate who makes the
choice to stay at someones home during the campaign will have no charge
against their spending limits, but someone choosing to stay in a hotel will
have a charge made against their spending limits?
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE: Yes, that is exactly what we understand ourselves to
mean. (Note: the charge against their spending limits will be the amount of
the bill at the hotel).
Q: You
do understand that this is discrimination? Any candidate will have a
basis to challenge the election on this rule alone.
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE: This is not discrimination. This is a rule.
Discrimination would be if we counted the money spent on something by
candidates we didn't like towards the spending limit and not for candidates we
did like (assuming the elections committee agreed on who we "liked"). The
use of the word "choosing" is key: candidates can
choose how to organize their
stay.
Q: Sentence 2 of #12 - Are you saying that a candidate can pay for his/her
own meals out of campaign funds, but that this will not be charged against the
$750? I don't understand how this works - do you give the candidate additional
money for personal meals? If a candidate buys a meal for anyone else, can the
money come out of the $750?
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE: Sorry for the confusion. No, a candidate cannot pay for
his/her own meals out of campaign funds and no additional money will be given
to a candidate for personal meals. The thinking is that a candidate has to eat
whether or not they are campaigning. If a candidate were to buy a meal for
someone else (at least for another CUE member or more broadly another clerical
CUE represents who might join and vote), that would count towards the campaign
spending limit and would come out of the $750. With such a low spending limit,
honestly buying votes with free meals is less of a concern than it might have
been.
The Elections Committee:
Christine Benoit (Riverside)
Jill Ferrarini (Davis)
Julia Baumann (UCLA), Co-Chair
Kathy Kasten (UCLA)
Michael-David Sasson (Berkeley), Chair
Philip Solodkin (UCLA)
Susanna Reyn (UCLA)