Blue Hog: Legislative Reimbursement Practices & Amendment 70

Matt Campbell with our content partner, Blue Hog Report, digs deeper on a previous post examining the origins and offenses of a legislative practice that allows for "expense reimbursement" greater than the salaries lawmakers receive for their work.

The root of the controversy involves a constitutional amendment passed in 1992 in the wake of a credit card scandal involving former Attorney General Steve Clark, who used a state credit card for fictitious meals. Arkansas voters passed Amendment 70, which expressly states that members of the General Assembly shall not receive additional income "whether in the form of salaries or expenses, including, but not limited to, public relation funds."

The law also allows an exception for legislator expense and mileage reimbursements, if "documented, and reasonably related to their official duties."

As Campbell notes, Republican and Democratic lawmakers are definitely taking advantage of the system by using shell companies, or in some instances companies not even recognized by the state, to receive expense reimbursements. A big issue, he notes, is that there is little to no documentation (as required by law) for this money funneling.

Clearly, then, the purpose of Amendment 70 was clear: the people of Arkansas wanted legislators to be paid only the statutorily defined salary for that office, but the people recognized that legislators should be able to be reimbursed for actual, documented, work-related costs incurred.

The fact of the matter, however, is that salary padding under the guise of “reimbursements” is about the only thing that has bi-partisan support, year in and year out; according to records requested by Blue Hog Report, only five legislators – four Democrats and one Republican – are not receiving statutory reimbursements this year.

You can read the full post from Blue Hog at this link. Also, Jason Tolbert with our content partner The Tolbert Report offers a suggestion to begin reigning in the mess.

Here is one idea. Link their salary to the amount at which the highest state income tax bracket begins currently $32,700. That means if they want to raise their salaries, then have to cut income taxes to do it. And then tighten up the requirements on expenses. Function like a business where reimbursements are made only for actual documented out of pocket expenses with realistic limits, tight documentation rules, and tough compliance auditing of the amounts paid.

Max Brantley with the Arkansas Times suggests an illegal extraction lawsuit for an enterprising attorney.