Worley & the Fair Campaign Practices Act

It seems that Nancy Worley (D-New Hope), despite having been a teacher, seems to have either a reading comprehension problem (can't be that, she taught English) or a problem following rules.

Some background first.

The Fair Campaign Practices Act is Alabama's campaign finance disclosure law. It requires candidates to report who gave them money and where they spent their money. With regard to expenditures, it specifically says they must report the name of

each person to whom expenditures have been made . . . within the calendar year in an aggregate amount greater than $100.00, the amount, date and purpose of each expenditure . . . [§17-22A-8(7)]

Apparently, candidates who were interested in using credit cards to pay campaign bills wanted to know how they were to report payments to credit cards. The Attorney General wrote in a 1995 opinion that listing a payment to a credit card company, rather than identifying the multiple payments or purchases, would not comply with the Fair Campaign Practices Act. The AG said that expenditures should not be lumped together under a general entry for a credit card company; they should be listed individually.

The Secretary of State's office has published this information in its Candidate Filing Guide for at least the last two elections (see page 24 of both the 2002 issue and the the 2004 issue).

So what's this have to do with Worley, other than the fact that she is the Secretary of State and the 2004 issue of the Candidate Filing Guide was published under her supervision?

It seems that a review of Worley's campaign finance reports from 1998 to 2004 reveal that she reported payments to credit card companies without providing a breakdown as to who was paid with the credit cards. You can review the applicable pages here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

That's odd, since, as noted above, the Attorney General's opinion came out in 1995 and the Candidate Filing Guide for 2002 (again, see page 24) specifically mentions that expenditures cannot be lumped together as a credit card payment. She ran in 1998 and 2002 and should have been aware of her responsibility. And if she wasn't, well, ignorance is no excuse.

We're talking about approximately $8,300.00 worth of expenditures that Worley has not accounted for between 1998 and 2004. While that's not a large percentage of the total amount of money that went through her campaign during that time frame, it's still several thousands of dollars that Alabama voters have no clue as to who received it. Presumably, Worley spent it on legitimate campaign expenses. But she could have used it for other purposes. Who can tell, based on the public record?

And there may even be more money unaccounted for, since she has several additional entries listed for "BP/Amoco." We can't determine from the record if that's a gas charge card or one of the BP or Amoco Visa accounts that can be used for non-gas purchases at places other than gas stations.

It would be to Worley's credit if she would clarify the entries.

As a bonus discovery, it seems that in 1997 Worley received a contribution from a public school. This page from her annual report covering that year shows a contribution from Frisco City Elementary School. What's up with that? How can a school make a contribution to a partisan candidate for public office? Who has ever heard of such, since state law prohibits the use of public funds for campaign purposes?