Should SC candidates be able to spend your campaign donations on childcare?

Would you be OK with your $50 campaign contribution being used on the candidate’s childcare?

Lawmakers debated Tuesday on whether they could use campaign funding for dependent care. Donations to a South Carolina candidate for office can only used for campaigning and office related matters. Use of these funds for personal matters is prohibited.

Candidates are required to log their mileage for reimbursement related to travel while working, but candidates can’t even purchase gas with campaign funds

The proposal, by Rep. Elizabeth Wetmore, D-Charleston, would allow a candidate or public official to use campaign funds for “dependent care.” This includes the “direct care, protection, and supervision of an immediate family member that is either a minor or that has a disability or medical condition for whom the candidate or the public official has direct caregiving responsibility.”

Rep. Jay Jordan, R-Florence, spoke in favor of the bill, along with multiple Democrats including Democratic Minority Leader Rep. Todd Rutherford, who argued the bill allows more people to have the ability to run for office. If a single parent, for example, wants to run, getting childcare and completing all the requirements asked of them becomes harder compared to their peers.

“A child should not be an impediment for someone trying to run for office and serve in office,” Jordan said.

Jordan said the federal system and 31 other states allow this. The South Carolina bill would only allow someone to use the funding for childcare in the time a candidate is serving or campaigning.

But some lawmakers said it would enable them to benefit from campaign funds for personal situations, giving them a leg up from everyone else.

Freedom Caucus members Rep. Adam Morgan and Rep. April Cromer said campaign contributions being used for private expenditures was inappropriate.

“I think the campaign contributions and the use of campaign funds should be about as restricted as possible because you’re creating an area ... don’t you think that allows us to personally benefit from the funds that might be contributed?” Morgan said.

“Who’s going to be the keeper of this? Can they one in turn use their campaign funds to pay for child care and then also take the child care credit on their income tax for child care?” Cromer asked.

Jordan said a tax credit would not be appropriate and the bill adds a record keeping component to it.

Cromer, however, again said candidates know what their income will be and what the expectations are.

“To offer tax-free child care for their child, that’s concerning for the parents out there that are having to pay for their kids,” Cromer said. “This isn’t going to help them at all. The childcare is a part of your income. This is the part-time job you accepted.”

Meanwhile on Twitter, Freedom Caucus members took to battling it out via online forum, like Rep. Jordan Pace, R-Berkely, who tweeted “On the last day of session, we’re spending the whole day debating a Democrat bill to let politicians use campaign funds to pay for childcare for their kids. We still haven’t touched Judicial Reform or a long list of other priorities.”

Pace later posted a photo of the voting board via Twitter, a common tactic by the House Freedom Caucus to call out Republicans when they vote with Democrats or bills the Freedom Caucus members disagrees with.

The House did move onto issues such as judicial reform in the late afternoon.

Rep. John King, D-York, said that in some ways, they shouldn’t consider their role as “part time.” He said he supports the bill because he wants to support his colleagues regardless of what side of the aisle they are on, to ensure them and others are able to run effectively.

“No one can leave their job for six, seven months and run for office for $10,400 a year and come down here, effectively take care of what they have to do back home unless they are independently wealthy.”

“When people donate to a campaign, that money should be used in your campaign for office,” Morgan said. “It should be very limited, very tailored so that we don’t have the situation where you have outside influences donating to a campaign to help you out in your specific circumstances at home.”

The bill passed its second reading, and will be read for a third time Wednesday. If passed, it will move to the Senate.

©2024 The State. Visit thestate.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.