Perry uses an old trick: Gimmicky budget numbers
By Jennifer Rubin
WashPost
Texas Gov. Rick Perry has been criticized for his most recent budget, which is heavy on gimmicks and postponed dealing with a real structural deficit. His aim was to make his books look as clean as possible going into a presidential run. Now it appears he’s doing the same thing on his presidential campaign.
Perry reported that he brought in $17 million but spent only $2 million. That frankly raised some eyebrows both in opposition campaigns and among outside political operatives who have viewed Perry’s operation, rather constant jet travel and large security entourage. In looking over his Federal Election Commission filings, I noticed that some staffers weren’t listed on payroll, including Ray Sullivan, the campaign’s communications director. I asked Sullivan if he was getting paid. He responded via e-mail: “Yes, but I just received a first payment a few days ago.” That would be after the close of the quarter. Well, what about other staff? He answered, “The campaign payroll started Sept. 1, and we’re paying for work performed — not paying in advance — so in most cases the first payroll checks went out in October. As you know, the cutoff for the report was the end of Sept.”
After reviewing the figures, an experienced Republican insider who is supporting another candidate told me, “He is punting payments to make it appear that they have more cash on hand.”
There is nothing illegal here, but it’s the sort of sleight-of-hand budgeting that values the appearance of thrift over transparency.
(More here.)
WashPost
Texas Gov. Rick Perry has been criticized for his most recent budget, which is heavy on gimmicks and postponed dealing with a real structural deficit. His aim was to make his books look as clean as possible going into a presidential run. Now it appears he’s doing the same thing on his presidential campaign.
Perry reported that he brought in $17 million but spent only $2 million. That frankly raised some eyebrows both in opposition campaigns and among outside political operatives who have viewed Perry’s operation, rather constant jet travel and large security entourage. In looking over his Federal Election Commission filings, I noticed that some staffers weren’t listed on payroll, including Ray Sullivan, the campaign’s communications director. I asked Sullivan if he was getting paid. He responded via e-mail: “Yes, but I just received a first payment a few days ago.” That would be after the close of the quarter. Well, what about other staff? He answered, “The campaign payroll started Sept. 1, and we’re paying for work performed — not paying in advance — so in most cases the first payroll checks went out in October. As you know, the cutoff for the report was the end of Sept.”
After reviewing the figures, an experienced Republican insider who is supporting another candidate told me, “He is punting payments to make it appear that they have more cash on hand.”
There is nothing illegal here, but it’s the sort of sleight-of-hand budgeting that values the appearance of thrift over transparency.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home