District 77 State Rep.-elect Marisa Marquez (D-El Paso) will have a fund-raiser Downtown tomorrow night (Thursday, Nov. 13, 2008). This would be Marquez’s second fund-raiser this week. On Monday, Texas Democrats held a joint fund-raiser at the prestigious Austin Club, near the Texas Capitol, honoring twenty House members including Marquez and District 78 State Rep.-elect, Joe Moody (D-El Paso).

According to the Texas Ethics Commission website [link], legislators are prohibited from raising funds while the legislature is in session. This moratorium on contributions comes into effect 30 days before the beginning of the 140-day session (Jan. 13). As such legislators across Texas are scrambling for cash before the cut-off period begins.

“The period between the election and the cut-off has become an extremely lucrative one for newly and reelected politicians,” says Craig McDonald, executive director of Texans for Public Justice, an Austin-based non-profit. [link] But why exactly do politicians need the money? After all, right now they are as far away from re-election as you can get. What does the money get spent on?

According to Marquez, a beefed up post-election treasury provides “a reserve that (legislators) can pay living and office expenses out of when we are in Austin.” But doesn’t the state cover that? Well, yes and no. The state provides legislators with $12,000 a month to cover office expenses. But with many legislators running an office in Austin and one in their district, state money often doesn’t come close. However, Texas law allows for these expenses to be funded by a representative's campaign account.

As such, legislators pay for all sort of things from their campaign coffers: “Anything that goes out of your office that you are not allowed to pay for with state money,” said Marquez, who explained that this includes paying for an apartment, sponsoring local charities and even helping to retire the campaign debts of other legislators.

“It allows us that flexibility,” said Marquez. A look into the finances of El Paso representatives illuminates just how flexible campaign expenditures can be. District 79 state Rep. Joe Pickett (D-El Paso) donated money to the “House of Hope,” an El Paso center that provides counseling on sexual health and abortion. District 76 state Rep. Norma Chavez (D-El Paso) has sponsored the choir of a church in her district. [Editor's note: This story was corrected at 10:20 p.m. Nov. 12, 2008, to reflect the correct district of Chavez.] Representatives also give money to other politicians.

“I'm not in debt but some of my other colleagues are … representatives can help other representatives,” said Marquez, who also has donated money directly to the Texas Democratic Party. Indeed, money can jump between campaign accounts during elections as well. Moody received considerable sums from other Democratic campaigns during his race with Dee Margo to represent District 78. These included $1,000 from District 74 state Rep. Pete Gallego (D-Alpine), now running for House Speaker, and state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh.

According to McDonald, up to 25 percent of all campaign contributions for Texas legislators can come between the day after election and 30 days before the beginning of the session.

“It is a time for people to get right with the politician they may have bet against during the campaign, a time to make nice and buy access to someone you thought might not be there,” said McDonald, adding that, “in your case, the Dee Margo donors will be going to the newly elected representatives.”

The “late train period” was born out of amendments to the Texas ethics code in the 1980s that came in response to several financial scandals. Politicians are no longer able to raise money either on state property or during legislative sessions. But McDonald disputes the success of the measures: “It changes the dates on the checks. It doesn’t stop the checks from coming,” said McDonald.

Furthermore, the moratorium creates a window of opportunity for special interests. A representative’s campaign coffers are at their lowest just after Election Day. However, bill filing for the new session begins only a week afterward. Thus, the first steps toward new legislation occur at the time when broke politicians (with only six weeks in which to raise six months of funds) are courted by special interests eager to get on the legislative agenda. Could legislation be bought under these conditions?

“I would be surprised if it didn’t happen,” said Gaspare M. Genna, associate professor at UTEP’s Political Science Department. Genna explained that campaign finance issues are compounded by the shortness and infrequency of legislative sessions in Texas (Only 140 days every two years).

“There’s only so much they (legislators) can do within that time frame ... Everybody starts prioritizing," he said. "I wouldn’t be surprised if (such prioritizing) is associated with contributions … If an oil interest or whatever comes in (during the window created by the moratorium) then you’re going to be beholden in some manner.”

Genna teaches comparative politics and contrasted the realities of the Texas system with European alternatives.

“(In Europe) financing is tied to the parties. Individuals don’t raise money for themselves … so therefore, the control of behavior is dictated by party leaders,” said Genna. In Texas, he said, legislators “are not so beholden to party leaders … Decentralization therefore makes for a weaker party structure.”

Indeed the political space taken up by the current Speaker election in Texas simply doesn’t exist in Europe. Most parties go into elections with clear party leaders, who automatically become leaders of the legislature if victorious. (In Britain, the ruling party leader, as “Prime Minister,” becomes as head of the executive as well.)

European politicians are also paid a lot better than their Texan counterparts, who earn a measly $600 a month.

“In Europe, I’m not aware of anyone who does it as a part time job,” said Genna. Politicians’ expenses are paid for out of state coffers rather than from lobbyists contributing to individual legislators – or well-funded legislators giving money to each other.

So can special interests buy into the process as easily?

“Lobbying exists, it just happens at different points … It is a different dynamic because the bureaucracies in Europe have more say in legislative creation … Lobbying occurs at the very top and within the bureaucracies themselves,” said Genna. Also, campaign finance rules, though always capable of subversion, are usually stricter in European countries.

“Texas is the wild west of campaign finance … you get all the representation you can afford,” said McDonald. McDonald pointed out that the more collective party-based European model described by Genna, “just doesn’t happen in American Politics … Individualism accrues in our political system as well.”

McDonald believes that for Texas, voluntary spending caps and partial public financing of electoral candidates is the way forward. But he is cautious about the trend reaching the Lone Star state, which he believes “is light years away from a system like that.”

“Changing the campaign finance system would mean changing who controls Texas politics,” said McDonald, who pointed out that a mere 140 individuals were responsible for 25 per cent of all campaign contributions in the 2006 election cycle. [link] “Such a concentration of wealth and power cannot be healthy for democracy.”