ST. PAUL, Minn. (FOX 9) - Minnesota politicians would be allowed to use campaign donations to pay for Ring doorbells or Nest home security systems under legislation being considered in the state House of Representatives.
State Rep. Eric Lucero, R-Dayton, is seeking to add home security systems, cameras and identity theft monitoring to the list of allowed expenses from campaign funds. His bill would allow security-related expenses for candidates and immediate family members living in the candidate’s household.
This browser does not support the Video element.
Should Minnesota lawmakers be able to use campaign donations for home security?
Should Minnesota lawmakers be able to use campaign donations for home security?
Under current law, the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board has said politicians cannot use campaign donations for such expenses. But Lucero said lawmakers increasingly face threatening comments on social media and occasionally have protesters show up at their homes.
“We become the targets of those who can’t keep their disagreements in the arena of ideas,” Lucero said in an interview. “Public officials are at a greater risk.”
Lawmakers forward harassing or threatening comments for review on a daily basis, and there’s something concerning enough to contact Capitol Police every couple of weeks, Capitol sources with knowledge of the complaints told FOX 9. Lawmakers from both parties receive the messages, which can include vague threats about their children or mentions of where a politician’s family goes to church, the sources said.
Lucero’s bill passed the House Government Operations committee last week on a voice vote with no dissent. State Rep. Mike Freiberg, the committee’s chairman, said he knew of colleagues who’ve had to notify police about threats they’ve received.
“(The legislation) seems to make sense. Nobody’s contacted me opposed to it,” said Freiberg, DFL-Golden Valley.
As written, it would allow politicians to charge virtually any security-related expenses. Some said they feared it would become a sort of personal slush fund.
Jeff Sigurdson, executive director of the state campaign finance board, raised concerns about the wording.
“I mean, would a guard dog be included in that? I’m not sure you want the (campaign finance) board to make that call,” Sigurdson told lawmakers. “If a guard dog is included, are the veterinary services related to the guard dog included?”
In 2018, the campaign finance board said campaign funds could not be used to pay for home security systems or identity theft monitoring under current state law.
“It is speculative to conclude that an elected official has a greater need for home security services and identify theft monitoring than the general population, or that the need is directly related to service in office,” wrote Carolyn Flynn, the board’s then-chairwoman.
The advisory opinion was the result of a request; the board did not disclose who requested it.
In October 2018, FOX 9 reported that two Republican candidates for state representative had been attacked on the campaign trail. One of them, state Rep. Shane Mekeland, R-Clear Lake, said he was punched in the face and blacked out.
State Rep. Tama Theis said last week that she had bought a Nest camera for her St. Cloud home after her campaign signs were stolen.
Other Republicans defended the bill by saying they were concerned about protesters showing up at lawmakers’ homes.
“You will get some people who are on the fringy ends of either position who may want to come out and remind you that you suck,” said state Rep. Jim Nash, R-Waconia.
State Rep. Aisha Gomez said she preferred to separate personal security measures from a concern about a politician’s property.
“I don’t want our campaigns to turn into slush funds for us,” said Gomez, DFL-Minneapolis.