Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-013 BellSenator Clarence D. Bell Senate of Pennsylvania State Capitol Harrisburg, PA 17120 RE: Bumper Stickers; Leased Car Dear Senator Bell: I. Issue: II. Factual Basis for Determination: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 July 31, 1984 OPINION OF THE COMMISSION 84 -013 You ask whether you may display or place a bumper sticker on your automobile. You currently serve as a member of the Senate of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. You indicate that you use a car that is paid for with state funds either by way of mileage reimbursement or on a leasing formula. Specifically, you state that payment for expenses associated with the operation of a car for one round -trip per week is authorized to be paid from the general funds of the Senate and the remainder of the costs for operating your car on official business are paid from your accountable expense account. You indicate that you lease a car and you are reimbursed at the rate of 20.5 cents per mile for the official use of your car. We do take notice of the fact that the Senate does have a resolution which deals, in general with the question of use of expense accounts. See Article XXXVI, Rules of the Senate and Resolution No. 53, adopted July 1, 1981. You ask, however, whether under these circumstances, you may affix, to the car described above, a bumper sticker suggesting your own re- election or the election of others. You state that the Senate has no specific regulations or guidelines as to such stickers. Senator Clarence D. Bell July 31, 1984 Page 2 We will assume for purposes of this response that this car does not bear the designation, as do cars supplied and maintained by the Department of General Services such as "State Car -- For Official Use Only" and that this car is used for personal purposes, i.e. other than for transportation related to your official functions and duties as a Senator. III. Applicable Law: The law to he applied to this question is as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The Legislature hereby declares that public office is a public trust and that any effort to realize personal financial gain through public office other than compensation provided by law is a violation of that trust. In order to strengthen the faith and confidence of the people of the State in their government, the Legislature further declares that the people have a right to be assured that the financial interests of holders of or candidates for public office present neither a conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the public trust. Because public confidence in government can best be sustained by assuring the people of the impartiality and honesty of public officials, this act shall be liberally construed to promote complete disclosure. 65 P.S. 401. Section 3. Restricted activities. IV. Discussion: (a) No public official or public employee shall use his public office or any confidential information received through his holding public office to obtain financial gain other than compensation provided by law for himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which he is associated. 65 P.S. 403. As an elected Senator you are clearly a "public official" as that term is defined in the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 402. As such your conduct must conform to the requirements of the Ethics Act. In performing your duties as Senator you must, on occasion, travel. The Senate recognizes this need and provides reimbursement for the travel- expenses associated with your position. The question of the propriety of having your political advertising or that of others on the vehicle which is used and for which reimbursement is sought is a novel and difficult one. Senator Clarence D. Bell July 31, 1984 Page 3 We have ruled, for example, that a district office provided for a Representative and paid for out of public funds may not be used as a campaign headquarters. Cessar, 82 -002. But is a car, a mode of transportation, substantively identical to the office facilities at issue in Cessar? Even if so, would the affixation of a bumper sticker -- even one supporting your own re - election -- be equivalent to the use of facilities proposed and reviewed in Cessar? We think not. The car in question here is not so identifiable as was the facility in question in Cessar as for the official as opposed to the personal or political use only. The car in question here can be and is used for other than official trips. A member of the public, without checking the specific dates, times and locations of trips for which reimbursement is eventually sought, would not perceive that as to any particular time or date your car was being used for personal versus official purposes. We continue to believe that public officials must, to the highest degree possible, assure the public that their financial interests present neither a . conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the public trust. However, here, the perception of the public viewing a bumper sticker on a car which is not identified or clearly identifiable as operating on official business (for which reimbursement will be sought) or on a private trip, unrelated to your duties as a Senator is necessarily different from the public's perception of a re- election campaign being run from an office provided solely for public purposes and paid for out of public funds. The difference is not only one of kind, but of degree as well. We are mindful of the de minimus nature of a bumper sticker versus the use of district office telephone lines, for example. We believe that the public's reaction to and rejection of the use of a publicly funded district office, as a re- election nucleus is quite different in degree from the affixation of a bumper sticker on your car. This is particularly true where the sticker would support the election of someone other than yourself and the degree to which you would be financially interested in or benefit from such support is not articulated or apparent. V. Conclusion: It would not be improper or violative of the Ethics Act for you to affix a bumper sticker as described herein to your car. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(i), this opinion is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith conduct in any civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requestor has disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance of the advice given. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. Senator Clarence D. Bell July 31, 1984 Page 4 Finally, any person may request within 15 days of service of the opinion that the Commission reconsider its opinion. The person requesting reconsideration should present a detailed explanation setting forth the reasons why the opinion requires reconsideration. SSC /na HERBE'T 'ONNER Chairman