Where does Trump campaign owe money for security? The Trump campaign’s outstanding debts for security at rallies have raised ethical and legal questions. At money-central.com, we delve into this topic, exploring the financial obligations of political campaigns and their implications. We help you navigate these intricate financial issues with clarity. Discover more on how political debts are handled and what it means for taxpayers, campaign finance, and public accountability.
1. Why Are Cities Billing the Trump Campaign for Security Costs?
Cities are billing the Trump campaign for security costs primarily due to the financial strain these rallies place on local resources. When President Trump holds a rally, it requires significant police presence and public safety measures. According to interviews with local officials and municipal records obtained by the Center for Public Integrity, as well as the U.S. Secret Service, cities often have no choice but to provide the requested level of security. Given the substantial costs, cities seek reimbursement to alleviate the burden on local taxpayers.
The need for increased security arises from several factors:
- Large Crowds: Trump rallies often attract thousands of attendees, necessitating extensive crowd control and security measures.
- U.S. Secret Service Requests: The Secret Service mandates specific security protocols to protect the president, which can be costly for cities to implement.
- Potential for Unrest: Some Trump rallies have been associated with protests and occasional violence, requiring additional security to maintain order and protect attendees and the general public.
For example, El Paso, Texas, billed the Trump campaign $470,417.05 for a rally in February 2019, highlighting the significant financial impact on the city.
Donald Trump supporters at a rally
2. How Much Money Does the Trump Campaign Owe for Security?
The Trump campaign owes at least $841,219 to various city governments for public safety costs associated with his political rallies. This figure, compiled from interviews with local officials and municipal records, includes unpaid bills dating back to 2016.
Key municipalities and their unpaid bills include:
- El Paso, Texas: $470,417.05
- Tucson, Arizona: $81,837.00
- Spokane, Washington: $65,124.69
- Mesa, Arizona: $64,467.56
- Eau Claire, Wisconsin: $47,398.00
- Billings, Montana: $42,811.00
- Erie, Pennsylvania: $35,129.27
- Lebanon, Ohio: $16,191.00
- Green Bay, Wisconsin: $9,380.00
- Burlington, Vermont: $8,464.27
El Paso Mayor Dee Margo publicly criticized the Trump campaign for not covering the costs associated with the February 11 rally near the Mexican border, stating that people who do not pay their bills raise questions about their character.
3. Is It Mandatory for Political Campaigns to Pay for Security?
Whether it is mandatory for political campaigns to pay for security depends on the presence of a signed contract between the municipal government and the campaign. In many cases, such contracts do not exist. Cities often dispatch police officers to secure events due to public safety concerns and at the request of the U.S. Secret Service. While cities believe campaigns should pay these bills, the legal obligation is often unclear without a formal agreement.
Richard Myers, Executive Director of the Major Cities Chiefs Association, suggests that campaigns should consider paying these bills, given the significant fiscal impact on local governments. He notes that considering the amount of money campaigns raise and spend, reimbursing cities for security costs seems reasonable.
4. What Is the Trump Campaign’s Stance on Paying Security Bills?
The Trump campaign has not publicly addressed the specific issue of unpaid security bills. When reached for comment, Trump campaign Director of Operations Sean Dollman referred questions to the campaign’s communications staff, which did not respond to multiple requests. This lack of response leaves the cities in a difficult position, as they are left to cover the costs without any commitment from the campaign.
Some local officials have voiced their frustrations. For example, Spokane City Councilmember Kate Burke alluded to Trump’s history of unresolved deals and disputes, questioning whether he ever pays his bills. This sentiment reflects a broader concern among city officials about the campaign’s willingness to fulfill its financial obligations.
5. How Do Other Political Campaigns Handle Security Costs?
Other political campaigns handle security costs in various ways, with some readily paying their bills and others initially refusing to do so. Senator Ted Cruz, during his 2016 presidential run, meticulously paid police bills, emphasizing the importance of running an organized campaign. Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign also appeared to have paid most bills, although there is no federal record of payment for one known bill from Philadelphia.
In contrast, Senator Bernie Sanders’ 2016 campaign initially refused to pay public safety bills from 23 different local governments and law enforcement agencies, totaling over $449,000. The campaign’s attorney argued that they did not contract for or request the police services. However, as Sanders considered another presidential run, his campaign quietly began paying these bills.
6. What Are the Potential Legal Ramifications for the Trump Campaign?
The Trump campaign may face legal ramifications for not reporting debts to municipal governments or police departments in its mandatory campaign finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). According to federal election law, a political committee must report a disputed debt if the creditor has provided something of value. Several election law lawyers argue that public safety services provided to the campaign qualify as something of value.
Erin Chlopak, Director of Campaign Finance Strategy for the Campaign Legal Center, asserts that it is hard to argue that public safety services are not something of value to the political committee. Failure to disclose these debts could lead to an FEC investigation or a complaint filed by a third party.
7. How Does the U.S. Secret Service Factor into Security Costs?
The U.S. Secret Service plays a significant role in security costs for presidential campaign rallies, as they mandate specific security measures to protect the president. However, the Secret Service does not reimburse municipal governments for their assistance during these events. According to Secret Service spokesman Jeffrey Adams, the agency is not funded to reimburse local police and lacks a mechanism to do so.
This lack of reimbursement leaves local governments to bear the financial burden of providing security, often leading them to bill the presidential campaigns directly. The Secret Service’s involvement thus increases the security requirements and associated costs without providing financial relief to the cities.
President Donald Trump with law enforcement officers
8. What Financial Leverage Do Cities Have Over Presidential Campaigns?
Cities have some financial leverage over presidential campaigns when the campaigns want to stage rallies at government-owned facilities such as municipal convention centers or city parks. In such cases, cities can require the Trump campaign to sign a contract or similar agreement to pay various expenses and fees, including police protection.
For instance, in Nashville, the Trump campaign agreed to pay $49 per hour for each uniformed police officer patrolling the city’s Municipal Auditorium during a rally in March 2017 and $50 per hour for a rally in May 2018. While the Trump campaign has generally honored these contracts, there have been instances of delayed or incomplete payments.
9. Why Don’t Cities Just Refuse to Provide Security for Rallies?
Cities often do not refuse to provide security for rallies despite the financial strain due to several reasons. Trump rallies draw large crowds, which can boost local economies through hotel occupancy, restaurant patronage, and other commercial activities. A visit from a commander-in-chief also brings a certain prestige and visibility to the town.
Additionally, there are concerns about potential negative publicity and safety risks if security is not provided. As Richard Myers of the Major Cities Chiefs Association noted, police chiefs are mindful of how quickly a city can become known for a negative event, such as an assassination.
10. How Can Cities Ensure They Get Paid for Providing Security?
To ensure they get paid for providing security, cities should treat political committees like any private sector event promoter. Brett Kappel, a government affairs and public policy partner at Akerman LLP law firm, advises that cities should get everything in writing. This includes signing a contract or agreement that outlines the costs associated with providing security and the terms of payment.
Other steps cities can take include:
- Requiring Upfront Payments: As Orlando did, cities can require campaigns to pay for security upfront before the event takes place.
- Negotiating Contracts: Clearly define the services provided and the associated costs in a written contract.
- Following Up Promptly: Send invoices promptly and follow up on any overdue payments to ensure timely reimbursement.
By taking these proactive measures, cities can better protect their financial interests and ensure they are not left footing the bill for political campaign events.
11. What Role Does Campaign Finance Law Play in This Issue?
Campaign finance law requires political committees to report debts to creditors if they have received something of value. The failure of the Trump campaign to report debts to municipal governments for security services may constitute a violation of these laws. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) could investigate the campaign if it believes the debts were not properly disclosed.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Chairwoman of the Committee on House Administration, has criticized the situation, stating that American taxpayers deserve to know to what extent they are subsidizing the president’s political activities. This issue highlights the need for transparency and accountability in campaign finance practices.
12. How Did the City of El Paso Respond to the Unpaid Bill?
The City of El Paso responded to the unpaid bill of $470,417.05 by publicly criticizing the Trump campaign. Mayor Dee Margo expressed his hope that the campaign would do the right thing and pay the bill, emphasizing that failing to pay debts raises questions about one’s character. The city’s public stance aimed to pressure the Trump campaign into fulfilling its financial obligations.
El Paso’s high bill was due to the extensive security measures required for the rally held near the Mexican border. The city’s efforts to collect the debt highlight the significant financial impact that such events can have on local resources.
13. What Actions Did the City of Tucson Take Regarding the Unpaid Security Bill?
The City of Tucson, Arizona, sought to recover $81,837 from the Trump campaign for security provided during a May 2016 rally. Deputy City Manager Scott Butler expressed hope that the campaign would “do right by the taxpayers of Mesa and provide payment.” However, the city also faced pushback from the Trump campaign, with then-campaign general counsel Don McGahn criticizing the Tucson Police Department’s performance during the event.
Despite the dispute, Tucson officials emphasized their commitment to providing necessary law enforcement and public safety support for such events. They indicated plans to revise agreements in the future to ensure campaigns cover certain costs.
14. How Did the City of Spokane Address the Trump Campaign’s Unpaid Invoice?
The City of Spokane, Washington, billed the Trump campaign $65,124.69 for security services provided during a May 2016 rally. City Council President Ben Stuckart stated that he expected anyone billed for police services to pay their fair share. Other councilmembers urged proactive efforts to collect the debt.
However, Spokane City Councilmember Kate Burke expressed skepticism, alluding to Trump’s history of not paying bills. This situation reflects the broader challenges that cities face when seeking reimbursement from political campaigns for security costs.
15. What Was the Response of Burlington, Vermont to the Trump Campaign’s Debt?
The City of Burlington, Vermont, issued an invoice of $8,464.27 to the Trump campaign for police and fire services related to a January 2016 event. Mayor Miro Weinberger criticized Trump’s lack of cooperation with local law enforcement officials and communication with the public. He stated that paying the invoice remained the right and honorable thing for Trump to do.
Burlington’s experience underscores the difficulties that smaller cities also face when dealing with unpaid bills from political campaigns. The city’s leaders emphasized the importance of fulfilling financial obligations to ensure public safety and community well-being.
16. How Did the City of Erie, Pennsylvania Justify Billing the Trump Campaign?
The City of Erie, Pennsylvania, sought $35,129.27 from the Trump campaign for security costs associated with an October 2018 rally. Renée M. Lamis, chief of staff for Erie Mayor Joe Schember, stated that the city believed the level of security required was costly and that it was reasonable to be reimbursed, especially given that it was a campaign rally and the president was also conducting a high-end fundraiser.
Erie’s justification highlights the financial strain that campaign rallies can place on cities and the expectation that campaigns should contribute to covering these costs. The city’s approach reflects a growing trend among municipalities to seek reimbursement for security expenses from political campaigns.
17. How Did the Issue of Unpaid Security Bills Affect the City of Lebanon, Ohio?
The City of Lebanon, Ohio, sent the Trump campaign a $16,191 invoice for police and other public safety costs associated with an October 2018 rally. Despite follow-up reminders, the bill remained unpaid. Lebanon Mayor Amy Brewer expressed hope that the Trump campaign would pay its bills, emphasizing that it was a matter of taxpayer dollars.
The unpaid bill was significant enough to fund the entire police force for nearly two days in this modest city. Lebanon’s experience illustrates the real-world impact that unpaid security bills can have on small communities.
18. How Did the Campaign of Bernie Sanders Evolve in Its Approach to Paying Security Bills?
Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign initially refused to pay public safety bills from 23 local governments and law enforcement agencies, totaling over $449,000. His campaign attorney argued that they did not contract for or request the police services.
However, as Sanders considered another presidential run, his campaign quietly began paying these bills. A Sanders spokeswoman stated that the campaign would work with municipal governments to amicably resolve these matters, even if the campaign was not “legally responsible” for event security costs. This shift reflects a change in approach and a willingness to address outstanding financial obligations.
19. What Stance Did Cory Booker’s Campaign Take on Paying Security Bills?
Cory Booker’s presidential campaign took a clear stance on paying security bills, stating that they should always pay the bills for police or public safety expenses. His campaign racked up $50,400 in fees associated with his campaign kickoff rally in Newark, New Jersey, and promptly paid the bill.
A Booker spokeswoman criticized the Trump campaign for not paying its bills and stated that the campaign should pay them immediately. Booker’s approach highlights the importance of fulfilling financial obligations to support local communities and ensure public safety.
20. How Did Kamala Harris’ Campaign Handle Security Costs for Her Rallies?
Kamala Harris’ campaign received an invoice for $187,327.87 following her campaign kickoff rally in Oakland, California. The campaign paid $65,000 of the bill, with a remaining balance of $122,327.87 due by the following week. A Harris spokeswoman stated that the campaign was working with Oakland to “square away any outstanding costs.”
Harris’ campaign’s partial payment and commitment to resolving the remaining balance demonstrate a willingness to address security costs associated with her rallies and work with local governments to ensure timely reimbursement.
21. What Considerations Should Campaigns Make When Planning Rallies?
When planning rallies, campaigns should consider the potential security costs and proactively engage with local governments to establish clear agreements and expectations. Key considerations include:
- Budgeting for Security: Allocate sufficient funds to cover potential security expenses.
- Contract Negotiation: Work with local governments to negotiate contracts that clearly define the services provided and associated costs.
- Communication: Maintain open communication with local officials to address any concerns or issues that may arise.
By taking these steps, campaigns can ensure they are prepared to meet their financial obligations and support the communities that host their events.
22. What Is the Role of Protests at Rallies in Increasing Security Costs?
The presence of protests at rallies can significantly increase security costs, as additional law enforcement resources may be required to maintain order and protect attendees. Protests can lead to confrontations, requiring police to manage crowds, prevent violence, and ensure the safety of both protesters and rally participants.
The University of Pennsylvania researchers concluded that cities hosting Trump rallies during the 2016 presidential campaign experienced an average of 2.3 more assaults than they would expect on a typical day. This increase was not associated with Hillary Clinton’s campaign rallies during the same time period, suggesting that Trump rallies may have been more prone to unrest.
23. How Can Cities Balance Economic Benefits with Security Costs?
Balancing economic benefits with security costs requires careful planning and financial management. Cities can:
- Assess Economic Impact: Conduct a thorough assessment of the potential economic benefits of hosting a rally, including increased hotel occupancy, restaurant patronage, and other commercial activities.
- Negotiate Fair Contracts: Negotiate contracts with campaigns that reflect the true costs of providing security and other services.
- Seek External Funding: Explore opportunities to secure external funding or grants to help offset security costs.
By carefully weighing the potential economic benefits against the associated security costs, cities can make informed decisions about hosting rallies and ensure they are not left with a financial burden.
24. What Are the Long-Term Implications of Unpaid Security Bills?
The long-term implications of unpaid security bills extend beyond the immediate financial impact on cities. Unpaid bills can erode trust between political campaigns and local governments, making it more difficult to coordinate and cooperate on future events. Additionally, unpaid debts can set a negative precedent, encouraging other campaigns to disregard their financial obligations.
The issue also raises broader questions about campaign finance and accountability, potentially leading to calls for greater transparency and stricter enforcement of campaign finance laws. Ultimately, addressing the issue of unpaid security bills is essential for maintaining fair and ethical campaign practices.
25. How Can Money-Central.Com Help Individuals Understand Campaign Finance Issues?
Money-central.com offers resources to help individuals understand campaign finance issues by providing clear and concise explanations of complex topics. Our articles, tools, and expert insights empower you to stay informed about the financial aspects of political campaigns and their implications. Whether you are interested in learning about campaign finance laws, the role of money in politics, or the financial obligations of political campaigns, Money-central.com has you covered. Visit our website today to explore our comprehensive collection of resources and gain a deeper understanding of campaign finance issues.
Money-central.com offers comprehensive guides and tools to navigate financial complexities, whether it’s understanding political campaign debts or managing personal finances. We strive to provide accessible information that empowers individuals to make informed decisions.
Address: 44 West Fourth Street, New York, NY 10012, United States.
Phone: +1 (212) 998-0000.
Website: money-central.com.
FAQ
-
Why are cities requesting payment for security at political rallies?
Cities request payment to offset the financial strain on local resources due to increased police presence and safety measures required.
-
How much does the Trump campaign owe for security services?
The Trump campaign owes at least $841,219 to various city governments for rally-related security costs.
-
Is it legally required for campaigns to pay for security?
The legal requirement depends on signed contracts. However, cities believe campaigns should pay due to public safety concerns and resource use.
-
What has been the Trump campaign’s response to these bills?
The Trump campaign has not publicly addressed these unpaid security bills, with communication requests going unanswered.
-
How do other campaigns handle security expenses?
Some campaigns, like Ted Cruz’s, pay promptly, while others, like Bernie Sanders’ initially, refused before later paying.
-
What legal actions could the Trump campaign face?
The Trump campaign may face legal issues for not reporting these debts to municipal governments, possibly violating campaign finance laws.
-
What role does the U.S. Secret Service play in these costs?
The Secret Service mandates security but does not reimburse local governments, increasing cities’ financial burden.
-
What leverage do cities have over campaigns for payment?
Cities can require contracts for events at government-owned facilities, ensuring payment for services like police protection.
-
Why can’t cities just refuse to provide security?
Refusing security can lead to economic loss from reduced tourism and raises safety concerns, especially for high-profile events.
-
How can cities ensure payment for security services?
Cities can secure payments by requiring contracts, upfront payments, and promptly following up on overdue invoices.
