[EL] Oregon Excludes Campaign Contributions from Bribery Statute; Do Other States?

[Dan Meek]

I have written a short article here:
https://www.oregonoutpost.com/good-news-will-no-illegal-bribery-oregon/

It shows that the Oregon statute defining the crime of bribery of a 
public official excludes from consideration all campaign contributions.  
Thus, it appears to me that a person can hand over money to a public 
official in direct exchange for the public official’s official act, 
including a vote on a bill or approval of a government contract for the 
person or her business, as long as the money is deemed a “political 
campaign contribution.”

And in Oregon recipients of campaign contributions can use the money for 
a lot of purposes I would not consider to be "campaigning."  For 
example, the Speaker of the Oregon House paid herself $1855 per month as 
a salary from the PAC she was the treasurer of.  See 
http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2013/11/val_hoyle_oregon_house_majorit.html. 
Rep. Mike Schauffler used campaign money to pay his bar tabs (about 
$8,500 in 2 years) and pay himself $400 a month for use of a room in his 
own apartment.  See 
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-17463-perfectly-legal.html. Many 
recipients of campaign contributions in Oregon use the money to hire 
their relatives or friends to work on their campaigns or in their 
legislative offices.

My question:  Do the bribery statutes of other states exclude "campaign 
contributions" from the definition of bribery of public officials?

Dan Meek

	503-293-9021 	dan at meek.net <mailto:dan at meek.net>	855-280-0488 fax



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160725/67152243/attachment.html>