How much do political apointees kickback to the party?

7 comments

1. For clarification,

   Political party members do kickback a certain monthly stipend, back to the party that helped the person attain the particular position/office. For example, a political apointee may be required to give back 1/3 or more from their (net) salary, in the position they’ve been appointed. Or offer a % to an NGO of interest to the party or of the party branch. Others may need to put down a hefty sum of money for a temporary appointed position, which may happen or not.
   In case of being listed (chosen) for election by the party committee branch, they would most likely have to put down a hefty sum down to appear to be elected for office in Parliament or executive positions. Obviously, being voted in is a different question, the money is still put down beforehand, and not returned.

   Regardless of *how*, in Romania, every member of a political party is obliged to pay more to the party, in case they’ve been put in a certain position. Officially, they may appear to earn a lot, though in actuality, they get half or less than half of that monthly salary.

   I’m curious how your political apparatuses handle this financial kickback by underlings, and in institutions within, such as in your Senior Executive Service, Foreign Office etc – where such kickbacks are given/reoriented.

2. Pretty sure that’s illegal here.

3. That doesn’t really happen here. In fact it’s probably illegal.

   Also, due to PACs, you don’t really see this kind of thing.

   Party picks candidate popular with big spenders, big spender donates to a PAC, party makes money.

   This is why candidates that aren’t always popular with the people sometimes get the nod to run for office over a more popular but less profitable candidate, or why candidates in office don’t always go full-throttle on their promises. Gotta keep the party funded so you gotta keep the PAC funded.

   This, of course, is why so many Americans are frustrated with PACs regardless of political affiliation, but that’s it’s own discussion.

4. No, man. Shit, no. I believe you’d get your ass kicked trying something like that around here.

   SC is corrupt as hell, but it’s not done publicly like that at all. It’s more like government contracts going to family members or certain industries or areas being favored above others. There aren’t direct, quid pro quo kickbacks and they definitely don’t go to the political parties out of anybody’s government salary. It’s even more unthinkable at the federal level.

5. That’s not how it goes, here.

6. It is against the law to force public servants to give a portion of their salary to a political party. This said, in Indiana 2% is the rule. Usually it goes into a “Flower Fund” or to pay for the Christmas Party to provide plausible deniability.

7. It would be hard to define. Kickbacks are technically illegal. But practically, things like [the DeVos family](https://www.americanprogressaction.org/article/devos-family-buying-political-sway-ahead-midterm-elections/) making millions in donations happen all the time. Because formal kickbacks are illegal, actually tracking how much money is made through appointments of key individuals is extremely difficult and there’s probably no reliable numbers for it