Table of Contents
After leaving her Senate position earlier this year, Kyrsten Sinema has continued to attract attention for her political maneuvers and financial decisions regarding campaign funds. Since transitioning from a Democratic senator to an independent, her current role at a law and lobbying firm has not quelled scrutiny over her spending habits.
Recent reports detail significant expenditures, including a surprising array of expenses that many consider personal.
According to Federal Election Commission records, Sinema has allocated substantial amounts of her campaign funds towards makeup services, totaling approximately $800. This spending, particularly for personal grooming, raises questions about the legality and ethics of using campaign finances in such a manner.
Details of Sinema’s expenditures
In August, Sinema engaged the services of Michelle Lee Photography + Makeup, spending $400 for makeup sessions. This firm also offers wedding photography, indicating a blend of personal and professional services that could be contentious under campaign finance laws.
Following this, another $400 charge was recorded for services provided by Lauren Reid, a freelance makeup artist based in Arizona. Such personal expenditures prompt discussions about the boundaries of acceptable uses for campaign funds.
Security and travel costs
Beyond personal grooming, Sinema’s campaign account reflects a variety of other expenses.
Notably, she reported spending over $1,500 at a winery in Sonoma, categorized as “donor gifts.” This is a significant sum considering her campaign account boasted over $4 million at the end of last year. Furthermore, her security expenses amounted to $12,500 in a recent quarter, with additional costs of $5,210 for housing related to her security detail.
While security measures are typically justified for active lawmakers, the appropriateness of these expenditures for a former senator remains questionable.
Sinema’s travel costs have also been extensive. In a single month, she racked up approximately $216,000 on travel, which included a staggering $1,262 bill for dining at the upscale Nobu Tokyo restaurant.
The FEC has advised that while current candidates may legitimately incur security expenses, the same does not necessarily apply to former officeholders like Sinema.
Legal implications and expert insights
Experts in campaign finance, including Brett Kappel from Harmon Curran, have pointed out that former lawmakers face restrictions on how they can use campaign funds. They are not allowed to direct these funds towards personal expenses. Kappel notes that the makeup sessions likely fall under the category of personal use, which is prohibited. Instead, former legislators are typically allowed to donate leftovers to political parties or charities, refund contributors, or transfer funds to political action committees supporting other candidates.
Sinema’s financial activities are especially scrutinized given the current limitations of the FEC, which has been hindered by a shortage of commissioners and operational inefficiencies. As a result, Sinema has yet to face any ramifications for her controversial campaign spending. This situation underscores the complexities and potential loopholes within campaign finance regulations that can allow former officials to navigate their expenditures without immediate accountability.
Sinema’s political journey and future
Having served one term in the Senate and six years in the House, Sinema’s political trajectory has shifted significantly. In March 2024, she announced her departure from the Senate, thereby avoiding a potentially contentious three-way race against Democrat Ruben Gallego and Republican Kari Lake, in which she was trailing in polls. Shortly after her exit from Congress, Sinema joined the advisory council of cryptocurrency firm Coinbase and later took a position with the prestigious DC law firm Hogan Lovells, focusing on regulatory and intellectual property matters.
Despite requests for comments on her campaign spending, Sinema has remained silent. The ongoing examination of her financial habits post-Congress raises questions about her ethical standards and highlights broader issues regarding the management of campaign funds and the need for stricter regulations.
