Do you beleive it is ethical to accept your wages if you are working from home?
Yes I do, which is wildly different from a per diem, and if you’ve ever had a job, you recognize that.
Per diem is not wages.
Funny…I never see you actually defending the Reps actions or policies. You know, making an actual case that they are indeed the best party and that any accusations are spurious or their opponents are even worse.
The Dems may lose but that is no argument that the Reps are somehow better.
A per diem isn’t pay for work (which, of course, is perfectly ethical to collect if you’re working or taking a vacation given as part of your compensation package, regardless of where you happen to be at the moment).
A per diem is compensation for incurring expenses as a result of work-related travel. See Governor Knowles’ comment, quoted above – collecting a per diem for being at home is inappropriate because “clearly, it is and it looks like a scam”.
Really, anybody who knows anything about the subject understands that much. Attempting to blur the distiction is a rather sad-looking obfuscation.
But Federal M&IE aren’t one’s wages. They’re designed to cover meals and incidental expenses when one is traveling, also known as “not at home.”
I type slow, apparently.
I work for a government agency. One of the things I do is create travel claims. If I were to try and claim M&IE when the people for whom I prepare these claims are at home, I would first be laughed at and then get a blistering lecture about “doing it wrong.”
“Not fucking up quite as spectacularly as the predecessor” is now considered “success” when referring to Republicans now.
Of course it is.
It’s accepting an extra pile of money specifically intended for travel expenses that’s unethical. How hard is that to understand?
Without getting into the weeds and auditing this whole mess, I must point out that it is absolutely ethical to charge per diem for a night spent at home - if you spent even part of that particular day traveling on state or government business.
That’s the point of per diem. It simplifies accounting for government and the individual both.
Joint Federal Travel Regulations allow you to bill per diem at a 75% rate for the first and last days of travel and 100% for other days. I do not know Alaska’s procedures, but they probably closely match this - and it should be noted that legitimate expenses may go above per diem.
But we’re not talking about claiming 75% for first/last day of travel, are we? We’re talking about claiming per diem on non-travel days. Unless you’re going to say that every one of her claims was for a day in which her travel took (essentially) 24 hours?
Also, I don’t believe Federal regs allow for M&IE for one’s guests unless said guests are providing a necessary service to the venture requiring travel. How, then, do her children qualify?
Anybody want to start a betting pool who first raises the argument that walking from the bedroom to the computer/phone is, technically speaking, “travel”, and how long it will take?
Who does that? The only elected federal officials who get government houses in DC are the President and Vice President. If a Senator wants a house in DC, he has to buy or rent, just like everybody else.
Ooh. Shades of Michael Trend.
The more I learn of her, the less I like her. I don’t have it in me to hate her like some here do, but there are misjudgements and there are misjudgements. Some can be characterised as learning experiences, others not. This might be entirely legal - presumably her expenses claims were thoroughly checked - but it’s as much a question of perception and character as legality.
I’m sure the money the state paid for her husband to attend and participate in that snowmobile race returned untold dividends to the state. I wonder if he split his winnings with the state?
She may have had a legal claim to much of that money, but she certainly didn’t have a moral one. Fiscal conservative?
This is a question, just a question, as I don’t know the timing of things: If the governor is entitled to a chef (which she had and fired) wouldn’t she then be entitle to a per diem in lieu of that chef, for the same number of days the chef would have been providing meals to her?
Another question. One someone like a governor has a chef, is there also a budget for the actual food? Or is the chef just there to cook, and the governor has to pay for the food?
Anyone know?
Becuase there’s a difference between your Tax home and your real residence. Blame the IRS not Palin.
"The state finance director, Kim Garnero, said Alaska law exempts the governor’s office from elaborate travel regulations. Said Leighow: “The governor is entitled to a per diem, and she claims it.”
Just trying to understand the per diem charges as to what’s allowable and what’s not. If she’s working from the Anchorage office and is putting in lengthy hours, ones that necessitate her taking all her meals, from breakfast to supper, either in restaurants or having them catered to the state office, are those not allowed to be classified as per diem expenses?
It’s unlikely to qualify as a per diem expense. If she’s working late into the night, odds are she’s not working alone, and I guarantee there’s money in the state budget for meeting catering.
From a purely ethical perspective, no one I work with has ever tried to expense a meal eaten in (or near) the office, alone. Perhaps if they’re with other employees, and certainly if they’re with clients (both of which qualify as meeting expenses, which are, again, in the budget).
Didn’t know that. I always assumed Senators/Congresspeople had their lodging paid for since part of their job requires them to be away from their home states. Whether the Feds or the State paid for it I just assumed the state did. Frankly seems kind of fair to me. If my job told me I had to spend half the year (or more) in another city to do my job they damn well had better pay my lodging or I’d find a new job.
I think people are confused here. The same forms are used for expenses and travel, so this can get a little strange.
If you look at the form in question and look at the circled expense, you’ll note that Palin wasn’t billing for per diem rates at home. She was just noting that she was at home and then billing for the meal costs associated with attending a funeral and a Black community meeting.
As for the question of children traveling, I have no opinion of that. Everyone in the article seems to agree that no laws were broken, and the sums of money do seem to be small.
Unless I see more, I’m just going to chalk this up to Post reporters being unable to read an expense report. In the old days, when papers had more money to throw around, perhaps they wouldn’t have this disability.