State lawmakers rack up hefty cellphone bills for taxpayers to foot
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - During last year's wrangling with budget troubles, Washington state Sen. Jerome Delvin racked up a cellphone bill that would make most users recoil - $309.21 in a single month.
The bill wasn't unusual for Delvin, who submitted the costs for taxpayers to cover. The Republican from Richland regularly posted cellphone bills surpassing $180 a month during the past two years, with some jumping much higher and one topping out at $382.75.
Delvin said the higher bills were typically from when he was travelling, but he acknowledged that he may need to reassess the AT&T plan that gives him 700 minutes a month.
"There's probably a cheaper plan out there," Delvin conceded.
Records obtained by The Associated Press under public records laws show that a variety of lawmakers have consistently submitted hefty cellphone bills that stretched beyond the normal cost of even some of the most generous wireless plans. Others seemed to submit expenses carefully crafted to avoid disclosure rules.
Some lawmakers got compensation for large portions of the family plans that they shared with others. Records show that Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, received full compensation for his entire family plan that he shares with his wife.
After an AP reporter asked Kline about the expenses, such as one monthly bill that was $193.48 for two phones, Kline said he was checking into the matter. He later said that it was done in error and said he plans to reimburse the state for the money paid to cover his wife's bill.
"Thanks for bringing this to my attention," Kline said.
Other lawmakers consistently posted bills for around $130 to $150, which would make the plans extremely costly. Verizon and AT&T, for example, offer a smartphone plan with unlimited calling, unlimited texting and a comfortable 4GB of data for $110 plus taxes and fees.
House rules explicitly say that members must estimate their legislative usage and get reimbursed for those portions so that the state isn't paying the cost of personal or campaign calling, and those parameters lead some lawmakers to submit monthly bills for only $45 or $50. When senators submit their bills, they sign under penalty of perjury that they are making a claim for "necessary legislative business expenses."
Delvin said it was his understanding that the phone can be used for any type of calls. He also regularly received expenses of around $163 every month for phone and Internet service in his home office.
Many other lawmakers appeared to file bills that avoided disclosure rules. Both chambers require legislators to submit a receipt as proof when their bills go over $75. Sixteen lawmakers regularly submitted bills between $74 and $74.99.
Senate Majority Leader Rodney Tom, a Democrat, was among those who filed receipts right under the disclosure threshold. He submitted bills each month for $74.50 for his cellphone. But he also separately submitted monthly bills of $55 for a data plan, bringing his total to about $130 a month.
Tom said he got the $74.50 number by estimating how much of his calling was for legislative use and that it wasn't an effort to avoid the $75 disclosure rule. He also said he reported the data plan information separately because that's how he believed it was supposed to be done.
"They are two different things," Tom said.
Tom, who lives in the wealthy enclave of Medina, also got reimbursed $328.49 for an iPhone in 2011.
Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver, introduced legislation this week in an effort to corral overall state spending on cellphone use. His proposal would place new rules on the circumstances under which state agencies can give out devices to their employees.
"The state shouldn't be providing you with a cellphone unless it's necessary for you to perform the functions of your job," Benton said.
He said the measure would not apply to lawmakers, since they get reimbursed and are not issued phones by the state.
A policy developed last year by the state Office of the Chief Information Officer encourages agencies to ensure that government-issued devices are necessary for business needs. It also offers guidance for agencies that want to give employees a monthly stipend to defray the cost of a personal phone instead of giving them a state-issued device.
That suggested stipend for voice and data is $40 a month for state workers.
Benton bills the state $150 each month for his cellphone.
The bill wasn't unusual for Delvin, who submitted the costs for taxpayers to cover. The Republican from Richland regularly posted cellphone bills surpassing $180 a month during the past two years, with some jumping much higher and one topping out at $382.75.
Delvin said the higher bills were typically from when he was travelling, but he acknowledged that he may need to reassess the AT&T plan that gives him 700 minutes a month.
"There's probably a cheaper plan out there," Delvin conceded.
Records obtained by The Associated Press under public records laws show that a variety of lawmakers have consistently submitted hefty cellphone bills that stretched beyond the normal cost of even some of the most generous wireless plans. Others seemed to submit expenses carefully crafted to avoid disclosure rules.
Some lawmakers got compensation for large portions of the family plans that they shared with others. Records show that Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, received full compensation for his entire family plan that he shares with his wife.
After an AP reporter asked Kline about the expenses, such as one monthly bill that was $193.48 for two phones, Kline said he was checking into the matter. He later said that it was done in error and said he plans to reimburse the state for the money paid to cover his wife's bill.
"Thanks for bringing this to my attention," Kline said.
Other lawmakers consistently posted bills for around $130 to $150, which would make the plans extremely costly. Verizon and AT&T, for example, offer a smartphone plan with unlimited calling, unlimited texting and a comfortable 4GB of data for $110 plus taxes and fees.
House rules explicitly say that members must estimate their legislative usage and get reimbursed for those portions so that the state isn't paying the cost of personal or campaign calling, and those parameters lead some lawmakers to submit monthly bills for only $45 or $50. When senators submit their bills, they sign under penalty of perjury that they are making a claim for "necessary legislative business expenses."
Delvin said it was his understanding that the phone can be used for any type of calls. He also regularly received expenses of around $163 every month for phone and Internet service in his home office.
Many other lawmakers appeared to file bills that avoided disclosure rules. Both chambers require legislators to submit a receipt as proof when their bills go over $75. Sixteen lawmakers regularly submitted bills between $74 and $74.99.
Senate Majority Leader Rodney Tom, a Democrat, was among those who filed receipts right under the disclosure threshold. He submitted bills each month for $74.50 for his cellphone. But he also separately submitted monthly bills of $55 for a data plan, bringing his total to about $130 a month.
Tom said he got the $74.50 number by estimating how much of his calling was for legislative use and that it wasn't an effort to avoid the $75 disclosure rule. He also said he reported the data plan information separately because that's how he believed it was supposed to be done.
"They are two different things," Tom said.
Tom, who lives in the wealthy enclave of Medina, also got reimbursed $328.49 for an iPhone in 2011.
Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver, introduced legislation this week in an effort to corral overall state spending on cellphone use. His proposal would place new rules on the circumstances under which state agencies can give out devices to their employees.
"The state shouldn't be providing you with a cellphone unless it's necessary for you to perform the functions of your job," Benton said.
He said the measure would not apply to lawmakers, since they get reimbursed and are not issued phones by the state.
A policy developed last year by the state Office of the Chief Information Officer encourages agencies to ensure that government-issued devices are necessary for business needs. It also offers guidance for agencies that want to give employees a monthly stipend to defray the cost of a personal phone instead of giving them a state-issued device.
That suggested stipend for voice and data is $40 a month for state workers.
Benton bills the state $150 each month for his cellphone.
Those aren't very expensive bills for people who use their phones a lot more than most of us do.Â
I guess there is no international travel involved here either. International roaming is very expensive. An overseas trip with even any mobile data use almost always exceed $50 per day. I know. I travel overseas for my job, and on the months I am overseas, my bill can easily go over $500. We have had some people with bills over $1000 for a single month.Â
It's funny, if all of us pissed off people went down to olympia and aggressively in a non-confronting manner brought these fact's, the biased media would make us out as nut balls, we need a common ground to expose these criminals, especially Sound Transit, WDOT, the list goes on. Speak to the media you cowards, they always cry for more money for education but all they care about is sucking more money out of the honest hard working tax payers to fund there nonsense feel good programs.
Either way you look at it, SOMEONE who is NOT a legislative figure is paying their enormous bills.
Â
Hey, I have a GREAT idea: How about a legislative figure BUY and PAY for ME to have an iPhone with AT&T? I am currently in need of an upgrade. I scroung to keep my prepaid phone going. Yeah. No internet. Just talk and text, barely.
Â
Yup. I'll trade you.
The article is missing a huge point - government data shouldn't be held on private cell phones due to security matters. Â All government business should be conducted on a government-issued cell phones that support remote data-wipe and secure email.
 @UtterReality what did they do before cell phones?
 @maggie112  @UtterReality They wrote notes on the backs of napkins and had assistants relay the information from a pay phone.
 @UtterReality The fact that secure data is generally not transmitted at the state
level is a fact that you seem to be overlooking. It is doubtful that most state legislatures
ever have to deal with national security issues. They are too busy finding new ways to
tax, and add new, or increased fees for services.
 @pete1427  @UtterReality Personal information privacy laws require the secure handling of any personally identifiable data. This and other information privacy laws virtually require data to be secure. There are also applications and platforms that allow users to view this secure data even on mobile devices.Â
 @pete1427 Heck, the company that I work for doesn't deal with classified information either - but they still require cell phones that support these security features.  That information can be used for tons of nefarious activities, including identity theft and breaking into computer networks.  I'm guessing that these politicians want to use their own phones so that their phone calls can't be audited by the state.
 @pete1427  @UtterReality Mmmmm...you certain of that? There is plenty of secure data that is rolling around in places you couldn't imagine.
 @Smokin Bear Facebook for one.
state lawmakers cellphone reform!
SIMPLE MOBILE - $40 a month no contract; unlimited text, data, minutes. $12.00 for SIM card, usage of data, text, and minutes available on account. Been with them for 2 years, never a problem other than the occasional dropped call in a bad spot. Seems pretty "simple" to me :)
I'll have to ask T-Mobile if they have a 'I'm a public servant so go ahead and screw me in the a**' plan.
 @Ankle Biter LOL!
The article was about "LEGISLATORS" submitting their entire bill fre payment, not minor public servents who pay their own phone bills. Most cellular providers offer discounts for many company employees, but you need to ask your particular service
How does that billing work out if you subtract all the Porn Site charges...??
...And the circus continues. Just makes you wonder what's left. And we trust these guys to fix a deficit that they keep digging us deeper into?
Running off at the mouth doesn't guarantee good representation. This is a cost to be picked up by his local taxpayers
We cynically say it when talking about politicians all the time, but I am starting to think they really are crooks. How can anyone still think the State has a revenue problem?
They shouldn't get a dime for their cell phone. Cell phones are not a necessity in performing their jobs a civil servants. Enough said.
 @antiflag That's like me saying that  you should not have a work phone either. I know about as much about the details of your job as you know the details about their jobs.Â
They should only get 1/2 their bill off and no family plan! They should get a better plan that costs less and use their own money for family and friends.
Prediction:
These same people will soon tell us they need more tax money and road tolls for the poor poor children or whatever reason of the minute works.
We, as a whole will agree and give it to them.
They will then get even fatter (and somehow even more lazy) and need more money.....
 @brewzbrothers Or buy more 'decor' for their offices, clothes, etc.
For "law makers" they sure as heck are the dumbest bunch. If they have a hard time figuring out which is a "cheaper plan", they should not have one period. And if they do have one, just as with their dirty laundry, and everything else of any personal nature, pay for it their own dumb selves.
Â
Now, back to this cell phone thing and their laundry bills, find out how much each has charged the public, and then have them reimburse for every penny.
Â
Perhaps to allow for calls pertaining to "legislative business", as long as those calls are logged and reported as such with proof. And get these folks someone, maybe one of the High School kids to show them the cheaper plans.
Let's increase the tolls on the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and apply a new I-90 toll to pay for their phone service.
I don't understand how people can be paying more than 100 bucks a month for cell service. I have an unlimited nationwide data and voice plan for less than 90 a month.Â
Â
Â
@lakeview text, international calls and roaming
It's becasue they don't care...cause they aren't paying it. I have no doubt the legislature as a whole could get a really good deal if they purchase from one carrier. Most business's use the bulk approch to save money. State employees in general are not looking out for the taxpayer money....they just don't care.
 @FED__UP International travel? That gets expensive really fast.
Also, sometimes it is cheaper to pay an expensive bill once in a while and have a cheaper monthly, non-unlimited plan. That'w what I do. We only go over our limits once or twice a year, and only by a little. It's therefore cheaper for us to choose a limited plan.Â
I love the politician speak they give out. Signed the records that they are truth or risk perjury, yeah, whatever.  Only John Q Public has to be accountable or risk getting in trouble.  If they can't get their simple affairs in order, why are they representing us? This should brought up in their next job interview... do you know how to take 5 minutes of your time to find the most cost effective calling plan? Do you not know who is even on your plan? Would you submit a bill for over $350 when you know that one call to alter your plan could more than cut your bill in half? SORRY, we're looking for someone more qualified and responsible than you.... Next!
 @NWlife These are the same folks that approve spending $70M on a ferry designed to cost $35M.  They are so far removed from worrying about paying bills that they forget the actual cost of things. They have very little accountability.
I am all for paying the bill if and only if it is based upon a simple prepaid phone and the legislators are willing to submit their entire call history (as a PUBLIC record) for verification that the calls were all legislative business. Otherwise they can pay their own darn bills, they already receive adequate compensation to be able to do that since people who make half what they do as legislators (not inclusive of any other income they may have) are able to pay their own phone bills or don't have one.
 @Cogitation Their bills should be a part of the public record.  I bet if their call records were available to the general public many would just eat the cost of their cell plans to keep the log of their personal calls private.
they should pay for their own cell phones, way back before there were any they did just fine didn't they? sob's
What is KOMO trying to  hide by making this non-story the headliner. It costs money to run a state. Big deal.
 @memory9 Yeah. You would see the exact same thing at just about any medium to large sized company out there. Business can be really expensive.Â
Â
 @memory9 I agree with Choliscott ~ This is investigative reporting that, through making  tax payers aware of how much money is being burned by our elected officials while they cry poor, might actually bring about positive change.
@memory9 How is this a "non story"?  Since they are submitting their cell phone bills for the taxpayers to pay, I'm sure the taxpayers would like to see what kind of websites or calls are being made on the "taxpayers dime"
This is why the other KOMO article is ridiculous. We should be providing them a work cell phone with an appropriate plan. Whoever thought is was a good idea to reimburse them for their personal plans needs a good talking to.
 @TP That would be, umm, the Legislators. Â
 @S4tran  @TP I would bet that they don't get work phones because someone once wrote about the waste of civil servants getting work mobiles even though they already had a personal mobile.  Everyone on the forums screamed about it and work phones were taken away and the expensing begun. That's my theory anyway.
I would think that with all the corporate tax breaks, these guys would get phones for free. Â These Ego Maniacs only serve themselves, I wish they would do 2 term limits!! The arrogance that these "civil servants" have is no different that the criminals in jail. Â
So here is how it goes down....Just like any other company-issued equipment that gets abused, it gets taken away and disciplinary action is taken against the employee it's issued to.
Â
These people are employees of the people. It's time to take some of their phones away and start the process of removing them from their employment. Â
Hey Senate, foot my cellular bill that's $55 a month kthx
So basically he doesn't care that he goes over his minutes each month because he doesn't pay $.45 for each additional minute, we the tax payers do!
We should not be paying for their cell phones at all! They want cell phones, they pay for them. Bet they'd find a cheaper plan then! If we pay for ANYTHING, it should be to re-imburse for calls they can prove were work related - not texting. They seem to forget who they work for!
This is BS. They can get unlimited plans (including texting, internet access, etc.) for a hell of a lot cheaper than that! And they wonder why the taxpayers don't want more taxes....
"There's probably a cheaper plan out there," Delvin conceded. Really idiot? Oh yea, you're a lawmaker, WE pay your bills, and you sure aren't in a hurry to do us any favors. Our government needs to be flushed, cleaned out, and re-stocked with people capable of this thing called......rational thought.
 @Harley-H.S.C. Actually, to avoid a fight, most companies give the employee a choice of prosecution or quietly resigning on their own accord, and surprise surprise, most resign on their own. I have had to give this choice to employees before. None of them chose prosecution.Â