Scott Walker’s son were paid $1,500 a month to campaign for Walker

Apparently there are no limits to Scott Walker’s tendencies towards cronyism & nepotism.

Gov. Scott Walker’s two college-aged sons were paid about $1,500 a month to campaign for their dad during his brief run for president.

Walker’s campaign finance report filed Thursday with the Federal Election Commission shows that both Matt and Alex were paid roughly $1,500 a month by the campaign.

The report shows Alex Walker was paid $4,819 between June 30 and September and Matt Walker was paid $4,824.

The fact that Scott Walker’s sons were paid nearly $10,000 by Walker’s campaign is galling not just because they’re his kids, but even more so because his campaign ended $161,000 in debt. It strikes me as the height of irresponsibility to pay your children $10,000 at a time when your campaign owes $161,000 in debts.


Related Articles

10 thoughts on “Scott Walker’s son were paid $1,500 a month to campaign for Walker

  1. Zach, you are on to something. You just have to connect a few more dots. I think the whole presidential campaign thing was really just a money laundering scheme. The Walker family is laughing all the way to the bank with $10k. Probably should raid their house for proof of the scheme.

      1. No Zach, I don’t. And this is truly one of your loopiest posts. Many if not most losing presidential campaigns lose money I suspect. My guess is that virtually every candidate for president employs their children if they are available and of value to the campaign. If Walker’s sons were not involved with the campaign you would probably wonder aloud why the kids hate their dad or some similar nonsense. I can’t wait for your expose’ on Chelsea Clinton’s involvement in Hillary’s campaign. No nepotism their though, right Zach?

        1. Shorter Denis: “It’s okay that Scott Walker paid his kids to campaign for him rather than pay his campaign’s bills because Hillary Clinton!”

          Did I get the gist of it?

          1. “Did I get the gist of it?”

            Uh, no. Having campaign debt is hardly an unusual occurrence. If Walker does not repay his debt or make an effort to do so in a reasonable time, then you might have a story. But for now, you have got nothing other than symptoms of stage-4 WDS. The Hillary bit was just added to demonstrate your obvious-to-everyone-but-you double standard.

      2. I wonder if the transportation and lodging and meal expenses were covered in addition to the $10,000 for Walker’s use of child labor?

        Or did the Wisconsin taxpayer pay for their transportation?

        Any of Walker’s friends, neighbors, relatives, or girl friends expenses covered too?

        How about “entertainment” expenses?

        Essentially, Walker was on a paid “vacation.”

  2. Reports of his actual debt seem muddled at best.

    Mr. Walker’s FEC report shows he spent $6.4 million between the mid-July launch and the end of September. But those figures don’t include $200,000 in Mr. Walker’s reported outstanding bills or debts the campaign pushed past Oct. 1 – a number that raises the Walker debt to more than $1 million more than his cash on hand, according to the people familiar with Mr. Walker’s campaign finances.

    Matt and Alex’s expenses, room and board on the campaign trail aren’t clear. Security costs for the “boys,” are not broken out anywhere and likely a place WI citizens are absorbing more than is being reported.

  3. Ah, so he hired the kids for a job in the family business. I can’t get too upset about that, he was running through contributor’s money to pay for it mostly.
    However… no one has yet answered whether Scott Walker’s children remained on his insurance during this time. Remember, Scott Walker wants to take away access to insurance for other people’s kids when he kills Obamacare – a campaign promise. He needed to put his money (or other people’s money) where his mouth is and pay for his kids’ insurance himself.

    1. And was the “salary,” for the sons’ part-time jobs reflecting dad’s view and standards for a starting and/or a, “sustaining,” living wage? Did the pay scale work out to more that the minimum wage as it stands in the state. Are the boys somehow specially qualified to do a particular job they were tasked with where they deserved a higher wage, if that is the case?.

      Curious, but guessing, “do as I say, not as I do,” would be the ruling mantra here.

  4. I wonder if they did any work at all, other than appear at their father’s side. My son is working for Bernie — he is on the job about 10 hours a day, 7 days a week, making phone calls, meeting with potential supporters and supporters, working door to door, developing the network needed for the Iowa caucuses, updating databases, and so on. He doesn’t do it for the kind of “salary” these guys were pulling down. And while he gets a free place to sleep, he doesn’t travel, stay in hotels, get free meals or any of the other benefits of which Matt and Alex surely availed themselves.

Comments are closed.