Okay. So. If you become governor of a state and you decide that, instead of living in the big mansion that is provided for you, you're going to live far away and then use a per diem that is supposed to be for expenses NOT FOR LIVING but for travelling on state business, CAN YOU STILL BE CALLED EITHER A FISCAL CONSERVATIVE OR ETHICAL????

from McBlogger

Lemme get this straight... you have a job that pays you $125,000 per year. In Alaska. And comes with it's own house. Still, you choose to live more than 600 miles away from your job AND you use a state office building for your convenience.

Oh, and while you're 600 miles away from your responsibilities, you're billing the tax payers of the state to stay in your OWN HOUSE?

Let's compare with Governor Goodhair Perry. He lives in the mansion, sort of . At least he did until it was torched by an arsonist a couple of months ago. Meanwhile, he's not living 600 miles away, he's living in a chi-chi house he was renting ANYWAY while the mansion was being remodeled (oh, that's another story). And course, not that I"m trying to defend Rick Perry-remember when the Texas Lege used the poor fund so that Perry's electrical bills could get paid. Let those Poor People Eat Cake, demmit.

Here's Harpers Mag on that.

The Post said that in two dozen “undated amendments to the reports, the governor deleted the reference to staying in her home but still charged the per diem.” It would be interesting to know when those amendments were filed.