The recent trip of Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell to Paris has raised eyebrows, particularly regarding its funding and purpose. Campbell attended a conference for state attorneys general from July 29 to August 3, 2024, with the total cost to taxpayers amounting to approximately $13,627. This expense included transportation provided by Avis Chauffeur, a premium service, costing about $9,000. However, details regarding accommodation and meals remain unclear, prompting questions about the transparency of public funds.
The conference was co-sponsored by the National Association of Attorneys General and the Attorney General Alliance (AGA), a nonprofit organization. The AGA’s funding comes primarily from corporate donors, including major companies like Amazon and Pfizer, which each contributed $500,000 in 2021. Critics, including former NAAG executive director Christopher Toth, have indicated that this financial arrangement allows lobbyists to influence state officials indirectly. Toth noted, “Lobbyists essentially fund these trips. They funnel the money through AGA and then that insulates the AGs from being criticized that they’re taking money from lobbyists.”
The lack of transparency regarding the conference is concerning. There was no official agenda released, nor any announcements regarding meetings or outcomes from the event. The officials managing the conference did not disclose the specific dates initially, and there has been no summation of Campbell’s activities or partnerships during the trip.
The scrutiny over Campbell’s Paris trip follows an analysis conducted by the Boston Herald, which examined her taxpayer-funded credit card expenses for the last fiscal year, revealing totals nearing $300,000. These expenses were incurred through procurement cards, commonly known as P-cards, issued to certain state officials. The use of these cards has previously led to issues of abuse among state employees. While there is currently no evidence to suggest that Campbell misused her card or benefited from lobbyist contributions during her time in France, the situation highlights the ongoing debate around accountability and transparency in public office.
Campbell’s trip has surfaced amid her rising profile within the Democratic Party establishment in Massachusetts, as she prepares for her reelection campaign for a second four-year term. During her previous campaign, Campbell emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in government. Nevertheless, her actions, particularly regarding her collaboration with the state legislature, have drawn criticism. For instance, she has been accused of obstructing state Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s attempt to audit the Democrat-controlled Massachusetts Legislature, despite a public vote showing 72% support for the proposal.
In a notable move, the legislature recently allocated a substantial budget increase of $7 million to Campbell’s office to fund her “anti-Trump unit,” which will continue to pursue legal actions against former President Donald Trump. This strategy echoes the political path of her predecessor, former Attorney General Maura Healey, whose litigation against Trump played a significant role in her election as governor.
As the narrative surrounding Campbell’s Paris trip continues to unfold, it reflects broader issues of government spending, accountability, and the influence of corporate funding in legal and political systems. The scrutiny of such expenditures raises important questions about the ethical obligations of public officials, especially when taxpayer money is involved.
