If you ever needed another reminder that Washington operates by a different set of rules than the rest of the country, a new complaint filed Tuesday against former Senator Kyrsten Sinema might do the trick.
A government watchdog group says Sinema may have spent nearly $2 million in campaign funds after leaving office — and now they’re asking the Federal Election Commission to take a closer look.
The complaint was filed by the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), a Washington-based ethics watchdog that focuses on potential abuses of public office. According to FACT, Sinema’s campaign committee continued spending large amounts of money even after her Senate term ended in 2024.
And we’re not talking about pocket change.
FACT alleges that Sinema’s campaign burned through almost $2 million in campaign funds during 2025, which is about $1.3 million more than had previously been reported, according to the group’s analysis.
The spending reportedly covered everything from staff salaries and travel to events and other miscellaneous expenses — but the watchdog group says the scale and nature of the spending raises serious questions about whether some of the money may have been used for personal benefit.
And if that’s the case, that’s a problem under federal campaign finance law.
According to the complaint, the biggest chunk of the spending went toward payroll. FACT says staff and payroll costs totaled roughly $653,555 after Sinema left office.
But that wasn’t the only spending category raising eyebrows.
The complaint lists a wide range of other expenses, including credit card payments, banking fees, airfare, security services, office expenses, lodging, meals, and events.
FACT acknowledged that federal law does allow former members of Congress to use campaign funds for a limited time after leaving office to wind down campaign operations and close out accounts.
But the watchdog group says the amount of money spent — and where some of it went — doesn’t look like a simple wind-down operation.
“The amount alone is significant and suggests it is not related to official duties,” the complaint states.
FACT also pointed to several expenditures that appear unrelated to shutting down a campaign operation, including makeup services, alcohol, catering, and lodging.
In the group’s words, those purchases appear “quite clearly to be for personal purposes.”
Among the specific expenses highlighted in the complaint are roughly $9,000 spent at luxury destinations, including resorts in Beverly Hills, Montauk, Wyoming ski country, and the Grand Canyon.
The complaint also raises questions about payments made to a security guard who, according to the watchdog group, allegedly had a personal relationship with Sinema.
Now here’s where the timeline becomes important.
When Sinema left office on January 3, 2025, her campaign committee reportedly had about $4.2 million in its account.
But when the campaign filed its termination report with the FEC later on, the account balance was gone.
That’s a lot of money to disappear in a short amount of time.
And it’s not the first time questions have been raised about Sinema’s campaign spending.
Back in 2024, another watchdog group — Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) — filed a separate complaint accusing Sinema of spending more than $100,000 in campaign funds on travel between March and September of that year.
CREW alleged that trips to places like Italy and Boston appeared unrelated to either her campaign or her work in the Senate.
So far, the Federal Election Commission has not formally ruled on that earlier complaint.
Here’s how the process usually works.
When the FEC receives a complaint, the agency first determines whether there is “reason to believe” a violation of federal campaign finance law may have occurred. If the commission finds enough evidence, it can pursue civil penalties — including fines or requiring the repayment of improperly spent funds.
In more serious cases, if investigators determine the violations were knowing and willful, the matter can be referred to the Department of Justice for possible criminal charges.
The timing of the new complaint is also interesting.
FACT filed the complaint shortly after news broke that Sinema had taken a new role as a columnist for the Washington Reporter.
Sinema has not publicly responded to questions about the spending allegations.
But if the FEC decides to move forward with an investigation, this story may be far from over.
