Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

. THE ATIDRXVEY GESERAL March 22, 1972 Honorable Raymond W. Vowel1 Opinion No. M-1099 Co~issioner State Department of Public Re: Whether a State Department Welfare of Public Welfare employee John H. Reagan Building may legally continue to Austin, Texas 78701 work for the Department and receive his salary while actively campaigning for election as city council- Dear Mr. Vowell: man. Your request for an opinion poses the following question: "Can an employee of the State Department of Public Welfare legally continue to work for the Department and receive his State salary while at the same time he is actively campaigning for the elected position of City Councilman?" Section 31 of Article 695c, Vernon's Civil Statutes, applicable to the State Department of Public Welfare, provides: "No officer or employee of the State Depart- ment [of Public Welfare] shall use his official authority or influence or permit the use of the programs administered by the State Department for the purpose of interfering with an election or af- fecting the results thereof or for any political purpose. No such officer or employee shall take any active part in political management or in political campaignsor participate in any political activity, except that he shall retain the right to vote as he may please and express his opinion as a citizen on all political subjects. No such officer or employee shall solicit or receive, nor shall any such officer or employee be obliged to contribute or render, any service, assistance, sub- scriptions, assessments, or contributions for any political purpose. Any officer or employee of the State Department violating this Section shall be subject to discharge or suspension or such other -5366- Hon. Raymond W. Vowell, page 2 Wd99, disaiplinary measures as may be provided by the rules and regulations of the State Department." (Brackets added.) Prohibitions such as those contained in the statute quoted above are not unusual. The Hatch Act, enacted by the United States Congress, 18 U.S.C. S61h, is an example. The obvious purpose of enactments of this nature is to prevent any possibility of conflict between the personal interest of a public employee and his interest'as an employee of the public. In United Public Workers.v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75 (1947) at 100 the United States Supreme Court,defined what is prohibited: ,I . . . It,is only partisan political activity that is interdicted. It is active participation in political management and political campaigns. Expressions, public or private, on public affairs, personalities and matters of public interest, not an objective of party action, are unrestricted by law so long as the government employee does not direct his activities toward party success." You stated in your request that it is the policy of your Department to require an employee to terminate his employ- ment with the Department during the time such employee is actively engaged in a political campaign for public office. It is our opinion in view of the foregoing provisions of the State statute. such regulation is in harmony with the prohibitions set out above. You are accordingly advised that an employee of the State Department of Public Welfare may not legally continue to work for the Department and receive his State salary while at the same time he is actively campaigning for the elected position of city councilman. SU,MMARY An employee of the State Department of Public Welfare may not legally continue to work for the Department and receive his State salary while at the.same time he is actively campaigning for the elected position of city counci w* ney General'of Texas , Hon. Raymond W. Vowell, page 3 (M-1099) Prepared by John Reeves Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Kerns Taylor, Chairman W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman Bob Lattimore Mel Corley Sig Aronson Jim Swearingen SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL Staff Legal Assistant ALFRED WALKER Executive Assistant NOLA WHITE First Assistant -5368-