Swalwell Faces Scrutiny Over Child Care Campaign Spending
Progressive Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) is under fire from campaign finance experts for allegedly using over $200,000 from his congressional campaign funds for child care, which critics argue is a personal expense.
Swalwell, who has been in Congress since 2013 and is currently running for governor of California after a brief presidential run in 2019, has had his campaign finances reviewed. Documents from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) covering 2019 to 2025 reveal that significant amounts were spent on child care.
Notably, his recent House and gubernatorial campaign filings show more than $22,000 spent on child care in just three months—from October to December 2025. Among these payments, over $6,000 went directly to his wife, Brittany Swalwell.
The campaign has also allocated more than $102,000 to someone named Amanda Barbosa from Dublin, California. Barbosa, described in her LinkedIn profile as a nursery worker and aspiring occupational therapist, began receiving payments shortly after her involvement with Swalwell’s campaign. She has been pictured with the Swalwell family in several social media posts.
Additionally, the campaign paid $57,324.40 to Bambini Play & Learn Child Development Center in Washington, D.C. Monthly childcare costs at this facility range from $2,520 to $3,280, according to their website.
The expenses listed include various reimbursements like $9,713.42 in payroll tax rebates for child care costs associated with the campaign, $1,943.35 for campaign event child care, and even $1,124 for travel that included food and childcare.
Federal regulations generally prohibit using campaign funds for personal use. However, a 2018 FEC opinion clarified that child care costs related to campaign activities could be considered acceptable. In 2022, Swalwell, who is a parent of three young children, sought clarification from the FEC on whether he could pay for night child care using campaign funds. The FEC approved this, allowing him to cover overnight childcare costs incurred during his campaign travels.
Allen Mendenhall, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Thomas A. Roe Economic Policy Institute, expressed concerns about the implications of the FEC’s ruling. He argues that child care expenses are inherently personal, regardless of whether someone is campaigning. He fears this decision might set a precedent allowing candidates to shift more personal costs, like clothing, into campaign funding.
In Mendenhall’s view, this creates a situation where certain politicians are insulated from the financial realities that most people face every day. He believes that these campaign finance laws are meant to ensure an equitable electoral process, and allowing such expenditures erodes that integrity.
Swalwell’s office has yet to respond to requests for comments regarding this situation.
