Listen to the article
Campaign finance watchdogs are raising concerns over Rep. Eric Swalwell’s extensive use of congressional campaign funds for childcare expenses, which have exceeded $200,000 according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings.
A review of FEC documents spanning from 2019 to 2025 reveals that Swalwell, a California Democrat who has served in Congress since 2013 and is currently running for California governor, has consistently used campaign finances to cover childcare costs for his three children, ages 8, 7, and 4.
The most recent filings show over $22,000 in childcare expenses during just a three-month period from October to December 2025. Notably, his gubernatorial campaign reports include more than $6,000 in childcare payments made directly to his wife, Brittany Swalwell.
Campaign records indicate that the largest portion of these expenses—more than $102,000—went to an individual named Amanda Barbosa in Dublin, California, between 2021 and 2025. According to her LinkedIn profile, Barbosa began working as a “childcare provider” at a “private practice” in September 2021, one month before her first payment from the Swalwell campaign. Social media evidence suggests she has a close relationship with the Swalwell family, appearing in family photos including a trip to Disney World last June.
Additional campaign funds, totaling $57,324.40, were directed to Bambini Play & Learn Child Development Center, a Spanish immersion preschool in Washington, D.C., where monthly tuition ranges from $2,520 to $3,280 according to the center’s website.
While federal law generally prohibits using campaign funds for personal expenses, the FEC has carved out exceptions for childcare. In 2018, the commission issued an opinion stating that childcare expenses resulting from campaign activities do not constitute personal use. In 2022, the FEC further expanded this interpretation by approving Swalwell’s specific request to use campaign funds for overnight childcare when traveling for campaign purposes.
These exceptions have drawn criticism from campaign finance experts, including Allen Mendenhall, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies. Speaking to Fox News Digital, Mendenhall characterized childcare as an “inherently personal” expense that candidates with young children would incur regardless of their campaign activities.
“It’s an expense that candidates with young children will incur regardless of whether they’re in a campaign,” Mendenhall said. “I have childcare costs. Many people have childcare costs, and we can’t just use this other money to subsidize our things.”
Mendenhall expressed concern that the FEC’s decisions create a precedent allowing candidates to shift personal expenses to campaign donors, potentially opening what he called a “slippery slope” where other personal costs like clothing or grooming could be justified as campaign-related.
“The danger here is creating a special class of politicians who are insulated from normal constraints, ordinary constraints that everybody else has to deal with,” Mendenhall explained. He argued that campaign finance laws should focus on protecting political speech and electoral integrity rather than subsidizing politicians’ personal expenses.
The controversy highlights ongoing tensions about the appropriate boundaries between campaign and personal finances, particularly as more candidates with young families enter politics. Advocates for the FEC’s childcare allowances have previously argued that such provisions help create more equitable conditions for parents, especially women, to run for office.
Swalwell’s office did not respond to requests for comment on the childcare expenditures.
The California congressman, who briefly ran for president in 2019, has maintained a high profile as a progressive Democrat and frequent media commentator. His gubernatorial campaign faces significant challenges in a crowded field as he seeks to replace current Governor Gavin Newsom, who will be term-limited.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
This situation highlights the need for robust campaign finance regulations and oversight. Voters should have confidence that their contributions are being used responsibly and in alignment with the law.
This is a tricky issue as childcare can be a significant expense for elected officials. However, the specific details here, like the payments to the representative’s wife, require close scrutiny to ensure everything is above board.
This seems like a complex issue around campaign finance laws and how they apply to childcare expenses. I’m curious to learn more about the justifications and precedents around this type of spending from campaign funds.
While there may be legitimate reasons for using campaign funds for childcare, the large sums and payments to the representative’s wife raise questions that warrant further scrutiny. Transparency around these expenses is important for public trust.
Interesting that a significant portion of the childcare expenses went to an individual who appears to have started working as a ‘childcare provider’ around the same time. I wonder if there are any conflicts of interest or improper personal use of campaign funds there.
I’m curious to hear more about the legal and ethical justifications for using campaign funds for childcare expenses. While it may be a legitimate expense, the scale and specifics warrant further investigation.
While there may be valid reasons for using campaign funds for childcare, the scale and specifics of these expenses raise red flags. Voters deserve full transparency around how their contributions are being utilized.
Elected officials need to be held to high standards when it comes to how they use campaign contributions. This situation deserves a thorough investigation to determine if any improper actions occurred.