When donors contribute to political campaigns, they expect their money to be spent on consultants, advertisements and literature.

Yet U.S. Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Hoover, used $42 of his nearly $1 million campaign war chest to pay for a baby gift to one of his donors and more than $1,000 on a home security system, according to campaign finance records. U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Saks, spent $1,004 on Christmas cards and $250 on a funeral donation in lieu of flowers. U.S. Rep. Robert Aderholt spent $3,289 on Christmas cards and hundreds more on floral arrangements for funerals and a retirement. U.S. Rep. Bradley Byrne, R-Fairhope, bought $2,360 on Christmas tree ornaments from the House gift shop and another $3,200 was shelled out by his campaign for security equipment. U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Birmingham, paid her $25 dues to the Jefferson County Executive Committee from her campaign account, and $3,500 more as a donation to the nonprofit organization Reading is Fundamental.

While these expenditures may raise eyebrows, they are perfectly legal in the eyes of the Federal Election Commission, the agency that oversees campaign finance laws.

FEC rules bar federal elected officials and candidates from using campaign money for personal use, such as a mortgage, gym membership, Iron Bowl tickets or car loan for a vehicle not used for campaign activity.

But there are other items that may appear to be for personal use, such as the home security systems purchased by Palmer and Byrne with campaign funds, that are acceptable.

In July 2017, the FEC issued an advisory opinion allowing all federal elected officials to dip into their campaign accounts to pay for home security systems and upgrades. Before the opinion, the agency allowed a few individual members of Congress to use their campaign accounts in this fashion on a case-by-case basis, such as then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the Arizona Democrat that was nearly assassinated when she held an outdoor constituent event in January 2011.

“Installing (or upgrading) and monitoring residential security systems are permissible uses of campaign funds since they are ‘ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in connection with the duties of the individual as a holder of federal office,’” the FEC determined. “The spending does not fall under the … personal use prohibitions since the payments would not have occurred had the member not been a federal officeholder or candidate, and the residential security upgrades would not have existed irrespective of their duties as federal officeholders or candidates.”

While campaign finance rules bar candidates from dipping into their accounts to buy their spouse an anniversary gift or write a $10,000 birthday check to a generous donor, they are allowed to mark “special occasions” by giving gifts of “nominal” value, such as the $42 that Palmer spent on baby clothes.

Asked why the Hoover congressman chose to pay for the gift out of his campaign account instead of personal funds, a Palmer spokesman said: “These donors are longtime friends of the campaign, so when we found out they were going to be blessed with their first child --through adoption --, which was just approved at the time, the campaign provided them a small gift for their new baby boy.”

Certain dues, such as gym or health club memberships, paid for with campaign funds are illegal. But “campaign funds may be used for membership dues in an organization that may have political interests,” meaning Sewell’s use of campaign cash to pay her $25 dues to the Jefferson County Executive Committee is kosher.

Charitable donations are also allowed as long as the elected official or candidate does not personally benefit from the contribution. The congresswoman’s $3,500 donation to Reading is Fundamental is legal under FEC rules.

Sewell could not immediately be reached for comment on why she didn’t use personal funds to pay her dues.