Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, November 13, 1993 TAG: 9311130134
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Knight-Ridder/Tribune
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Long
But, of course, Packwood is no ordinary citizen. He is a powerful senator in Washington. And when he was accused of sexual misconduct, corporate America did not react with even a glimmer of the harshness that its own rules suggest.
Instead, chief executives and Washington lobbyists delivered cash to the accused senator - thousands and thousands of dollars of it.
In a quiet but steady outpouring, officials of at least 15 corporations have written big-dollar checks to help the Oregon Republican save his political life. So have prominent politicians. And labor groups.
"He's entitled to his day in court," said Arco spokesman Albert Greenstein, who defended Packwood's right to a defense - and Arco's chief executive's right to help him have one, with a $1,000 donation.
But women's groups were outraged that companies they work for and buy from would help defend a man facing so many allegations of sexual harassment.
"Women around the country are going to be angry, absolutely," said Ellen Bravo, executive director of 9to5 National Association of Working Women, headquartered in Cleveland.
"This will reinforce their fear," Bravo said, "that when the big boys are in trouble they are going to stick together. Women are worried. Their companies have these sexual harassment policies. But do they mean it?"
The Packwood donations - 243 in all - have been deposited into a legal-defense fund that has amassed about $275,000 so far. Most of it is being used to hire one of Washington's most prestigious, and priciest, law firms.
By contrast, the women accusing Packwood have raised $20,000 to $25,000 - and mostly in $26 checks, an amount selected for the number of women who came forward to accuse Packwood (now 28). The largest donation was $500 from Gloria Steinem. Lawyers are working for free.
"The playing field is completely uneven," said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Fund for the Feminist Majority. "The money, the disparity in the lawyers, the access. . . . The whole system is set up for the senator."
The question of how serious America is about sexual harassment echoes again and again in the Packwood case, as women across the country recall the Senate Judiciary Committee's grilling of Anita Hill two years ago and look for signs of greater equity this time.
Packwood was first accused of sexual harassment in November, when charges also were made that he tried to intimidate women from coming forward with their stories. At one point, the senator said he was "just plain wrong." But as the Senate Ethics Committee has investigated his case, and more women have accused him, Packwood has denied many accounts of his conduct.
That big companies may be bailing out the senator sounds all too much like the same old story, many women around the country say - and one that sparks an outrage that some will vent in the marketplace.
"The idea that corporations would reach out to this guy is startling. I think women will be more disturbed to learn that than they were with Packwood to begin with," said Nancy Ford, a founder of the Florida Women's Alliance.
"I won't buy from those companies," pledged Kathleen O'Brien, the senior female partner in one of Philadelphia's most prestigious law firms. O'Brien said she planned to bring a list of contributors to the Forum for Women Executives in Philadelphia so that the group might take a stand. "I think this will affect how other women buy, especially if a woman's group came out and said that it should."
The National Organization for Women plans to do just that.
Executive Vice President Kim Gandy said the group had been trying first to ensure that the Senate holds public hearings, but she added, "I have no doubt that that is something a number of organizations will turn to. I think there is a great potential for outrage."
With such a strong risk of alienating women - and many men, too - the most obvious question is: Why companies would give money to Packwood in the first place?
Of 15 companies contacted for comment, 14 provided or described explicit corporate rules forbidding the very conduct Packwood is accused of. Those rules specify punishment up to and including firing if the accusations prove founded.
Critics suggest Packwood's legislative influence means more to many companies than his alleged misconduct. The senator is the senior Republican on one of the most powerful of Senate committees - Finance - which writes tax and trade laws.
"He's a friend, and we don't want to lose him," acknowledged Mary Hanagan, executive director of a political action committee that represents Honda, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, Mercedes, Volvo and Hyundai car dealers, which gave the senator $5,000.
Ted Turner's broadcasting company - which contributed $2,000 - cited Packwood's "very distinguished record" and said he "is entitled to a defense." But its terse statement also hinted at the politics involved.
The powerful senator, said a spokesman, "is a friend of the cable industry."
Most corporate donors, however, distanced themselves altogether from the Packwood donations. Their Washington lobbyists and chief executive officers simply opted to make large "personal" contributions, they said. The First Amendment grants such rights, they pointed out.
"This isn't the gulag," Robert Baker, spokesman for Salomon Brothers, said hotly.
Then there were a few companies, such as Southwest Airlines, who cited friendship as the motivator. Southwest's chief executive is Packwood's law school classmate.
At Dole Food Co., a spokesman for David H. Murdock, chairman and chief executive, who gave $2,500, called the donation a "personal" gift to a friend. Then spokesman Tom Pernice said the money came from Pacific Holding Co., a much smaller and privately owned company, of which Murdock also is chairman and chief executive.
"If they're going to be mad, at least let them be mad at the right company," he said.
Still, many of these "personal" contributions list corporate addresses, suggesting a professional nature to the gift. And many were made by the lobbyists whose job it is to curry favor in Washington so senators such as Packwood will look favorably upon laws that help their companies.
"I'm not going to speculate on what is perceived," said Shannon Fioravanti, of Bell Atlantic. "All I can say is it was [the company's lobbyist's] private funds and as a private citizen he has a right to contribute to certain causes if he finds them meritorious."
Watchdog groups In Washington were not nearly convinced.
"I find it hard to believe that all these companies did not know what their people were doing," said Chuck Lewis, director of the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit research and watchdog group in Washington. "It sounds like deniability. It sounds like Alice in Wonderland.
"The practical effect is the same whether they write a check on their personal account or write a company check," Lewis added. "Bob Packwood knows where that money came from. These people represent their companies in Washington, and the companies still get their bang for the buck."
by CNB