Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, August 14, 1994 TAG: 9408150056
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: E-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: By ALEC KLEIN STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Long
Political action committees of all stripes have sent checks to U.S. Sen. Charles Robb's re-election campaign.
The Home Shopping Network of St.Petersburg, Fla., has chipped in $1,000. New York cosmetics giant Avon has given $1,000, too. Even San Francisco's Wine Institute has contributed $2,000.
These groups, known as PACs, don't necessarily expect the Democratic incumbent to vote their way, watch their show or buy their line of makeup, political watchdogs say.
Despite the growing perception that elected officials are beholden to PACs, independent analysts say an individual PAC - limited by law to a $5,000 contribution - holds little sway over congressional action.
"PACs give money, not so much to buy a vote, but to buy a seat at the table, to buy access," said Joshua F. Goldstein, project director at the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, D.C.
Even when PACs give money in packs, Goldstein said, "it's next to impossible to track" how it affects a politician's decisions, particularly through subtle shifts in legislative language or bill amendments.
Still, Robb has drawn fire from his opponents for bankrolling his re-election with hefty PAC contributions.
"Time and again, Chuck Robb has demonstrated that his vote can be bought. These PAC contributions are further evidence," former Gov. Douglas Wilder, an independent candidate, said in a recent written statement.
Robb spokesman Bert Rohrer retorted, "It's typical in political campaigns to [criticize] money from wherever you're not getting it."
Indeed, Robb leads the pack, records show. He collected more than $300,000 in PAC contributions from January to June 30 - nearly 10 times more than Republican nominee Oliver North.
Independent candidate Marshall Coleman reported $4,000 in PAC money through June, while Wilder had a single check for $1,000, which he returned.
And Robb's total doesn't include his latest drive: Last Tuesday, PACs were invited to a $5,000-a-head fund-raiser headlined by White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta. His opponents aren't amused.
"The reality is, Chuck Robb is raising tons of money from the Hollywood elite and the New York City wine-and-cheese crowd," said North spokesman Dan McLagan.
Actually, records show that Robb's main PAC support comes from a cross-section of industries, including finance, defense, telecommunications and labor.
The incumbent also has garnered support from a wide array of other PACs, including flight attendants, Alabama farmers, abortion-rights advocates, optometrists, air traffic controllers, shoe distributors, railroad companies and bricklayers.
"It's the whole culture of Washington,'' Coleman said. ``The first rule of PACs is you support the incumbent."
Coleman said he accepts PAC money. So does North, although his campaign asserts it is willing to return the money if Robb does the same. Wilder, however, has disavowed PAC money altogether.
"PACs wield a great deal of influence on Capitol Hill, and I know of no PACs that represent the people," said Wilder campaign manager Glenn Davidson.
Five years ago, though, Wilder accepted tens of thousands of dollars in PAC money in his victorious gubernatorial campaign. "He's late in finding this new-found ethics," said Rohrer, the Robb spokesman.
Beyond the verbal sparring, Robb's record shows that he does not always line up behind contributing PACs.
For instance, despite at least $4,000 in tobacco-related PAC support, Robb is the only candidate who has said he is willing to consider allowing the Food and Drug Administration to classify nicotine as a drug.
In other cases, however, PAC support closely reflects his committee assignments and record.
For example, Robb, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who has fought against deep defense cutbacks, has benefited in turn from several defense-industry PACs. The tally includes $1,000 from the Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock PAC, $1,000 from the McDonnell Douglas PAC and $500 from the Boeing PAC .
"We believe PACs give contributions to get both access to elected officials and to gain influence over decisions that are being made," said Jennifer L. Lamson, director of grass-roots lobbying for Common Cause in Washington, D.C.
But she added, "It's very difficult to prove a quid pro quo."
What is more certain, analysts say, is that a PAC will give to incumbents because the officeholder already is making decisions that affect PAC interests.
Numbers show an even closer tie: PACs bet on the favorite. Incumbents usually win, which means they usually get PAC money.
In 1992, the 28 Senate incumbents averaged $1.3 million in PAC contributions; challengers averaged $236,000, according to Common Cause. Incumbents won 24 races, .
They have Corporate America to thank. In the 1991-92 election year, businesses delivered the most PAC money - $127 million - to candidates for federal office, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Labor contributed $43.1 million; and ideological PACs, $18.6 million.
"The public concern," said political analyst Bob Holsworth of Virginia Commonwealth University, "is that there are so many of these groups that it tends to drown out the voice of the ordinary citizen."
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB