THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, October 10, 1995 TAG: 9510100293
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DAVID POOLE, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Long : 167 lines
The press has framed General Assembly elections this year as a battle to the death between entrenched Democrats and upstart Republicans.
But that's not how the state's powerful corporate lobbyists see things.
To special interests such as high-priced law firms, banks, utilities and the medical industry, the November elections are simply another opportunity to consolidate their access to the state's lawmaking process.
The surest way to access is to invest in candidates already in a position to return favors. That's why the most active companies and business-related political action committees have bestowed at least 95 percent of their money upon sitting lawmakers, according to a Virginian-Pilot computer analysis of campaign contributions.
In turn, incumbents have come to depend upon the same special interests that are seeking to influence them. Sitting lawmakers look to the business community for nearly half of their campaign contributions, the newspaper's analysis shows.
This marriage between political and corporate power worries campaign reform advocates who argue that even if control of the legislative branch shifts from Democrats to Republicans, some things will not change. ``It will be the same old gang: the developers, the doctors, the utilities,'' said Julie Lapham, executive director of the Virginia chapter of Common Cause, a self-styled citizen lobby.
Josh Goldstein, research director for the non-partisan National Library on Money and Politics in Washington, said the GOP takeover of Congress created an unmistakable shift in policies and priorities, but it did nothing to alter the basic dynamic between money and power.
``It's not a question of Democrats vs. Republicans or conservatives vs. liberals. It's all about incumbency and power,'' Goldstein said. ``It tends to leave ordinary citizens on the sidelines.''
In Virginia, lawmakers and business lobbyists say there is nothing improper about the state's political-corporate alliance. Politicians maintain that the corporate cash, food and drink that flows their way does not cloud their perspective or influence their decisions. Business lobbyists insist their money buys nothing more than access, a chance to make their case.
There is no quid pro quo, both sides insist.
But one lobbyist acknowledged that his group - the Virginia Manufactured Housing Association - handed out money to incumbents this year as a payback for an Assembly-approved mobile home bill.
The legislation prevents localities from keeping single-wide mobile homes out of agricultural areas that adjoin fast-growing suburban areas. Ron Dunlop, the association's executive director, said the new law is expected to increase mobile home sales by 10 percent over the next five years.
The trade group beefed up its campaign giving this year, contributing $36,325 in the first nine months of this year and vaulting onto the Top 10 list of corporate givers.
``I hate to use this word,'' Dunlop said, ``but it was `thanking' them for supporting us. We wanted to let them know that we appreciated their help.''
Some critics of the sky's-the-limit campaign laws in Virginia say that big money can drown out average voters.
``If you are a legislator who returns to your office at the end of a long day and finds a stack of phone messages on your desk, which ones are you likely to return? The buddy who gave you one thousand bucks. That's called `access,' '' Lapham said.
The public rarely questions the relationship between business and politicians - unless scandal erupts.
In North Carolina, for instance, political contributions by the state's rapidly expanding pork industry went largely unnoticed until citizens started complaining about drinking water contaminated by high-density pig farms. Earlier this year, The News & Observer in Raleigh revealed how political contributions factored into the state's friendly handling of the pork industry.
``I think people now would be nervous about getting these contributions,'' said Thad Beyle, a political scientist at the University of North Carolina.
In Virginia, the Democrat-controlled General Assembly has dodged campaign finance reform in the three years since a commission appointed by then-Gov. L. Douglas Wilder recommended a cap on contributions to statewide and legislative candidates.
Republicans also sidestep the issue in their ``Pledge for Honest Change.'' GOP lawmakers who used to scream about a system that favored Democrats now queue up at the corporate till.
There is plenty of corporate money to go around this year. The top 25 companies and business-related PACs gave out more than $800,000 in direct contributions this year. That figure does not include corporate money filtered through the two political parties and PACs like one headed by Republican Gov. George F. Allen.
The top-spending special interests are looking to protect their markets or expand into new ones.
There are Virginia Power Corp. and Appalachian Power Co. looking to protect their franchises in case Congress opens the door to competition among power providers.
There are players in health care reform: Hospitals that want to control costs with set guidelines and costs for procedures; insurance companies that want to funnel patients through a set of pre-approved physicians; doctors who want to minimize hospital and insurance company interference in patient care decisions.
There are trial attorneys seeking greater leeway in cases involving personal injury, medical malpractice and employment discrimination.
There are the state's big law firms looking to gain access for their roster of business clients.
There are banks looking to cut deeper into the markets of insurance companies and brokerage houses.
The smart money is going almost exclusively to incumbents. Because most lawmakers win re-election, companies find that the safest investment is with sitting lawmakers. ``Corporate donors are the most risk-averse donors in the world. They do not like to give to a person who is not in a position to help them,'' said Goldstein of the National Library on Money and Politics.
Businesses also have a more basic interest in returning incumbents to office: Companies have invested thousands of dollars in past campaign contributions and entertainment expenses in their relationship with each legislator.
Mike Toalson, senior vice president of the Virginia Bankers Association, explained why his group has plunked down $46,850 on incumbents and only $1,000 on challengers.
``One of our guiding principles is that we dance with the person who brung us,'' he said. ``If they just have an open-door policy to the Virginia Bankers, that's all we expect. Just an opportunity to present our views.
``The last thing we would do,'' he continued, ``would be to support a challenger of an incumbent who has an open-door policy.''
Companies that bet on the wrong candidates have plenty of time to make up for misses. After congressional elections last year, business-related PACs that backed Democratic incumbents who lost quickly shifted direction. A Congressional Quarterly study found that the 10 business-related PACs most active after Election Day gave 89 percent of their money to Republicans.
The pattern of corporate giving makes it relatively easy for incumbents to raise money. And it also means that some lawmakers rely heavily upon corporate contributions.
Fourteen incumbents have gotten more than 75 percent of their contributions from companies and business-related PACs, according to the newspaper's computer analysis.
Del. George H. Heilig Jr., a Norfolk Democrat, is near the top of the list because of his position as chairman of the House Corporations, Insurance and Banking Committee, which considers legislation ranging from telecommunications reform to utility regulation.
Of the $62,485 that Heilig raised through August, more than 80 percent came from companies and business-related PACs that appear before his committee.
Heilig said he considers the contribution a sign that the business community appreciates his willingness to listen and keep an open mind. ``They appreciate what you've done for them in the past and what you'll do in the future,'' Heilig said. ``I don't think that means a close relationship in a bad way between incumbents and business. I think we have a great record of integrity and honesty in government.'' ILLUSTRATION: Color staff graphic by John Earle
Virginia's 10 Biggest PACS
These are the Political Action Committees that have given the most
to this year's General Assembly candidates. Except for the Virginia
Trial Lawyers Association, they are giving almost exclusively to
incumbents.
1. Virginia Trial Lawyers
2. Virginia Bankers Association
3. Virginia Medical Association
4. Philip Morris U.S.A.
5. Mobil Oil Co.
6. Trigon Blue Cross Blue Shield
7. Virginia Power
8. Virginia Manufactured Housing Association
9. Norfolk Southern Corp.
10. Virginia Hospital Association.
For complete text, see micofilm.
KEYWORDS: POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE PACS CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
VIRGINIA HOUSE OF DELEGATES RACE ELECTION CANDIDATE by CNB