THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, October 31, 1995 TAG: 9510310013
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A12 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 64 lines
The occupation of one in five contributors to General Assembly campaigns this year was not identified on disclosure forms, according to a Virginian-Pilot review of campaign contributions.
That's a great improvement over 1989, when Common Cause, a nonpartisan citizens' lobby group, reported that half the campaign contributions came from supporters who listed no occupations.
Still, only four out of five is an unacceptably low level of compliance with the state law requiring that the occupation of a donor of $100 or more be listed.
For voters to tell if a legislator is receiving large donations from a certain interest group - say, Realtors - voters need to know which contributors are Realtors.
Disclosure is doubly important in Virginia because the Old Dominion is one of only eight states that do not limit the size of campaign contributions. No limits are needed, proponents of no limits weakly argue, because anyone interested can learn who is giving money to candidates.
It is true, reporters tend to ferret out who the big-sum contributors are, whether an occupation is listed or not. Still, when occupations are unlisted, it often is impossible to determine which legislators are being supported by which special interests.
Staff writer David M. Poole's report Monday on campaign donations revealed that none of the General Assembly candidates has been fined for campaign disclosure violations. He noted three reasons:
The state Board of Elections lacks the staff to enforce the law. ``I don't really want to broadcast that,'' said M. Bruce Meadows, the board's executive director, ``but that's the reality when we have to push so much paper.'' The board, traditionally one of the state's most underfunded agencies, lost three of 18 positions under the Allen administration's buyout program for ``nonessential'' employees.
While some states have disclosure forms filed electronically, making them easier to audit, Virginia still uses paper copies. Election-board workers have to sift through 20,000 contributions by hand.
The Assembly revised the disclosure law to require the Board of Elections to give candidates time to correct erroneous or incomplete reports before being fined. Presumably, many of the forms will be corrected in time to avoid fines, but not until after the Nov. 7 election. Last year, scores of notices of fines from $50 to $300 were sent out. This year's law giving candidates time to correct bad reports was made retroactive to 1994.
So what to do?
Adequately staff the Board of Elections. Unenforced laws create contempt for law and favor the people who break them.
Make the disclosure forms electronic, so computers can quickly do the checking.
Fine offenders. Repeal the law affording offenders time to correct their errors. Let them double-check, so there are no errors. No genius is required to see if the occupation is listed on each contribution form.
The purpose of contribution-disclosure laws is to determine clearly which candidates are getting what from which special interests - in time for voters to base decisions on the information. That purpose is not being accomplished in one in five cases, and the offenders go unpunished. by CNB