THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, October 9, 1996 TAG: 9610090015
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A12 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 56 lines
Fifth District congressional candidate George Landrith has given new meaning to the idea that charity begins at home.
Last year, he set up a fund-raising committee, ostensibly to help boost the fortunes of fellow Republican candidates. He raised about $9,800 in the name of that good cause.
``Virginians for a Conservative Majority has one job . . . to elect conservatives,'' wrote Landrith, an Albemarle County lawyer, in a February 1995 fund-raising letter.
Now, however, it turns out that the largest chunk of the money - almost one-third - was used to pay the health-insurance bill of Landrith, his family and a political hire. Another 26 percent went for salary and payroll taxes in Landrith's campaign office, and about 30 percent of the money was used for office supplies and rent.
Maybe what Landrith meant to say was that the job of Virginians for a Conservative Majority was to elect ``one'' conservative, himself. Landrith, who also ran for Congress in 1994, is opposing Democrat Virgil Goode of Franklin County this year.
Nor is this the first time Virginians have seen political-action committees formed by politicans put to nonaltruistic use. Former Reagan Budget Director Jim Miller got into a bit of hot water during the spring GOP primary because of a variation on the same theme.
Miller also formed a PAC in support of fellow Republican candidates. It operated in 1995, between his two races for a GOP Senate nomination. The committee, which functioned under state laws, allowed Miller to rake in donations far larger than those allowed in federal elections.
Among other things, the money went to pay the salary of the man who was Miller's campaign manager in 1994 and 1996. It also financed the political travels of Miller, who boosted his own prospects while campaigning for Republican candidates.
Landrith's explanation, similar to Miller's, was that the PAC funds freed him to campaign far and wide for Republicans and to share with them political support and advice.
That's well and good. But lumping your health-insurance bill into the cost of electing fellow Republicans is defining ``expenses'' a bit too broadly. What's next? Alimony? PTA dues?
Landrith says he's been so busy running for Congress in recent years that he has had virtually no income over the past 16 months. He, his wife and five children have been living off savings - and a little help from their PAC.
Passion in pursuit of office may be no vice. But in this case, it's no virtue. Virginia law relies on public disclosure to reveal misuse of campaign funds. Then voters decide whether or not to punish offenders by defeating them at the polls.
The better system would be a law that clearly lays out the distinction between personal and political expenses. The General Assembly should provide it. Until then, it is up to 5th District voters to tell Landrith that his first priority should be getting his own house in order. by CNB