PACs Give Heavily to Members of Tax Panel : Senators Got $3 Million From Special Interests in ‘85, Triple Amount Collected 2 Years Earlier

So much special-interest money is pouring into Sen. Charles E. Grassley’s campaign coffers that he has to keep a computer printout on his desk to remind him who has contributed.

Grassley (R-Iowa) sits on the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, where the cash register is ringing for others as well. Committee members raked in more than $11 million in campaign contributions last year, including $3 million from business, labor and other special-interest political action committees (PACs), triple the amount raised only two years earlier.

Why the sudden fund-raising boom? “We didn’t have a tax bill in 1983,” Grassley said with characteristic candor and a broad grin. “Now, people are anticipating a major tax bill.”

Wielding Influence

Practically every economic interest in America would be affected by the massive tax-overhaul bill approved by the House last December and scheduled for debate by the Senate Finance Committee this month. Many of them are vying to wield influence with money donated by their company or union PACs.

“Both PACs and congressional tax writers have seen the tax-reform bill as a major vehicle for giving and receiving large sums of special-interest political money,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of Common Cause, which seeks to curb PAC giving on the ground that it distorts the legislative process.

A Times study of campaign funds raised by the 20 members of the Senate Finance Committee revealed a dramatic increase last year not only in PAC giving, but also in the percentage of contributions given by PACs as opposed to individuals. The PAC share of committee members’ funds jumped from 18% in 1983 to 28% last year, demonstrating a growing reliance on special-interest money to meet soaring campaign costs.

Industries that stand to be big losers under the tax bill have been particularly heavy contributors to the Finance Committee. The Times study, based on senators’ reports to the Federal Election Commission, found that the insurance, real estate and oil and gas industries gave nearly one-third of the PAC money received by the committee. Seventy insurance PACs gave $415,800, 79 real estate PACs contributed $277,300 and 78 oil and gas PACs donated $266,800.

The surge in PAC money to Finance Committee senators duplicates the experience of House Ways and Means Committee members, who received $3.7 million in PAC contributions last year as they were writing the House version of tax overhaul. That was more than double their take in 1983, the previous non-election year.

PACs insist that there is nothing pernicious about their activity. “I don’t think you buy one vote with a PAC contribution,” said Eugene P. Kopp, Union Pacific Corp.’s chief lobbyist. “But certainly it provides you with some access to go in and present your views. In the old days, people went up with bags full of money and bought votes. I know a lot of PAC money is characterized that way now, but I think members (of Congress) make their decisions on the merits” of each issue.

Rule of Thumb

Finance Committee members typically agree. Grassley said, “A rule of thumb around here is if you give, the effect is neutral; if you don’t, it’s negative.” But PAC money has no effect on his own performance, Grassley asserted, noting that he is one of the defense Establishment’s prickliest critics, despite having received “massive amounts” of PAC money from the defense industry during his successful 1980 election campaign.

At the same time, Grassley, who received $74,500 last year from insurance PACs, was described by Tom O’Hara, a lobbyist for Prudential Insurance Co. of America, as one of the insurance industry’s most helpful friends on Capitol Hill. Iowa’s Grassley explained, “Next to Hartford, Conn., there are more insurance companies in Des Moines than anywhere else.”

The Finance Committee’s grand champion fund-raiser last year was Chairman Bob Packwood (R-Ore.), who netted $4,814,482--four times more than anyone else, with $950,067 of it from PACs. Packwood not only exerts considerable power as chairman but is running hard for reelection this year as Republicans try to retain control of the Senate.

Gifts to Republicans

The other three Finance Committee members seeking reelection this year are also Republicans, and they, too, piled up large sums: Steven D. Symms of Idaho, $1,286,902 ($502,658 from PACs); Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole of Kansas, $1,107,360 ($593,750 from PACs), and Grassley, $960,175 ($413,510 from PACs).

The leading Democrat was Lloyd Bentsen of Texas, who will take over the Finance Committee chairmanship next year if the Democrats recapture the Senate in the November elections. Bentsen raised $715,461--$112,575 of it from PACs--even though he does not have to stand for reelection until 1988. Among his biggest contributors was Trammell Crow, Dallas-based real estate developer, whose PAC gave $5,000 to Bentsen and $14,000 to five other committee members.

Besides Bentsen, five other committee members who do not face the voters again until 1988 were hustling last year to build up campaign nest eggs. The most active, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.), garnered $571,559, one-fourth of it from PACs.

Ruffled Feathers

Some of the early birds have ruffled PAC feathers.

“I think it’s carrying things a little too far for them (senators) to say, ‘Give us money now for an election two years from now,’ ” said Don Foreman, treasurer of Amoco’s PAC. “They tell us they’re trying to raise money early to scare off potential challengers.” Foreman said Amoco turns down such requests because they come “way too soon.”

Not everyone on the Finance Committee is holding Washington fund-raising events to hit up PACs. Sen. David Pryor (D-Ark.), who next faces reelection is 1990, “feels he owes it to his colleagues who are running this year to give them a free arena to raise money in,” press secretary Ann Pride said.

And Bentsen, who collected most of his 1985 money at a series of Texas events, said he has given his staff “very clear instructions” not to hold any fund-raisers in Washington this year. Although aide Jack DeVore declined to give the reasons, he did not discourage speculation that Bentsen wants to give campaigning Democratic colleagues a better chance to raise money--and that he considers it improper to solicit Washington-based PACs while a huge tax bill is before his committee.

‘A Huge Temptation’

Sen. John Heinz (R-Pa.), a Finance Committee member as well as chairman of the Senate Republican campaign organization, acknowledged that tax overhaul has created “a huge temptation for all the economic interests out there to be as generous as the campaign law allows.” However, he added, “it takes a substantial leap to translate that into a reprehensible acquisition of access and influence.”

Heinz contended that “most members of the Finance Committee formed very strong views on tax overhaul early on, whether they were running (for reelection) and raising money or not.”

Although the companies contributing to the Finance Committee have no illusions that they can simply buy a better tax bill, they do not believe they are throwing their contributions away. “Our views are certainly heard better if we are able to support the members in their campaigns,” said O’Hara of Prudential, whose PAC gave $18,000 to committee members.

Increasing Uneasiness

But, O’Hara added, there is increasing uneasiness about PAC giving in his own backyard--among Prudential employees whose cash contributions to the company’s PAC are relayed to congressional candidates.

“Our employees are happy to be supportive of Congress, but the more articles they read on PACs, the more they get concerned about the system working right,” he said. “They sense a sleaze factor but don’t know why. They trust the company, that we’re not doing anything wrong, but they want to make sure things are not getting out of hand.”

In the tax bill, Prudential is fighting Administration proposals to tax employee life insurance paid by companies as a fringe benefit and to tax the cash buildup of life insurance policies. The House rejected those proposals.

Amoco, which gave $13,000 to Finance Committee members last year, believes such contributions buy better access to lawmakers and “a little fairer treatment,” said Foreman, Amoco’s PAC treasurer. “Probably, you’re going to be less likely to get some type of punitive legislation.”

Amoco is looking for a lot less punitive treatment in the Senate than it believes it received in the House. Amoco’s chief economist, Ted Eck, called the House tax bill “a disaster” for the oil industry because it would eliminate the investment tax credit and substantially lengthen the period for writing off capital equipment costs. And on provisions affecting the oil industry specifically, the House was somewhat less generous to the industry than President Reagan.

‘Pro-Business Attitude’

Union Pacific Corp., a railroad and petroleum firm, donated $19,900 to Finance Committee members last year, including $3,400 to Symms because “we appreciate his support of issues we’re interested in,” Kopp said. “He has a pro-business attitude, and we do a significant amount of business in Idaho.”

Mark Clark, a spokesman for the U.S. League of Savings Institutions, said his trade group is “not trying to influence votes so much as we are trying to get the right people elected to office.” He defended the PAC system as widening citizen involvement in the political process, giving voice to a variety of economic interests and helping candidates offset rising campaign costs.

The league’s PAC, which gave $16,200 to Finance Committee senators last year, is seeking to head off House-approved changes affecting savings plans, real estate loans and taxation of savings institutions’ reserves.

“There’s no doubt that corporations and labor unions have a better chance of making contributions in their own private interest than does Joe Blow, who goes into the voting booth feeling he’s just a cog,” Clark said. “But I don’t buy the idea that somehow that’s evil.”

Finance Committee Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) isn’t so sure.

Too Much PAC Money

“I think there’s way too much (PAC money) in the political system,” said Baucus, whose PAC contributions were 40% of the $472,000 total he raised in 1983, when he was gearing up for a 1984 reelection race. “It is the better organized, more wealthy interests that are represented by PACs.”

Actually, most labor unions also have PACs--for example, the Carpenters Union gave $7,200 to Finance Committee members last year--but labor PACs contribute less than half as much as the rapidly proliferating horde of business PACs.

David L. Boren (D-Okla.), the only Finance Committee member who refuses to accept PAC money, said he was appalled recently when a group of PAC managers told him that if he accepted their money he would not have to “inconvenience the people back home” for their support.

Boren’s rejoinder: “That’s what the Constitution wanted us to do.”

LEADERS OF THE PACs

The leading political action committee contributors from three industries to Senate Finance Committee members in 1985:

INSURANCE Associated Life Insurance $39,800 Group National Policyholder Advisory Committee (ALIGN), group of life insurance agents. National Assn. of $29,800 Life Underwriters Prudential Insurance $18,000 Co. of America Travelers Corp. $18,000 OIL AND GAS Union Pacific Corp. $19,900 Amoco Corp. $13,000 Valero Energy Corp. $12,500 REAL ESTATE National Assn. of $23,300 Realtors Trammell Crow Co. $19,000 U.S. League of $16,200 Savings Assns. * half its business in oil and gas and half in railroads.

Source: Federal Election Commission

FINANCE COMMITTEE FUND-RAISING

Net campaign contributions to Senate Finance Committee members in 1985.

Amount Share Total from from contributions PACs PACs Up for reelection in 1986 Bob Dole (R-Kan.) $1,107,360 $593,750 54% Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) 960,175 413,510 43% Bob Packwood (D-Ore.) 4,814,482 950,067 20% Steven D. Symms (R-Ida.) 1,286,902 502,658 39% Not up for reelection in 1986 William L. Armstrong (R-Colo.) $5,022 $300 6% Max Baucus (D-Mont.) 8,075 6,040 75% Lloyd Bentsen (D-Tex.) 715,461 112,575 16% David L. Boren (D-Okla.) 9,100 0 0% Bill Bradley (D-N.J.) 192,596 12,010 6% John H. Chafee (R-R.I.) 215,042 36,025 17% John C. Danforth (R-Mo.) 251,845 59,450 24% David Durenberger (R-Minn.) 462,123 45,450 10% John Heinz (R-Pa.) 227,147 24,025 11% Russell B. Long (D-La.) 90,240 47,683 53% Spark M. Matsunaga (D-Hawaii) 13,270 8,500 6% George J. Mitchell (D-Maine) 477 1,000 21% Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) 571,559 141,950 25% David Pryor (D-Ark.)* -17,850 -550 -- William V. Roth Jr. (R-Del.) 70,510 60,000 85% Malcolm Wallop (R-Wyo.) 38,759 24,500 63% Total $11,026,615 $3,038,943 28% * Pryor received $21,550 ($700 from PACs) but returned $39,400 in contributions from prior years ($1,250 to PACs).

Source: Federal Election Commission