Legislators Freely Spend Supporters’ Money on Non-Campaign Expenses : THE MONEY GAME : How Legislators Spend Campaign Contributions

Orange County legislators, faced with few restrictions on the use of campaign contributions and often encountering little opposition at the polls, spend much of their supporters’ money on expenses not directly related to their own campaigns, finance reports show.

They use campaign money for travel, gifts for staff members and friends, and meals at fine restaurants. They buy tickets to civic and entertainment events and contribute to charitable causes. They donate large amounts of the money they raise to other political campaigns.

Such spending is accentuated during odd-numbered years, when no regular legislative elections are scheduled.

Both political fund raising and the spending of campaign money are virtually unrestricted by California law, but two initiatives on the June 7 ballot would change that. Proposition 68 would put limits on campaign contributions and would restrict spending by candidates who accept public funds; Proposition 73 would limit fund raising but not spending.

To assess the state’s current campaign-financing system as it relates to Orange County’s legislative delegation, The Times early this year began reviewing mandatory finance reports filed by the lawmakers with the secretary of state’s office for 1987. All contributions to Orange County legislators for 1988 elections and all expenditures of campaign funds in 1987 were tabulated and analyzed with the help of a computer.

Together, that analysis showed, the 12 lawmakers who represented Orange County in the Legislature and did not face election in 1987 spent $1.4 million in campaign funds in 1987. Sen. Cecil N. Green, a Norwalk Democrat whose district includes part of north Orange County and who won his seat in a special election in May of last year, spent $212,028 during the last six months of the year.

That amounts to about $1.6 million in off-year spending by the entire county delegation.

About one-third of that went for such direct campaign costs as office rent, professional consultants, advertising and mailings. An additional 16% was spent raising more funds for the 1988 election year. That left a little more than half of the money, or $826,908, for items that even some legislators concede are not crucial to their reelection hopes.

Some examples:

- Sen. John Seymour (R-Anaheim) spent about $1,200 on “political meals” and $23,528 on travel last year.

- Assemblyman Nolan Frizzelle (R-Huntington Beach) bought two $200 tuxedos--one for the district and one for Sacramento. Frizzelle also bought his supporters $676 in Christmas gifts.

- Assemblyman John R. Lewis (R-Orange) funneled more than $136,000 of his own campaign money to other politicians, including $20,000 to Assemblyman Richard E. Longshore (R-Santa Ana).

- Sen. William Campbell (R-Hacienda Heights), whose district includes part of Orange County, spent $29,692 on travel for himself and his aides, $13,000 on sports tickets, $929 for theater tickets and $1,136 on flowers for constituents and supporters. Campbell paid his legislative aide, Jerry Haleva, a $50,000 salary from campaign funds on top of Haleva’s $80,000-a-year state salary. Haleva also spent $13,735 of Campbell’s campaign funds, mostly for travel and meals.

- Sen. Green spent $348 on gifts for his staff while he was traveling in Israel.

Lawmakers justify this spending by saying that such items improve their political images, reward friends for campaign assistance and help woo new supporters. They say such indirect campaigning can be as valuable as sending slickly printed brochures to voters at election time. Some legislators say they can save taxpayers’ money by spending campaign funds on job-related items for which they could legally charge the state.

Law Interpreted Loosely

California law forbids the spending of campaign funds for personal purposes. But that law, enacted in 1981, has been narrowly interpreted by the state attorney general’s office to allow lawmakers to spend campaign funds for almost anything that can be remotely tied to politics. No legislator has ever been prosecuted for violating it.

Proposition 68 is sponsored by former insurance executive Walter Gerken of Newport Beach and a coalition of business and public interest groups. It would limit campaign spending to $375,000 in an Assembly election and $600,000 in a Senate race. The measure also would limit fund raising in election years and forbid it during years in which the candidate is not facing an election. Proposition 73, which would limit contributions but not campaign spending, was co-authored by Assemblyman Ross Johnson (R-La Habra).

Critics of the current system say that, because legislators have the freedom to spend their campaign funds essentially as they please, contributions from interest groups have become the practical equivalent of personal gifts. They also say the legislators’ spending habits add unnecessarily to ever-rising campaign costs, which in turn lead to more fund raising and, they complain, arm-twisting of businesses and individuals who have an interest in state legislation.

During 1985 and 1986, candidates statewide spent $57.1 million on races for 100 legislative seats. That number was up almost 30% over the 1984 election cycle, when $44.8 million was spent on campaigns for the Legislature.

The skyrocketing campaign costs can be compared to the superpower arms race: Each side feels that it cannot afford to be outspent by the opposition. The root costs of campaigning--professional consultants, advertising, mailings--have not increased greatly, but as each party ups the ante, the other continually matches it.

Campaign Costs Climb

With control of the Legislature--and with it the power to draw new district lines after the 1990 census--at stake, most observers expect campaign costs to continue to escalate. The Republicans need five more seats to control the 80-member Assembly and six more in the 40-member Senate.

“Every year, the remaining races become more expensive because they’re fighting over a lot more than some Assembly seat--they’re fighting over who is going to determine which way the state goes into the 21st Century,” said Assemblyman Gil Ferguson (R-Newport Beach).

Walter Zelman, executive director of California Common Cause, a private group that monitors political fund raising and spending, said his group is especially concerned about the impact of off-year campaign expenditures on these spiraling costs.

“Large amounts spent in the off-year force the incumbents to raise more money, and the more money they have to raise, the more indebted they are topeople who can contribute that kind of money,” Zelman said.

Common Cause supports Proposition 68. Zelman said the ballot measure, if approved by the voters, likely would lead to a reduction in what he believes are expenses unnecessarily charged to campaign funds.

“By cutting off the ability of incumbents to raise money in the off-year, you are going to dramatically impact their ability and readiness to spend money in the off-year,” Zelman said. “They’re not going to have $50,000 or $100,000 to spend on things they don’t have to spend money for.”

Off-Year Spending

Robert Stern, general counsel of the California Commission on Campaign Financing, a private nonpartisan group that studies campaign contributions and spending, said he believes that much of the off-year spending is fueled by the ease with which incumbent lawmakers cruise to reelection.

“If they don’t have any competition, there is no need to save it (campaign money) for their election costs,” Stern said. “If they’re faced with a tough election, then they want to hold on to the money and spend it for the most direct ways of communicating with their constituents.”

Many lawmakers defend their off-year spending, however, saying they can avoid a tough race for reelection by spending on items that at first glance might appear frivolous.

“As a businessman, when I ran my own company, I had a budget for public relations and lunches and dinners and social affairs and all that,” said Sen. Seymour, a former realtor. “As a legislator and politician, I’m in the same business. I have to ‘public relate.’ ”

Assemblyman Frizzelle said he bought Christmas gifts for several people who have supported him politically and have given him presents.

“We don’t give expensive gifts, but we give routinely to a number of individuals who under normal conditions we just wouldn’t give to,” he said.

Travel traditionally has been a big expense item for political campaigns. Until last August, Southern California legislators used their campaign funds to pay for weekly commutes from their homes to Sacramento. Now the state pays that tab. But many Orange County legislators used their campaign funds to pay for trips out of the state, or, in some cases, overseas in 1987.

Trip to Israel

Seymour, for example, spent $4,300 to take his son with him on a trip to Israel. The senator, whose own expenses were paid by the Los Angeles Jewish Federation, said the eight-day trip “benefits me greatly in the Orange County Jewish Community.” He said it was “not a vacation.”

“We visited Ben-Gurion University, military establishments, high-tech plants, a kibbutz, the Knesset,” Seymour said. “They rolled us out on buses at 7:30 or 8, dumped us at the hotel at 5:30 for a cocktail party, dinner, go to bed, get up the next morning and do the same thing over again.”

Both Proposition 68 and Proposition 73 would outlaw transfers of campaign funds from one political candidate to another. Orange County lawmakers are among the most generous in the state when it comes to contributing to the campaigns of other legislative candidates. In fact, nearly one-fifth of the money the county’s lawmakers raised last year was promptly handed over to other politicians.

Assembly Republican leader Pat Nolan of Glendale says there is a good reason for that. Orange County’s lawmakers raise more than they need for their own campaigns, Nolan said, so they can counteract the influence of liberal Democrats from wealthy areas of Los Angeles.

“For years, the Democrats have raised money in West Los Angeles and used it to pile into districts around the state to overwhelm the local Republican fund-raising base,” he said. “The Orange County Assembly Republicans have seen how important it is that those dollars from West L.A. be answered so that our candidates have a fighting chance.”

Fund Transfers

In 1987, Assemblyman Lewis contributed $136,800 of his own campaign funds to other campaigns. Assemblyman Johnson, co-author of Proposition 73, gave $102,657; Seymour, $66,339.

Among Johnson’s expenditures in 1987 were 14 separate transfers of funds totaling $86,100 to two committees promoting Proposition 73, which would ban such transfers. Lewis’ contributions included $55,000 in loans to unsuccessful Republican candidates that the assemblyman later forgave. He also forgave a $20,000 loan to Assemblyman Longshore.

“I don’t enjoy raising money,” Lewis said. “On the other hand, it’s a task that is almost an obligation. I feel I need to carry my weight in terms of trying to bring about political change.”

According to a recent study, three states--Michigan, Connecticut and Hawaii--ban transfers of funds from one campaign to another, while 35 states impose limits on them along with other restrictions on contributions.

“I’ve done it, and I’ll continue to do it,” Johnson said of his money transfers. “I think the system ought to be reformed. But I don’t find anything hypocritical in saying I’m going to play by the rules as they exist.”

Gifts to Charity

Most of the county’s legislators also contribute campaign funds to charity.

Sen. Seymour gave $650 to the Orange County Boy Scouts last year and $500 to the Dayle McIntosh Center for the Disabled in Anaheim. Seymour said such gifts help him improve his image in the community.

“It’s not all benevolent,” Seymour said. “I believe in those things I give to, but it’s good business too.”

Good business or not, Assemblyman Robert C. Frazee, a Carlsbad Republican who represents parts of south Orange County and north San Diego County, said he tries to limit his charitable donations to avoid opening a Pandora’s Box.

SPENDING BY ORANGE COUNTY LEGISLATORS IN 1987

Contributions Fund to Other Office Raising Consulting Member Candidates Expenses Expenses Services STATE SENATORS Marian Bergeson $14,150 $37,553 $13,005 $125 William Campbell 2,000 45,315 38,911 75,588 Cecil Green 100 13,422 15,805 10,290 Edward Royce 16,570 13,211 22,965 2,324 John Seymour 66,339 30,444 60,298 12,820 STATE ASSEMBLYMEN Doris Allen 1,500 5,750 12,359 12,095 Dennis Brown 6,000 23,312 27,079 2,000 Gil Ferguson 14,437 59,874 33,235 12,397 Robert Frazee 9,133 14,628 2,180 5,840 Nolan Frizzelle 1,550 13,713 9,022 30,533 Ross Johnson 102,657 3,850 8,240 -- John R. Lewis 136,800 10,841 8,500 350 Richard Longshore 11,100 31,407 19,815 6,148 Totals $382,336 $303,319 $271,413 $170,510 Percentage 23.56% 18.69% 16.72% 10.51%

Loans Travel to Others Member Expenses Candidates STATE SENATORS Marian Bergeson $9,657 $28,000 William Campbell 29,692 0 Cecil Green 7,363 0 Edward Royce 11,992 0 John Seymour 23,528 10,000 STATE ASSEMBLYMEN Doris Allen 9,884 0 Dennis Brown 3,983 15,000 Gil Ferguson 4,725 10,000 Robert Frazee 12,931 2,000 Nolan Frizzelle 7,839 0 Ross Johnson 6,084 42,100 John R. Lewis 6,746 5,000 Richard Longshore 1,277 0 Totals $135,701 $112,100 Percentage 8.36% 6.91%

Newspaper, Mailers, Charitable Magazine Member Brochures Donations Advertising Polling Other STATE SENATORS Marian Bergeson $1,533 $0 $664 -- $1,502 William Campbell -- 2,952 530 -- 3,832 Cecil Green 9,117 800 1,203 -- 153,927 Edward Royce 3,954 0 -- 1,500 0 John Seymour -- 1,850 -- 0 10,660 STATE ASSEMBLYMEN Doris Allen -- 200 -- -- 0 Dennis Brown 9,643 3,467 250 100 0 Gil Ferguson 6,308 700 460 -- 7,955 Robert Frazee -- 1,770 129 -- 0 Nolan Frizzelle 159 -- -- -- 4,567 Ross Johnson -- 115 -- -- 1,587 John R. Lewis 1,135 350 -- -- 418 Richard Longshore 14,020 -- -- -- 119 Totals 45,870 12,204 3,236 1,600 184,567 Percentage 2.83% 0.75% 0.20% 0.10% 11.37%

Member Total STATE SENATORS Marian Bergeson $106,189 William Campbell 198,819 Cecil Green 212,028 Edward Royce 72,516 John Seymour 215,940 STATE ASSEMBLYMEN Doris Allen 41,788 Dennis Brown 90,834 Gil Ferguson 150,090 Robert Frazee 48,611 Nolan Frizzelle 67,383 Ross Johnson 164,633 John R. Lewis 170,140 Richard Longshore 83,886 Totals 1,622,857 Percentage 100.0%

Source: Campaign Finance Reports