Candidates Face Funding Dilemma: Use It or Lose It

State Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Van Nuys), renowned for stockpiling campaign dollars, vows to launch a bid for a seat on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors if a vacancy occurs. Therefore, it is not surprising that Robbins has accumulated $828,000 in funds, even though his current term extends through 1990.

Now, however, Robbins has a problem. Last week’s passage of Proposition 73--the campaign reform initiative intended to limit the clout of wealthy special interests--means Robbins will have to spend that money by Jan. 1 or be unable to use it in any future election races.

Robbins said this week that he expects to employ some of the money to back ballot propositions--including one to raise the cigarette tax by 25 cents a pack--and support charities. He may also return some to contributors who, presumably, could give it back to him under Proposition 73 guidelines. Lawmakers will have these options both before and after Jan. 1, when most of the proposition’s provisions take effect.

A Headache

Proposition 73 presents another headache for Robbins as well. After Jan. 1, he will have to declare whether he intends to run for reelection to the Senate in 1990, or for supervisor. He will be prohibited from spending money raised next year on any other contest.

Robbins’ circumstances may be extreme, but they are not unique. Other San Fernando Valley-area lawmakers who have raised more money than they intend to spend this fall, or who are contemplating statewide races in 1990, also face some difficult--and unexpectedly early--decisions under Proposition 73.

Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sepulveda), for instance, is reportedly considering a 1990 bid for a statewide office, possibly lieutenant governor or secretary of state. And Assemblywoman Marian W. La Follette (R-Northridge) does not deny speculation that she may run for state superintendent of public instruction.

Under the old law, they could have begun raising money in January for either an Assembly reelection bid or a 1990 statewide campaign--without declaring their intentions.

In short, Proposition 73 has ushered in an era of campaign fund raising statewide and, with it, considerable uncertainty. Valley lawmakers are among those gnashing their teeth and scratching their heads.

Overall, three Valley senators and six Assembly members had a total of about $2.39 million available in their campaign funds as of the end of May, according to reports filed with the secretary of state.

War Chests

Seven of the nine lawmakers are seeking reelection this November, but none expect to face a highly competitive race. Their war chests range from Assemblyman Terry B. Friedman’s (D-Tarzana) $113,000 to Assemblyman Tom Bane’s (D-Tarzana) $685,000.

The only incumbent besides Robbins who is not up for election is state Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara). But Hart is running for Congress and expects to use whatever he raises this year to wage a million-dollar campaign.

Flyers Affected

Aside from the fund-raising issues, lawmakers awoke the morning after the June 7 primary to another unpleasant reality: Proposition 73 bans taxpayer-funded mailings or newsletters of more than 200 pieces. This provision, which took effect immediately, removes a tool for informing constituents as well as touting the incumbents’ accomplishments at public expense. Several Valley lawmakers said they expect to use campaign funds--perhaps excess money not spent this year if this is permitted--to send newsletters next year. Publicly funded mailings were already prohibited from the spring primary campaign through the November election.

“We need to do everything we can to keep constituents informed,” La Follette said. “It means there will be more and more people who will be less aware of how state government affects their lives.”

Katz said his office will no longer be able to send out publicly funded notices about free income tax assistance to the elderly or earthquake protection guides.

Not everyone bemoans this provision, however. State Sen. Ed Davis (R-Valencia), one of a handful of lawmakers who supported Proposition 73, bid good riddance to taxpayer-financed newsletters.

“No matter how you write it, it’s a self-promotion, and I don’t think taxpayers should pay for it,” Davis said. “It costs millions and millions of dollars.”

The mail issue’s sweeping language, however, sparked much uncertainty. On Thursday, the Fair Political Practices Commission released an interim opinion that essential government mailings--including tax bills and refunds, state workers’ pay checks, legal notices, utility bills and community college schedules--were exempted from the prohibition, commission spokeswoman Sandra Michioku said.

Suits Expected

Still, Valley lawmakers agreed that additional interpretations by the fairness panel and, eventually, lawsuits will probably be necessary to resolve the measure’s many ambiguities.

“Proposition 73 has passed too recently to fully understand what all its ramifications are going to be,” Friedman said. “Moreover, I think there are going to be some legal challenges.”

A key question is whether the law will succeed in making it more difficult for incumbents to raise large sums from well-heeled special interest groups. Some lawmakers predicted that both the interest groups and officeholders will find ways to circumvent key provisions.

“You cannot legislate reform when you’re dealing with people,” Assemblywoman Cathie Wright (R-Simi Valley) said. “It’ll take them awhile, but they’ll find a way around it.”

One reason for the uncertainty surrounding Proposition 73 is that a rival campaign-reform initiative, Proposition 68, received far more pre-election scrutiny. Proposition 68 also passed, but with a lesser majority, which means that Proposition 73 takes precedence wherever the two measures conflict. It is also unclear which provisions of Proposition 68 will take effect. The fairness commission’s legal staff is reviewing this issue, Michioku said.

One of those who anticipated the possible passage of Proposition 68 was Robbins. He had filed a statement with the secretary of state’s office in May allowing him to use his $828,000 campaign fund for the supervisor’s race under Proposition 68. But this action became futile when Proposition 73 received more votes.

Public Financing Ban

A major provision of Proposition 68 that will not take effect would have provided tax dollars to legislative candidates who agreed to abide by campaign spending limits. Proposition 73 expressely bans public campaign-financing.

After Jan. 1, Proposition 73 will limit contributions and loans to candidates from individuals and businesses to $1,000 each fiscal year, from small political committees to $2,500 and from broad-based political committees to $5,000. There are no statewide limits now.

The law also bans the transfer of campaign funds from one candidate to another, a widespread practice by the Assembly leadership of both parties.

Valley lawmakers generally maintained that these provisions will not hamper their future fund-raising because they do not rely on transfers from colleagues and they are supported by a broad range of local supporters rather than a coterie of fat cats who give them large sums.

Most Valley lawmakers, however, have reported receiving at least some individual, business and political committee contributions that exceed the Proposition 73 limits.

Despite overall distaste for the measure, several incumbents applauded the ban on transfers. One of those is Wright, who said she plans to contribute at least $115,000 to Assembly GOP candidates but only to help offset the large sums that Assembly Speaker Willie L. Brown Jr. (D-San Francisco) pours into Democratic campaigns.

Another is Robbins, who said he will stand firm against exhortations from the Senate’s Democratic leadership to channel some of his $828,000 to Democrats facing tough races.

“I have a number of contributors who I think would be unhappy if I rushed out and did that in big amounts,” Robbins said, alluding to his Republican supporters. “I’ve resisted that in the past.”

Robbins, who often operates as a lone wolf in the Senate, said he does not contemplate giving any money to Republicans, either. This includes embattled Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich, who has been pushed into a runoff against his predecessor, Democrat Baxter Ward. Robbins endorsed Antonovich in the primary.