Scrapping of Campaign Finance System Urged

The state’s system for financing political campaigns is now in such disarray that it should be scrapped and replaced by a comprehensive new program to regulate fund-raising, the sponsor of one of two voter-approved election financing initiatives said Thursday.

In exchange for a negotiated solution to the campaign finance dispute, California Common Cause would be willing to give up some provisions of its initiative that were upheld this week by the state Court of Appeal, said Walter Zelman, the organization’s director.

“We’re glad we won, but we’re not zealots,” said Zelman, spokesman for the sponsors of Proposition 68. “We recognize that it would be healthier if we could all get together and try to craft a comprehensive program where the pieces all fit together.”

Some Assessments

If the ruling stands as is, several lawmakers and political consultants said in interviews, it would handicap challengers to such an extent that incumbents would be virtually guaranteed reelection unless they committed some heinous act.

“We could effectively abolish elections and save ourselves the expense,” said Sal Russo, a consultant who works for Republican candidates. “I think this is a disaster for representative democracy.”

Democratic strategist David Townsend said the new restrictions will keep most challengers from raising enough money to mail more than a single campaign pamphlet to each voter in their districts.

“The incumbents ought to be dancing in the streets,” Townsend said.

The object of the criticism was a ruling by a panel of three judges--two appointed by Republican Gov. George Deukmejian--upholding several provisions of Proposition 68, which was approved by the voters in June, 1988. Most of the initiative had been put on hold by the state Fair Political Practices Commission because another campaign finance measure, Proposition 73, received more votes in the same election.

Effect of Decision

The court decision reinstated three parts of Proposition 68: a ban on campaign fund-raising in non-election years, a limit on the amount of money candidates can accept from corporations, labor unions and political action committees, and a cap on the total amount that those groups can contribute to campaigns.

These regulations, the court held, should take effect alongside Proposition 73’s restrictions, which banned transfers of campaign money from one politician to another and limited contributions to $1,000 from individuals and corporations and $5,000 from broad-based political action committees.

The ruling did not allow enactment of Proposition 68’s provisions calling for partial taxpayer financing of legislative campaigns. Zelman said he still holds out hope that the Legislature will approve a plan for public financing and submit it to the voters.

Zelman said he believes that the law as it now stands will not help incumbents. But he said Proposition 68’s provision limiting Assembly candidates to a total of $50,000 from corporations, labor unions and political action committees might be “too tough” a standard without public financing. Senate candidates would be limited to $75,000 from those groups.

Negotiate Changes

He said Common Cause might be willing to negotiate changes in those limits as well as the ban on fund-raising in non-election years if lawmakers will agree to public financing. The entire package would be submitted to the voters in 1990, Zelman said.

But Sen. Quentin Kopp (I-San Francisco), one of three legislative authors of the competing Proposition 73, said such a deal is not in the works. Asked when legislators could be expected to adopt taxpayer financing for campaigns, he replied: “Never.”

Whether or not there is an agreement, the court decision is scheduled to go into effectOct. 1 unless it is delayed by an appeal to the California Supreme Court. The FPPC, the loser in the case, is considering an appeal but is also preparing regulations to implement the decision, a spokeswoman said.

Assembly Republican Leader Ross Johnson of La Habra and a San Francisco law firm that has represented Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) are also considering asking the Supreme Court to review the case along with several others that are pending on the issue.

Ruling Called ‘Bizarre’

Brown, who termed the ruling “bizarre,” has already raised nearly $600,000 this year and plans a major fund-raiser at a Sacramento sports arena on Aug. 23. Together, members of the Assembly collected nearly $7 million in the first six months of the year--$1 million more than they raised in 1987, the last non-election year.

Zelman and others predicted that companies and lobbyists who have interests before the Legislature can expect a “barrage” of invitations to fund-raisers before the Oct. 1 deadline set by the court decision.

“I’d sure hate to be a lobbyist next week,” Townsend said.

Times staff writer Clay Evans contributed to this article.