FBI Donor Got ‘Access,’ Carpenter Testifies : Corruption trial: The former state senator says that contributors are more likely to get personal meetings with politicians than are non-contributors.

Former state Sen. Paul Carpenter testified Monday that he gave an undercover FBI agent more personal attention and a higher degree of “access” because the agent had become a major campaign contributor.

In his second day on the witness stand, the Norwalk Democrat also said that individuals who give money to politicians are often able to talk directly with their elected officials while others who do not contribute are excluded from the legislative process.

“People who contribute frequently get a different level of access,” Carpenter said. “That’s the real world. . . . He (the undercover agent) would not have had the access he did have, had he not been a contributor.”

For years, legislators have maintained that “access” is all they give in exchange for campaign donations--making themselves available to wealthy special-interest contributors and their lobbyists.

But with the Carpenter trial, federal prosecutors are challenging that practice. They contend that giving increased access to wealthy donors--and refusing to talk with individuals who do not contribute--is a violation of federal extortion laws.

Carpenter, now a member of the State Board of Equalization, is on trial on four counts of racketeering, extortion and conspiracy stemming from an undercover sting investigation of corruption in the state Capitol.

The senator has defended himself by pointing out that he did not vote for a dummy FBI bill pushed by the undercover agent, John E. Brennan, who contributed $20,000 to the senator’s campaign. But prosecutors charge that Carpenter used his position to help the agent while refusing similar assistance to those who did not contribute to his campaign.

Gerard Hinckley, Carpenter’s attorney, moved Monday for a mistrial. He argued that the jury may have been prejudiced by news reports of the continuing corruption investigation.

Last week, while the Carpenter trial was in session, Assemblywoman Gwen Moore (D-Los Angeles) voluntarily testified in secret before a federal grand jury that is continuing the corruption probe.

Moore’s name has come up frequently in the Carpenter trial because she was the official author of a dummy FBI bill designed to give a tax break to a phony Alabama shrimp company. Carpenter acknowledged last week that he talked privately with Moore and advised her on how to win Senate passage of the bill.

Although she is cooperating with investigators, the assemblywoman remains a target of the investigation.

Hinckley suggested that prosecutors had timed Moore’s appearance in an attempt to generate publicity and influence the jury in the Carpenter case. Assistant U.S. Atty. John Panneton, however, said Moore’s appearance at a closed session of the grand jury was in no way intended to affect the Carpenter trial.

U.S. District Judge Edward Garcia requested additional information about the incident from both attorneys and said he would consider the motion for a mistrial.

During Monday’s testimony, Carpenter sparred with Panneton over the meaning of secretly tape-recorded statements the senator made to agent Brennan.

But Carpenter insisted that he did nothing specific to help win passage of the shrimp company bill that Brennan was pushing.

Carpenter, who says he suspected he was the target of an FBI sting, told the jury that he purposely avoided voting for the bill so that he could not later be prosecuted for taking a bribe.

“The reason I did not vote for the bill was that I did not want to be sitting here,” Carpenter said from the witness stand. “If I did vote for it, I thought I would have difficulty defending myself from the accusation that my vote had been bought.”

Carpenter, who left the Senate in 1986, also testified that he was aware that some lawmakers used legislation to extract money from contributors.

At times, he said, certain lawmakers would create a “tollgate,” holding up a bill until they received a contribution from its backers. The senator, however, did not identify any legislators that he believed engaged in this practice.

At one point during his testimony, Carpenter explained that giving increased access to campaign contributors is part of the legislative process. “To deny it or pretend it doesn’t exist is fallacious,” he said. “. . . If I didn’t have time to see everybody, I would see a contributor before a non-contributor.”