CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS GOVERNOR : Wilson Maintains Edge as Both Sides Keep Up Fast Fund-Raising Pace

President Bush arrives in Los Angeles today to serve as the most visible foot soldier in a fund-raising battle between Pete Wilson and Dianne Feinstein, who together expect to raise and spend more than $25 million in their quest for the governorship.

With two events--a dinner tonight in Los Angeles and lunch Wednesday in San Francisco--Bush will probably bring $2 million in contributions to Wilson’s campaign, the Republican senator’s campaign director said. First Lady Barbara Bush is expected to raise another $250,000 in the first week of October during a two-day trip here.

The fund-raisers, campaign aides say, keep on track Wilson’s effort to bring in $16 million to $18 million by Election Day.

“From a budget dynamic, we feel we’re pretty much on target,” said Otto Bos, Wilson’s campaign director.

Feinstein’s campaign said the Democrat’s comparatively modest effort to raise $10 million for the general election race is also on target, with more than $1.5 million expected in profits from two early October fund-raisers alone.

Since the primary, Feinstein also has succeeded in persuading 2,000 donors to become members of her “California Cabinet,” a fund-raising club that requires a $1,000 contribution for membership.

“We will certainly have enough to be competitive,” said Dee Dee Myers, Feinstein’s press secretary.

Past experience gives Wilson the edge in fund raising. According to reports filed with the secretary of state’s office, his campaign has been raising money at twice the pace of Feinstein. Last month, the most recent period for which records were available, Wilson had $3.9 million in the bank and Feinstein had $645,000. Since then, each has launched costly television campaigns, leaving in question the amounts they have left.

The candidates are not required to file updated financial statements until Oct. 5, and they are closely guarding the amount they are taking in and spending until then.

Mindful of financial pressures in a state where expensive television commercials can dictate success, both campaigns have maintained a furious money-raising pace. A partial list of Feinstein’s Northern California fund-raisers has her conducting 20 such events in 13 days, beginning last Tuesday.

“We are doing fund-raising events and phone calls (to solicit donations) every single day,” Myers said.

Wilson’s schedule is similar. For the week that began Wednesday, he has scheduled nine fund-raisers, press spokesman Bill Livingstone said.

The Republican’s fund-raising muscles have been well exercised in recent years. He raised $16 million for his Senate reelection in 1988, and followed that by raising $8.2 million in 1989, a non-election year. The latter figure represents 80% of Feinstein’s projected budget for the entire general election campaign.

Throughout the campaign, Feinstein’s aides have made no secret of the hand-to-mouth nature of their effort.

“We’re spending money,” said her campaign director, Bill Carrick. “It’s been sort of our intention to keep running on empty.”

But Feinstein also wants to avoid tumbling into the abyss in which her Democratic rival, Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp, found himself during the primary. As the election closed in, Van de Kamp had to suspend several days of public campaigning to court donors. As a result, he disappeared from the television screens and newspaper columns when he most needed news coverage.

The former San Francisco mayor does have a fiscal weapon--her own family finances. But Wilson’s persistent questioning about the sources of income of her husband, Richard C. Blum, could raise the risk of political fallout if Blum again bails out her campaign.

Blum, who with Feinstein advanced about $3 million to her campaign in the primary, recently told reporters that he hoped not to be tapped again. But he refused to rule out future donations, saying with a smile that he wanted to “leave the suspense” intact.

Wilson’s current job has given him strong leverage in his fund-raising effort. If he wins, he will be governor, and if he loses he will be senator for four more years before standing again for election. In either case, he is well positioned to affect California industries.

To play against the incumbency edge, Feinstein’s campaign has long portrayed Wilson as using his Senate seat to benefit his contributors. Most recently, she tried to show that Wilson had acted on behalf of the savings and loan industry after receiving more than $243,000 in campaign contributions from thrift connections in the past nine years.

In an article that played to that theme, the Wall Street Journal last week reported that a Wilson aide had helped set up a meeting between movie industry officials and a Justice Department attorney, after which the department re-evaluated a legal ruling that had hurt the industry.

The meeting occurred a month before movie industry officials held a $250,000 fund-raiser for Wilson, the Journal reported. An irked Wilson said that the two were not connected and added that he has been actively helping the movie industry since he assumed office in 1983.

“I have been more than happy to seek the legitimate interest of any number of California industries who employ hundreds and thousands of Californians and I do that because it is my job,” Wilson told reporters at a press conference last week. “ . . . I clearly wouldn’t favor seeking a goal that I did not think legitimate.”

Asked directly if he traded favors for campaign contributions, Wilson responded. “No, I do not.”

But, he added, “I would hardly expect them to want to give to an opponent when someone has done a good job.”