Incumbents Have Big Lead When It Comes to Business PAC Donations

Thanks to contributions from the largest business-related political action committees, incumbent state legislators don’t have to fret about how they will finance their next election campaign.

That’s one reason they rarely lose in their bids for re-election. In 1988, only three state lawmakers lost their legislative seats.

Incumbents have a virtual lock on political contributions that come from business, which helps build political war chests that intimidate even the most formidable challenger.

In the 18 months ending June 30, the 25 largest business-related PACs donated less than 3% of their contributions to candidates who were challenging an incumbent, according to an analysis of reports filed with the Secretary of State’s Office. More than $5 million went to incumbents. But only $146,322 was contributed to challengers.

For example, the California Society of Certified Public Accountants doled out $177,050 to incumbents and only $2,000 to challengers. The California Grocers Assn. gave its entire political kitty of $106,175 to incumbent lawmakers.

The California Medical Assn. PAC was more generous to challengers, donating $41,672 to their coffers. But the medical group--the state’s largest political action committee--contributed $599,237 to incumbents.

“These days, there’s no risk taking in politics,” said Al Pross, who is executive director of the medical PAC. “Safe incumbents are like blue chip stocks. Why support losers?”

Firms Enlisting More Than One Lobby Team

Although many sectors of the economy are weakening, the lobbying industry continues to grow.

In the second quarter of this year, Sacramento lobbying firms took in more than $15 million in fees for their political handiwork--a 10% increase over the same period last year, according to reports filed with the Secretary of State’s Office.

One explanation for the strength of the political economy is the growing number of businesses that retain more than one lobbying firm. Companies that are determined to pack a punch in the state capital hire one lobbying outfit for its partisan persuasion, another for its grasp of an issue and another to push the right buttons with specific legislators.

Most businesses get along fine by hiring only one lobbying firm. But firms such as Alamo Rent A Car, for example, paid more than $55,000 in the second quarter to three firms that lobbied for the Ft. Lauderdale-based rental car company.

George R. Steffes Inc. earned a $20,376 fee from Alamo. Governmental Advocates Inc. was paid $20,000 for its lobbying services. Rose & Kindel charged Alamo $15,424 for legislative work.

Alamo’s lobbying firepower was used to rally legislators behind a bill that would reduce the fees that airports charge those rental car companies that do not have booths inside terminals.

Despite the substantial push, the company’s efforts failed to win legislative approval.

Other corporations that hire more than one lobbying company include Arco, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals and Irvine Co., each of which contracts with three Sacramento-based firms. Browning-Ferris Industries keeps four firms on retainer to do its political work.

“The Legislature has become so eclectic, with so many caucuses and sub-caucuses, that a team approach is sometimes necessary to get your message across,” explained Vigo Nielsen Jr., who heads up one of the largest lobbying enterprises in Sacramento. “The days are gone when one single lobbyist has a relationship with each member of the Assembly and the Senate,” he said.

Some firms are hired for their unique rapport with one of the two political parties or even for their relationship with a particular legislative committee chairman.

Also, some lobbyists specialize in legislative work, while others lobby the executive branch to change or revise regulations.

For example, some of the biggest fees are earned by firms that represent utility companies trying to influence the Public Utilities Commission’s decisions about proposed rate changes.

Southern California Gas Co., for instance, paid Nielsen’s firm $36,005 for work in the second quarter of 1990.

The passage of Proposition 103, the insurance reform measure, has contributed to a “boom” in lobbying, according to Nielsen. The 1988 initiative requires that the state insurance commissioner to approve rate changes on auto coverage. The insurance industry has retained a gaggle of lobbyists to represent its interests in these cases.

Can’t Live Without Our Budget Marathons

Assemblyman Richard E. Floyd (D-Carson) provided some comic relief during the political fracas over the state budget this summer when he introduced AB 3971.

Signed by Gov. George Deukmejian in August, the measure repealed a 1935 law that made it a misdemeanor for “any person to conduct or participate in any public marathon dance, walkathon, endurathon, speedathon or any public human endurance, dancing, running, skipping, jumping, sliding, gliding, rolling or crawling contest or exhibition.”

But it was legislative consultant Jim Provenza who delivered the punch line when he prepared an analysis of the bill that suggested one reason for preserving the 55-year-old law.

“It is noted that the recent interplay between the Legislature and the governor regarding the budget may arguably be defined as a “marathon dance” or “public endurance contest”--all activities discouraged by this (old) statute,” Provenza deadpanned.

THE LOCK ON CAMPAIGN FUNDS Contributions to incumbent state legislators from the state’s largest business political action committees.

Total % to in- PAC donations cumbents Cal. Med. Assn. PAC $640,909 93% Cal. Hospital PAC 395,488 99 Cal. Real Estate PAC 296,794 94 Cal. Optometric PAC 284,004 99 Cal. Dental PAC 280,713 97 Cal. Bankers Assn. 207,100 96 Cal. Cable TV Assn. 189,598 98

Period: Jan. 1, 1989 to June 30, 1990

Source: Secretary of State and Capitol Weekly Data