GOP Is Divided Over Baugh’s Political Future : Politics: New assemblyman’s career hinges on the truth about an envelope containing $1,000 cash, a contribution he returned to ex-rival Laurie Campbell’s husband, the party faithful say.

Republican Party supporters are offering a mixed prognosis on the political future of newly elected Assemblyman Scott Baugh, with most hard-bitten partisans standing by him, while others step to the sidelines.

Lincoln Club Vice President Dale Dykema, a prominent figure in Orange County Republican circles, offered a candid assessment of Baugh’s situation. Dykema, who gave Baugh a key endorsement in the November race for the 67th Assembly seat in northwest Orange County, said he is “very disappointed” with the news that Baugh had returned in cash a $1,000 contribution from former Democratic candidate Laurie Campbell’s husband, Rick, and that Baugh did not tell the truth about his longtime friendship with the couple.

It is illegal in California for a campaign to receive or make any payments in excess of $100 in cash, according to a spokesman for the Fair Political Practices Commission. The contribution also was omitted on three financial disclosure forms, appearing only on a form filed Nov. 28--three hours before the polls closed.

The transaction was also controversial because Democrats have accused Laurie Campbell of being a “stealth candidate,” recruited by Republicans to dilute the vote for a popular Democrat in the race, former Huntington Beach Mayor Linda Moulton-Patterson. Republican leaders and Baugh have insisted that they had nothing to do with Campbell’s candidacy, which ended when a judge removed her name from the ballot a month before election after finding that she had filed falsified nomination papers.

Baugh, a Huntington Beach attorney and political unknown, won the race to replace Assemblywoman Doris Allen (R-Cypress), whom voters ousted from office in the same election. Republicans had launched the recall drive because of Allen’s collaboration with the Democrats in her ascendancy to the Assembly speakership.

“It certainly concerns me that apparently Scott knew Laurie Campbell better than he had indicated earlier,” said Dykema, who next year is scheduled to become president of the Lincoln Club, an influential group of millionaires who donate to Republican causes. “That would seem to be an unnecessary untruth and so I have a concern, a deep concern.”

Dykema said Baugh’s short-term political survival depends on whether the assemblyman or his campaign treasurer is telling the truth about the sealed envelope that Baugh handed to the Campbells at his home a few hours after Laurie Campbell entered the race Sept. 21.

Baugh declined to comment. His lawyer, Ron Brower, has said the legislator was unaware that the envelope, which had been given to him by campaign treasurer Dan Traxler, contained $1,000 in cash rather than a check, as required for a campaign contribution of that sum. Robert Rinehart, a lawyer for Traxler, said his client “got cash because Baugh told him to get cash.”

Of Baugh’s political future, including the primary he faces in March, Dykema said: “That one is a little tougher to deal with. It wouldn’t surprise me if he didn’t survive that.”

In addition to hiding his relationship with the Campbells, Baugh failed to disclose the contribution from Rick Campbell on three state-required financial disclosure forms. Baugh’s Republican and Democratic opponents contend that he hid the contribution because his campaign fostered the Campbell candidacy and needed to conceal links between the two.

Haydee Tillotson, a Republican who was persuaded to withdraw from the race because of GOP fears that Moulton-Patterson might win, said it is impossible to know “where the truth is.”

“But we must keep in mind that from the very beginning of the campaign, Baugh was lying,” she said. “He started out by lying about himself.”

Jeff Flint, chief of staff to Assembly Republican Leader Curt Pringle, said Baugh will survive the controversy. “I believe Baugh is telling the truth and will not be removed form office and he will win the primary in March,” Flint said.

Dave Gilliard, Baugh’s campaign consultant, said “Scott did nothing wrong.”

“There may be some problems with [campaign finance reports] but it can be attributed to inexperience and just bumbling,” Gilliard said. “I don’t think that will derail what looks like a very promising political career.”

Gilliard said that people in Sacramento “are quite surprised the district attorney is going this heavy on what looks like something that is not all that major. . . . The Democrats and the L.A. Times have hyped this so much the D.A. has no choice.”

Former Newport Beach Assemblyman Gil Ferguson, one of the few local Republican leaders to support Allen in her recall battle, said he was “repulsed” by the recent disclosures involving Baugh. Ferguson is heading toward a March Republican primary battle with state Sen. Ross Johnson for the 35th District Senate seat.

Baugh “has lied about every single step of his candidacy,” Ferguson said. “If there is any justice at all, he should spend more time in jail than he does in the Assembly.”

Dick Rosengarten, who edits a statewide political newsletter, said he did not expect Baugh to remain in office beyond this term:

“At the best, he is going to have FPPC problems because the contribution from Campbell was concealed and because of the dealing in cash, which is illegal. At worst, the district attorney could go after him and he would have to forfeit his office.”

Rosengarten questioned the political wisdom of Baugh’s chief backer, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, who discovered and championed the 33-year-old political novice. “What does this say about Dana Rohrabacher and his choice of people? It speaks poorly of Dana and his judgment of character.”

A staff member in Rohrabacher’s Washington office said late Friday that the congressman was unavailable for comment throughout the weekend. But in a letter to The Times published today, Rohrabacher describes the controversy as “making mountains out of molehills” and accuses the newspaper of criminalizing mistakes by first-time candidates.