THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, August 3, 1996 TAG: 9608030380
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B3 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DAVID M. POOLE, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: 103 lines
Del. Earl Dickinson was a popular guy at last winter's General Assembly session, thanks to his new status as chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee.
His ninth-floor office was a destination for corporate lobbyists, college presidents and anyone else seeking special consideration in the state's $35 billion budget.
Most came with hat in hand; a few brought campaign contributions.
Virginia is one of 26 states where lawmakers can accept special-interest money while voting on matters affecting the same interests.
A Virginian-Pilot computer survey shows that 37 of 140 state lawmakers reported at least one contribution during the 1996 General Assembly session from Jan. 10 to March 11.
A legislative subcommittee studying campaign finance reform may recommend closing that loophole, which critics say can create the perception of corporations buying favor or lawmakers shaking down special interests.
``I think (changing the law) is something that will clear the air,'' said John ``Butch'' Davies, a Culpeper Democrat who chairs the subcommittee.
Critics say prohibiting contributions during the General Assembly would do little to dilute the influence of corporate money. Lobbyists would continue to wine and dine lawmakers. And lawmakers could get around the law by scheduling fund-raising events just before or after the session, which is becoming standard for some legislators.
The situation in the part-time General Assembly is nothing like that in the full-time U.S. Congress, where special interests tend to increase their contributions when a bill of interest is being considered.
In Richmond, state lawmakers reported contributions during the session totaling $51,605, a fraction of what candidates raised during the first six months of the year.
Nonetheless, citizen-action groups contend a ban on contributions during Assembly sessions would be a good first step toward reform. ``It's fresh grease for the wheels,'' said Julie Lapham, director of Common Cause of Virginia.
In January, two heavy-hitters contributed $500 each to Dickinson's campaign as he was settling in as chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, which holds sway on budget matters.
Trigon Blue Cross Blue Shield - looking for a legislative blessing of its conversion to a for-profit insurance company - gave $500 to Dickinson's campaign fund a few days before the General Assembly convened in January.
John ``Til'' Hazel, a Northern Virginia dealmeister pushing for a budget windfall for higher education, contributed $500 to Dickinson's campaign Jan. 15.
Dickinson, a Louisa Democrat, said those contributions had no bearing on the way he helped shape the budget. ``I think it could treat it just as if the money had come during the election in November,'' he said.
Trigon was the most generous contributor during the session, giving out $3,500 to six lawmakers.
A Trigon spokeswoman said the checks came in response to lawmakers' requests and were not part of the company's $134,000 lobbying strategy. ``Your findings are coincidental,'' Vanessa Scherzer said. ``There was no effort to target that period of time. What we do is respond to fund-raising requests.''
Senate Finance co-chairman Stanley C. Walker held the biggest fundraiser during the Assembly, raising $12,500 from 24 corporate lobbyists Jan. 11. The guests included Pittston Coal Co., which was planning to ask Walker's committee to endorse a $188 million tax break for the state's coal industry.
Walker, a Norfolk Democrat, said he tried to be sensitive to public perception by scheduling the event for Jan. 8, two days before the Assembly convened. A snowstorm delayed it until the second day of the session.
In hindsight, Walker said, he should not have tapped lobbyists so close to the session.
``I think the public is asking for more restrictions on campaign spending,'' Walker said. ``I think the general view is that it is beginning to get out of hand.''
Banning campaign contributions during legislative sessions is one recommendation that a House Privileges and Elections subcommittee may forward to the 1997 Assembly.
Twenty-four states have restrictions that range from a ban on contributions from lobbyists to total prohibition from all sources. North Carolina and Maryland both bar lobbyist contributions while the legislature is in session.
At a July 12 organizational meeting, members of the House subcommittee appeared open to the idea of restrictions for individual lawmakers during sessions.
Members were less enthusiastic about extending the restrictions to Democratic and Republican caucus organizations, which provide lawmakers and challengers timely help during elections.
The Commonwealth Victory Fund, a Democratic group, reported contributions of $565,487 during the first six months of 1996. The Joint Republican Caucus raised $360,283 during the same period.
Del. John Watkins, R-Chesterfield, said it's no coincidence that both organizations raise money from special interests during the General Assembly session.
``I can tell you both parties say, `You've got them (lobbyists) right where you want them,' '' Watkins said. ``I think it's terrible, I really do.''
Davies, the subcommittee chairman, replied that it would take ``some real salesmanship'' to get the Assembly to tinker with political party fund raising.
Not all subcommittee members agreed that there is a need to tighten campaign finance laws.
``I haven't heard a hue and cry about campaign contributions,'' said Del. Kenneth R. Melvin, D-Portsmouth. ``We have a few do-gooder groups, and the media is concerned.''
KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY LOBBYIST SPECIAL INTEREST SURVEY
POLL CAMPAIGN FINANCING by CNB