Campaign Law Aids Wealthy, Advisor Testifies

SACRAMENTO —  The trial over California’s campaign reform initiative opened Wednesday in federal court with one top campaign consultant warning that contribution limits will give an advantage to wealthy candidates such as multimillionaire Democrat Al Checchi.

The testimony by consultant William Carrick was used to buttress a legal challenge filed by the state Democratic and Republican parties, opponents of last November’s Proposition 208. They contend that the law violates their rights to free speech and political association.

Proposition 208’s centerpiece is a limitation on the size of political contributions to state and local candidates, a restriction that backers of the law contend will curb what they call the corruptive influence of big money on government policy.

The measure, put on the ballot by Common Cause and the League of Women Voters, is one of three political initiatives being challenged in the courts. The others include a law creating open primary elections and a 1990 statute establishing term limits for legislators.

Proposition 208 restricts contributions by individual citizens, business and labor organizations and political action committees to $250 for legislative and local candidates and $500 to candidates for statewide office such as governor.

The measure also seeks to limit the influence of political money by prohibiting lobbyists from making or arranging contributions, outlaws transfers of contributions between candidates, and subjects violators to criminal penalties.

However, Proposition 208 did not impose spending limitations on candidates who use personal funds for their campaigns. The courts have ruled that spending limits on self-financed candidates violate the U.S. Constitution.

In testifying Wednesday, Carrick, a professional campaign media and advertising manager for big name Democrats, said that the contribution limits would make it virtually impossible for gubernatorial competitors to win against Checchi, a multimillionaire Democrat.

Carrick said that Checchi’s personal wealth would put former White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta at a severe disadvantage and would shove Lt. Gov. Gray Davis’ campaign out of reach of winning. Davis has announced that he is running; Panetta has not decided yet.

Carrick, who ran Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s 1994 reelection campaign against multimillionaire Republican Michael Huffington, testified that virtually any of the announced or potential Democratic contenders for governor next year would wage an uphill battle against Checchi’s personal fortune, which has been estimated at $550 million.

Checchi, former co-chairman of Northwest Airlines, formally announced his candidacy last month.

In response to questions from attorney Joe Remcho, representing opponents of Proposition 208, Carrick estimated that a competitive campaign for governor typically costs about $20 million in California, most of it for television commercials.

“He has indicated he is prepared to spend $30 million to $50 million [of his own funds]. He is constitutionally protected to do that,” Carrick said of Checchi.

Carrick cited Panetta, the former chief of staff to President Clinton, and Davis as contenders who would be handcuffed by contribution limits.

Panetta “would be put at a severe disadvantage” and would have “little prospect of waging a successful campaign in a competitive environment,” Carrick testified.

Carrick said that although Davis has compiled a campaign treasury of about $4 million, “Mr. Checchi has basically taken the campaign out of his reach. . . . He cannot possibly compete in that environment.”

A Times poll published Sunday showed that if the June primary were held today, Checchi would be favored by only 1% of registered voters. The same poll showed Davis supported by 11% of voters. When Democratic front-runner Feinstein was removed from the survey, Panetta received 12%.

The nonjury trial is being heard by U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton, who in 1990 struck down an earlier initiative that limited campaign contributions.

The judge had initially indicated he would rule quickly. But Wednesday he said that the Proposition 208 case was one of the most complex he had faced in nearly 20 years on the bench and that reaching a decision would take longer than he had anticipated.

“Don’t hold your breath,” he told the attorneys, who expect the trial to take several days.