Campbell Raises Funds as He Urges Limits

On Capitol Hill, Rep. Tom Campbell (R-San Jose) has pushed for legislation to limit out-of-state contributions to federal candidates.

But in his U.S. Senate campaign, he has collected more than $70,000 from out-of-state donors and continues cross-country fund-raising that will generate tens of thousands more.

At the recent state Republican Party convention, Campbell also challenged Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein to return the campaign contributions that she has received from political action committees, or PACs.

But over the years, Campbell has collected more than $1 million in PAC money. And even after deciding in 1995 that he no longer would accept such contributions, he spent what was left rather than return it.

Although campaign reform has become a centerpiece of Campbell’s drive for the Republican nomination in the March 7 primary, he sees no clash between his words and his fund-raising practices.

It would be electoral suicide, said the professor turned politician, to practice what he espouses before campaign finance laws are changed. His proposal to limit out-of-state contributions, Campbell said, is “a suggestion for an improvement, [but it] cannot be applied in my own case without destroying the potential of a fair battle.”

Similarly, Campbell said, he sees nothing inconsistent in calling on Feinstein to surrender her PAC money, although he has benefited from such contributions in the past. “I am saying simply in this campaign I have made the decision not to accept PAC money,” he said, “and I would urge her to do the same.”

Polls suggest that Campbell is running ahead of state Sen. Ray Haynes (R-Riverside) and San Diego County Supervisor Bill Horn in the race for the GOP nomination, and campaign reports show that he is by far the leading fund-raiser, with almost $1.3 million at the beginning of the year.

The 47-year-old Campbell is, put simply, California’s maverick in Congress.

A Harvard-educated lawyer with a PhD in economics from the University of Chicago, he is best known in the Capitol for his professorial manner and his interest in constitutional law. No surprise, because he is a Stanford law professor who has continued to teach while serving in Congress.

But this Republican son of a well-known Democratic federal judge from Chicago is not bashful about turning political expectations on their ear.

Although it was not the popular thing to do in his Northern California district, Campbell voted for the impeachment of President Clinton. And when the Republican leadership rallied behind Newt Gingrich, Campbell voted against keeping Gingrich as House speaker.

Last year, he broke from GOP ranks more than any House member west of the Mississippi. He supports gun control and abortion. And the American Civil Liberties Union last year gave him slightly higher marks than Feinstein on issues involving social concerns and civil liberties.

Still, Campbell voted the party line 67% of the time last year, according to a Congressional Quarterly survey. For example, he opposed legislation giving patients the right to independent reviews of service denials by health plans--a right granted under recent California legislation. He also backs voluntary prayer in schools and opposes affirmative action.

Silicon Valley is the economic engine for Campbell’s district, but he has received mixed reviews from the computer industry.

He supported legislation making it harder for investors to file class-action stock fraud lawsuits, limiting liability in Y2K lawsuits and extending research and development tax credits. But he ran afoul of high-tech companies for, among other things, voting for a patent reform measure that the industry said would discourage innovation.

In 1997-98, Campbell received only a passing grade--70%--on the Information Technology Industry Council’s report card, which tracks votes on high-tech issues. Feinstein, who already has the support of some high-tech giants, received a 91% rating.

Despite a genteel manner, Campbell can be a firebrand. He led efforts in Congress to invoke the War Powers Act so congressional approval would be required for sending U.S. troops to Bosnia in 1998 and for the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.

His socially moderate views may serve him well in a November general election against the moderate Feinstein, but Campbell must first win the GOP primary. And he is banking in large part on his fiscal conservatism.

While campaigning, he boasts that he is the “Cheapest Man in Congress.” In fiscal 1999-2000, according to the National Taxpayers Union, no one in the House wrote or co-sponsored less legislation requiring federal spending than he did. In the Senate, Feinstein came out the No. 1 spender.

For a politician who has so tethered his candidacy to campaign reform, Campbell’s own record begs scrutiny.

At the recent GOP state convention, he not only defended his decision not to take PAC money but took aim at Feinstein’s fund-raising.

“Dianne Feinstein, if you are listening, give back the PAC money. You don’t need it,” he declared during a debate among the Republican candidates for Senate.

Although he has not accepted any PAC money in his last two campaigns, Campbell did carry over money from one congressional committee to another in 1996, and his campaign acknowledges that the money included PAC contributions.

He also is willing to accept contributions from the Republican Party and from congressional colleagues who accept PAC contributions. His recent report shows three $1,000 donations from fellow House members.

“There is no connection between the source of funds to the party and me,” he said. “Rather, the concern is that I might be indebted to the party [for its contributions]. . . . And there I rest on my record, which is one of singular independence.”

As for donations he received from other congressional committees, Campbell said, “I am not making use of other campaigns in order to wash or launder PAC contributions. An individual colleague in Congress who knows me well and wishes me well makes a contribution from his or her own [committee].”

Campbell also has continued to accept money from special interests that contribute as individuals, rather than as PACs.

In 1996, no House member reported receiving more money from PACs and individuals in the computer industry--$71,010--than Campbell, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. The PAC money was collected before his promise to stop collecting it.

That year, he also ranked second in donations from the securities industry, pulling in $198,375.

His most recent campaign report shows tens of thousands of dollars from attorneys and financial executives, such as Charles Schwab and Richard DeMartini, president and chief operating officer of Dean Witter.

Corporate executives and others who give as individuals are different from the “single-issue” PACs, as Campbell sees it. “David Packard probably contributed to me and helped me get started more by far because I was pro-choice than because I was good for the electronics industry,” he said, referring to the late high-tech executive who was one of his earliest political backers.

His change of heart on PAC contributions, Campbell said, results from a logical evolution of his views about what is acceptable.

“It’s the difference between whether the acceptance is inherently corrupt or whether I was making an improvement in trying to develop a new approach that would be better for the future,” he said.

“If I thought it was inherently corrupt, I would have never accepted [PAC money in the past]. . . .”

Campbell has sponsored a “Can’t Vote, Can’t Contribute” bill to limit out-of-state Senate campaign contributions to $100. Now, candidates for federal office are permitted to accept as much as $1,000 from individual donors, regardless of where they live.

“California candidates should limit themselves to California contributions,” Campbell said in 1996. “It’s Californians whose interests we should expect to represent.”

His most recent Senate campaign report shows that he collected more than $70,000 from out-of-state contributors in 1999, most in the weeks after he officially announced his candidacy Nov. 19. The total will soar as proceeds from fund-raisers this year--some $1,000-a-plate events--are officially reported.

A Jan. 19 Chicago event, hosted by his siblings, brought more than 100 guests to the city’s Tavern Club, according to campaign officials. More than $75,000 was raised.

The next night, Campbell had a $1,000-a-plate dinner at the University Club in New York City. That “Wall Street” event, according to Campbell’s campaign, drew about two dozen people but took in $50,000 because many attendees were bearing checks from supporters who could not attend.

“One should be allowed to put forward proposals to improve the system [without] a moral obligation to apply them in one’s own case,” Campbell said. “I think you will chill discussion and advocacy of necessary improvements.”

Librarian Paul Singleton contributed to this article.

Tom Campbell

Congressman and former state senator from Silicon Valley. Also Stanford law professor since 1987.

* Age 47

* Residence San Jose

* Education Law degree, Harvard, 1976. PhD in economics, University of Chicago, 1980

* Career highlights Voted for impeachment of President Clinton and against continued House speakership of Newt Gingrich. Pushed for California’s open primary.

* Interests Travel, “poorly made” movies, chocolate.

* Family Married for 23 years. No children.

* Quote “I am in the profession of politics because I feel it is a field where my background, interests and personal commitment can all come together to do something positive for the betterment of my country.”