news-record.com

RALEIGH — To become a legislator and have the responsibility of unraveling the thicket of problems surrounding the state budget, one first has to run for office.

And to run for office, candidates need to raise money from some of the same people who have an abiding interest in the decisions made about that state budget.

That’s a problem, according to government watchdog Democracy North Carolina, which says the state’s top 36 most generous political action committees, or PACs, will be looking for a return on the $7 million they invested during the 2008 campaign cycle.

“The PACs apparently believe it’s in their interest to give a lot of money as an investment in something,” said Bob Hall, who heads Democracy North Carolina. “They’re definitely trying to ingratiate themselves with an expectation that they’re going to get something back.”

This is not a new story. It has long been the case that interests that could be affected by actions at the General Assembly give to political campaigns.

But Hall said this year’s budget situation makes that long-standing practice particularly troublesome.

The state is facing what Democrats, who control the House and the Senate, describe as a $4 billion budget deficit. There are questions about which taxes will be raised and which programs will be cut to balance the state’s books.

The question Hall raises is this: Will legislators be willing to hurt the interest of big political donors to balance the budget and not harm those who don’t have a big voice in the political process, such as the poor or mentally ill?

One example of the potential conflict comes in the fight over how to raise more money.

Tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds gave $88,000 to state-level candidates in 2008, including $8,000 to Sen. Linda Garrou, a Winston-Salem Democrat and chief budget writer. That doesn’t count money RJR executives gave to Garrou.

Garrou has been a staunch and outspoken opponent of raising tobacco taxes in North Carolina.

“I happen to live in Winston-Salem,” Garrou said. The city is RJR’s corporate headquarters, and the two have long historical ties. “People support you because they believe you’re honest, and you work hard and you try to do the right thing. I’m not naïve enough to think that’s the only reason, but I’ll just tell you I think we’re down here trying to do a good job and I’m trying to protect things that are important to Winston-Salem.”

It’s the chicken-and-egg problem of modern American politics. Do campaign donations chase politicians with certain policies, or are politicians swayed by donors?

Rep. Earl Jones, who was a key to defeating a proposal to raise the state’s tobacco tax and raise the tax on beer in the House version of the budget, says it is the former.

During the 2008 campaign cycle, Jones received donations from the PACs associated with Greensboro-based cigarette-maker Lorillard and the state’s beer and wine wholesalers.

“It has no influence on me,” Jones said. “You establish a track record based on principle.”

Jones says that it is traditionally the people who raise vast sums that end up finding themselves in trouble. He reported raising less than $10,000 during the last election cycle.

Still, $10,000 sounds like a lot to everyday people, said Bob Phillips, who heads the North Carolina chapter of Common Cause.

His group has advocated for public financing of elections as a way to remove apparent conflicts from politics.

“If it’s not reality, it sure is a perception that special interests are buying influence with their campaign contributions,” Phillips said.

Frank Lester, a spokesman for RJR, said campaign contributions don’t sway a politician’s mind.

Rather, he said, RJR picks politicians to support based on their positions.

“There are legislators that share our opinions, that see us as a valuable industry in this state. ... We try to support them,” Lester said.

Other high-dollar political donors have said contributions provide access to legislators, a chance to make their case. Often, contributions are given in connection with a reception or other event where the politician will mingle with contributors.

And to be sure, tobacco isn’t the only big campaign donor that is watching the budget closely. Examples from Hall’s report:

lThe PAC that represents the state’s nonprofit hospitals gave more than $300,000 during the 2008 cycle. It has been fighting an effort to limit how much of a sales tax refund nonprofits can claim.

lProgress Energy and Duke Power are among the state’s top 10 PACs. The state House has been reluctant to accept a proposal that would raise $130 million per year by raising the sales tax on electricity.

lCitizens for High Education, a PAC affiliated with UNC, gave $479,000, a record for giving to legislative candidates.

They have fought efforts to repeal a tuition break for scholarship athletes that saves booster clubs millions of dollars per year.

In almost every case, the line between public policy and politics is blurry.

For example, many legislators run on a platform of supporting public schools by reducing class size and raising teacher salaries. In the current budget negotiations, “preserving classroom spending” has become a mantra for many legislators.

But the N.C. Association of Educators, an employee group for teachers, is among the state’s biggest PAC givers and often provides manpower for campaigns.

“At the least, it does complicate things,” Hall said. “It’s confusing to the public whether what’s being considered is purely in the public interest. The school teachers’ lobby does put in a lot of money and they have a lot of clout. Whether the school children have a lot of clout is another matter. That’s part of what you have to worry about.”

Political donors don’t just give directly to candidates but to party committees that help elect members of the House and Senate. The educators, for example, reported giving $17,500 to the N.C. House Democratic Committee during the 2008 campaign cycle.

But Rep. Hugh Holliman, a Lexington Democrat and the House majority leader, said that giving on any scale doesn’t have as much impact as voters might think.

That’s particularly true, he said, on difficult pieces of legislation like this year’s budget, where there are more immediate concerns than the problems donors might have, such as rounding up the necessary votes.

“To be quite honest, we look at it in terms of how many votes do we lose in our own caucus if we do one thing or the other,” Holliman said. 

Contact Mark Binker at (919) 832-5549 or mark.binker@news-record.com