Campaign Spending

Sen. Brian Frosh's comment that the $40 million raised so far by gambling interests in Maryland for the casino referendum constitutes "wretched excess" is incredibly naive ("Record $40 million raised for and against gambling referendum," Oct. 13). The amount of spending merely underlines that funding for all political campaigns will continue to escalate commensurate with the expansion and intrusion of the government at the federal and state level, as will corruption and crony capitalism, I might add. It is the natural state of affairs, and it is a bipartisan phenomenon.

WHEN THE federal campaign finance reforms were enacted 17 years ago in the wake of the Watergate scandal, they were hailed as the start of a new era of purity in American presidential elections. The sky would no longer be the limit in raising and spending money, as it had been up to then, and notably in Richard Nixon's no-holds barred rout of Democrat George McGovern in 1972.The reforms indisputably have cleaned up campaign finance in some important ways, among them reducing the direct influence of the old fat-cats who before 1974 were able to plunk down millions of their own money on a favorite candidate, as insurance tycoon W. Clement Stone of Chicago did for Nixon in 1972.

Jessie Mangual had been to B.J.'s Wholesale Club to buy 500 roles of Life Savers. She and her mother had affixed little campaign messages to each one. Her advance team had received their bright yellow T-shirts.Unfortunately, the school bus was an hour too late getting her to Havre de Grace High School yesterday.And so the 17-year-old Mangual, of Baltimore County's Carver Center for Arts and Technology, found herself trying to make up ground in her bid to win one of the most coveted positions a Maryland high school student can have: a spot on the 12-member, otherwise all-adult Maryland State Board of Education.

Four days before last fall's primary election, Del. James Campbell began getting calls from constituents concerned about his indifference to a planned march of Skinheads in Baltimore.This came as a surprise to Campbell, D-City, who said he has worked hard to keep the hate group out of his neighborhood, Hampden. But about 5,000 voters in his district got the opposite impression from some colorful brochures mailed to them."Even through Campbell lives in Hampden, he's done nothing meaningful to keep violent racists and anti-Semites off the streets of Baltimore," said the brochure, which was illustrated with swastikas and other Nazi symbols.

WASHINGTON -- In a case that President Clinton and campaign finance reform advocates hope will lead the Supreme Court to change its mind about spending ceilings, a federal appeals court struck down yesterday a Cincinnati mandatory ceilings law passed explicitly to put the justices to a test.A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, rebuffing the pleas of 24 states and a host of activist organizations who want to curb spending, said that the arguments in favor of caps on campaign outlays have been rejected by the Supreme Court for more than 20 years.

WASHINGTON -- If the phenomenal pace of political fund raising continues, candidates for federal office will spend about $3 billion in the 2000 campaigns, an increase of about $800 million from four years earlier, according to projections based on Federal Election Commission data. Gov. George W. Bush of Texas, who has raised an unprecedented $56 million in seven months, is hardly alone in reaping the benefits of this cash-flush political season. This year's fund-raising totals for House and Senate incumbents and the national political parties have shattered records, exceeding the most optimistic projections of chief fund-raisers and political operatives.

Evidently seeking a dapper look on the mayoral campaign trail, City Council President Lawrence A. Bell III spent $4,323 in campaign contributions on his wardrobe during an April trip to Saks Fifth Avenue in New York City.Bell's shopping trip -- which was legal under state law but drew barbed comments from some political observers -- was part of $475,800 his campaign spent through July 1. He has spent more than twice as much as either of his major rivals, Carl Stokes, who reported spending $200,262, and Martin O'Malley, who said he has spent $153,806, both for seven months.

GOTHAM'S HISTORY was changed yesterday. Michael Rubens Bloomberg's election as Rudolph W. Giuliani's successor marked the first time that two Republicans have been elected consecutively in New York, where Democrats hold a fivefold registration advantage. Mr. Bloomberg, an imaginative media tycoon (and chairman of the Johns Hopkins University board of trustees), spent a record $50 million of his own money to defeat Democrat Mark Green. In the end, though, it wasn't the money that mattered but New Yorkers' renewed interest in their city's future after Sept.

ST. PETE BEACH, Fla. - With about 250 hours to go before the polls open on Election Day, President Bush devoted two precious hours last night to privately courting donors for the Republican Party at a home in nearby St. Petersburg. Bush's decision to squeeze in a fund-raiser in the campaign's final days is a fitting exclamation point to an election season awash in cash. The major parties and their candidates are expected to spend a record-smashing $3.9 billion on campaigns for the White House and Congress, 30 percent more than they spent on federal elections four years ago, according to the nonpartisan watchdog group Center for Responsive Politics.

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court upheld a key provision of campaign finance law yesterday, ruling that limits on the amount of money political parties may spend in coordination with their candidates do not violate the First Amendment. The ruling could provide new momentum for congressional efforts to overhaul the nation's campaign finance laws. In a 5-4 decision, the court said that restrictions on the money the parties spend in concert with candidates are necessary to enforce other provisions of campaign finance law, specifically the limits on how much an individual or group can contribute to a candidate.