Thursday, February 15, 2001

Joe Hallett
Dispatch Politics Editor

American poet Emily Dickinson penned this ditty:

A word is dead when it is said, some say.

I say, it just begins to live that day.

In her day, the 19th century, Dickinson obviously never heard a word about campaign reform.

Last year in Ohio, the issue elicited countless words -- all apparently dead now.

Blistered by the public outrage over fund-raising scandals and an anything-goes campaign season, Ohio politicians scrambled over one another last year to pledge support for political reform; just let us get past the Nov. 7 election, they pleaded.

Now that the heat is off, the promises have been put on the back burner.

Gov. Bob Taft has delivered his State of the State address and laid out a $44.9 billion two-year budget, and more than 100 bills have been introduced in the General Assembly -- yet nary a word has been said about campaign reform.

"Maybe I was a little naive to think that shame would lead to action,'' said Catherine Turcer, campaign-finance reform director for Ohio Citizen Action, a nonprofit government-watchdog group.

"Nothing's happened, has it? There's a surprise,'' Ohio Democratic Party Chairman David J. Leland said, mocking Republicans in control of state government.

But some of those Republicans, particularly Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, say they haven't forgotten about campaign problems last year, particularly the hidden political contributions, and are committed to addressing them.

"Don't worry,'' he said. "It'll get done.''

Chances are, though, Blackwell won't be around to do it. He soon might leave the secretary of state's office for a State Department post in the Bush administration.

"We're getting a lot of fingerprints on this,'' Blackwell said. "This will not be a one-man show. This will be a movement.''

So far, there has been no sign of movement.

No campaign-reform legislation has been introduced, and Blackwell and House Speaker Larry Householder, a Glenford Republican, have a higher priority.

Before they address campaign reform, both said, they want to pass House Bill 5, which is aimed at reforming the state's election system by, among other things, codifying standards for counting pesky punch- card ballots.

Confident that "legislators can walk and chew gum at the same time,'' however, Turcer sees no need to delay work on campaign reform.

"I do think people remember last year's campaign, and I hope they don't confuse all the election reform in the works with campaign reform,'' she said.

Foremost on the list of campaign reforms sought by Citizen Action, Blackwell and party leaders is full disclosure of contributions to all campaign and political-party funds. Events of last year showed that current Ohio law contains gaping loopholes in campaign-funds reporting requirements.

That became evident in April when a fund-raising letter signed by Taft was made public. In the letter from the Ohio Republican Party dated Sept. 10, 1999, Taft offered seats in his Ohio Stadium box for an Ohio State football game in exchange for $50,000 contributions to Team Ohio, an exclusive donor club.

Taft and the Ohio GOP said no donors took advantage of the offer, but that contention was impossible to verify because most Team Ohio contributions went into a fund used to operate the party. Unlike party political funds, the operating account can receive unlimited donations without being reported.

After the scandal broke, Taft promised to refrain from such fund- raising activities and was joined by legislative and party leaders in supporting full disclosure of parties' operating accounts.

Rep. David Robinson, a Columbus Republican, introduced House Bill 728 to require political parties to report contributions to and expenditures from operating accounts. The bill died, Robinson was defeated in the November election, and his bill has not been reintroduced in the current two-year legislative session.

Blackwell said there is "no real dissent'' against legislation requiring that operating money be reported. But early indications are that such a bill could bog down in the perennial sniping between Republicans and Democrats over the reporting of labor-union contributions.

Mary Anne Sharkey, spokeswoman for Taft, said the governor still favors disclosure of party operating accounts "as long as the Democrats disclose contributions from labor unions.''

Ohio Republican Party Chairman Robert T. Bennett and other GOP leaders are convinced that the state Democratic Party is hiding contributions from unions.

Bennett charged that labor unions provide get-out-the-vote, voter-education and other services for the Democratic Party that aren't reported as contributions.

Although the GOP has to solicit donations for such activities, Bennett said, "The labor unions are the infrastructure of the Democratic Party.''

Nonsense, Leland replied.

"All of our books are open,'' he said. "Every dime we spend is open to the public. What they're saying is categorically false.''

Such disagreements suggest that legislation requiring disclosure of operating accounts might not be as easily passed as Blackwell predicted.

The secretary of state said the package of reform legislation he eventually submits to the General Assembly will include more-controversial measures, including one to add Ohio to the list of 27 states that prohibit campaign contributions during legislative sessions.

"Let's talk about it,'' Blackwell said. "It's the one that will be perhaps the most contentious, the most debatable.''

Legislative leaders promised a task force on those issues last year, but nothing was done.

Blackwell said he also intends to consult Ohio Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer before he crafts a proposal to require reporting of contributors by independent groups, such as the pair that waged a nasty, multimillion-dollar TV campaign against Supreme Court Justice Alice Robie Resnick last year.

The groups, one linked to the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and the other to the U.S. Chamber, have said that as "educational'' entities sponsoring "issue-advocacy'' ads, they are protected by the First Amendment and not required to disclose contributors' names.

In a recent speech, Moyer said he will work with legislative leaders to redefine advocacy in an effort "to require outside, independent groups to disclose their expenditures and their contributions.''

Leland and Bennett said they support requiring independent groups to report contributors. But Bennett said he would oppose any effort to limit further contributions to political parties, contending that such limits merely "drive the money to the special interests, and then you have the situation we had last year in the Supreme Court race.''

jhallett@dispatch.com

---