Where The Q spends Its Money, WSJ>
July 23, 1999
Page One Feature
High-Tech Gore Lags in Silicon Valley
As a Dark Horse Steals Some Thunder
By GLENN R. SIMPSON and PHIL KUNTZ
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
In the hotly fought contest among presidential hopefuls for high-tech funds,
Al Gore is starting to look like an also-ran.
Arguably the nation's first high-tech politician, the vice president dines
regularly with a group of top technology executives dubbed the
"Gore-techs." He didn't invent the Internet, but even his opponents
concede that he has spent two decades studying and promoting
leading-edge technology.
Nonetheless, when it comes to wresting contributions from the newly
wealthy nabobs of U.S. technology, Mr. Gore, by one key measure, has
fallen behind a dark horse from the industrial state of New Jersey. In
Silicon Valley, former Sen. Bill Bradley has drawn the most money,
according to an analysis by this newspaper of campaign contributions from
Santa Clara County and the surrounding region.
"The bottom line is, I think he gets it," says Joe Horowitz, chief executive
of the Menlo Park, Calif., firm Geocast Network Systems Inc. Describing
himself as an economic conservative and social liberal, Mr. Horowitz says
Mr. Bradley is "a thoughtful listener" who processes "information to form
opinions and views that then tend to stick."
Mr. Bradley's success in Northern California has even won him grudging
respect from fund-raisers and contributors in the George W. Bush camp.
Venture capitalist Floyd Kvamme attributes Mr. Bradley's popularity to his
free-trade views, a big plus among export-dependent high-tech companies.
Two Productive Events
Mr. Bush has done well with technology companies, too. A pair of events
in San Francisco and the Silicon Valley grossed $1.7 million for the Bush
campaign just as the second-quarter fund-raising period was closing,
helping him reach his $37 million total for the first half. Though edged out
by Mr. Bradley in the geographic confines of the Silicon Valley, he appears
to have raised much more than either of the Democrats from donors
employed by companies with such high-tech terms as cyber, digital and
.com in their names, as well as some high-profile companies such as
Hewlett-Packard Co. In that unscientific analysis, Mr. Gore did somewhat
better than Mr. Bradley.
High-Tech Bets
Sum of donations to major presidential candidates from donors listing Silicon Valley
addresses
Recipient
Amount
Bill Bradley
$408,600
George W. Bush
371,145
Al Gore
242,200
Elizabeth Dole
27,750
John McCain
26,201
Gary Bauer
17,430
Dan Quayle
4,671
Source: The Center for Responsive Politics
As of June 30, the candidates had collected about $103 million -- more
than three times the amount that had been gathered at a similar point in the
1996 campaign. Mr. Bush raised the most, with $37.3 million, followed by
Mr. Gore's $19.6 million, Mr. Bradley's $11.7 million and $6.3 million for
Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican. After these top four
fund-raisers, the totals for the rest of the field drop off sharply.
Traditional Sources
For the most part, The Wall Street Journal's analysis shows, both Mr.
Bush and Mr. Gore have relied heavily on traditional sources for their
funds -- particularly lawyers. Mr. Bush raised $900,000 from Texas
lawyers, much of it coming from just four big law firms specializing in
corporate defense -- Vinson & Elkins, Jenkins & Gilchrist, Baker & Botts
and Haynes & Boone, according to a separate study of major financing
sources by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit research
organization based in Washington, D.C.
Mr. Gore relied heavily on trial lawyers and raised more money than the
others in the first half from Hollywood and Beverly Hills. His total was
almost $210,000, compared with Mr. Bush's $174,000 and Mr. Bradley's
$76,000. He also raised nearly $200,000 from federal government
employees.
Tracking the money behind political campaigns is a tricky business.
Campaign officials refuse to identify all the fundraisers who solicit friends
and business associates and the amounts they raise. More important, they
frequently fail to disclose key information about their donors, omitting
employers or occupations; they are required to make their best effort to do
so. A quarter of the donors to the top four fund-raising candidates weren't
completely identified, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The
records also don't reflect money from relatives, leaving thousands of
donors who are undoubtedly tied to corporate contributors listed only as
students and homemakers.
Biggest Surprise
But the records do suggest certain trends, and the most surprising story so
far is Mr. Bradley's strong showing in Silicon Valley. Residents of Santa
Clara County and the surrounding communities that constitute Northern
California's high-tech base contributed nearly $410,000 to Mr. Bradley in
the first half of the year -- 70% more than they gave to Mr. Gore. Mr.
Bush wasn't too far behind Mr. Bradley, raking in about $370,000. That
strict geographic definition of Silicon Valley understates the actual level of
support from the executives of technology companies; for each candidate,
the true number is much larger, but the reported figure is a useful yardstick.
Placing Bets
Donations to top fund-raisers in the presidential primaries from selected professions and
industries (through June 30)
Bill
Bradley
Al
Gore
George
W. Bush
John
McCain
Lawyers
1.7
3
3
0.2
Real Estate
0.4
0.6
1.3
0.1
Securities,
Investments & Misc.
Finance
1.6
1
3
0.3
Doctors & Health
Professionals
0.3
0.3
1
0.1
Commercial Banks
0.3
0.2
0.7
*
Insurance
0.1
0.1
0.4
*
Accountants
0.2
0.2
0.4
*
Note: In millions of dollars, rounded to the nearest $100,000
*Less than $50,000
Source: Estimates based on Federal Election Commission data and figures compiled by
the Center for Responsive Politics
...And From the West Coast
Contributions from Hollywood and Beverly Hills
Bill Bradley
Al Gore
George W. Bush
John McCain
$76,000
$192,465
$151,149
$5,905
Source: Federal Election Committee data
The Most Generous
Ranking of companies whose employees contributed to presidential campaigns
Bill Bradley
Lehman Brothers
$80,500
Citigroup
74,150
Goldman Sachs
65,000
Merrill Lynch
56,500
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter
55,750
JP Morgan
51,600
Winston & Strawn
45,750
Jeffries
45,500
Mayer, Brown & Platt
44,050
Kushner
40,000
Al Gore
Federal Employees
$194,564
Ernst & Young
114,200
Viacom
69,250
BellSouth
66,750
Goldman Sachs
58,750
Nat'l Jewish Democratic Council
49,750
Citigroup
43,750
Holland & Knight
42,750
Jenner & Block
38,500
Akin Gump
31,500
Source: The Center for Responsive Politics
George W. Bush
Vinson & Elkins
$184,850
Andersen Worldwide
120,450
Jenkens & Gilchrist
99,450
Enron
86,650
Baker & Botts
82,050
Enterprise Leasing
81,000
Ernst & Young
72,950
Haynes & Boone
72,000
American General
71,223
Bank of America
70,100
John McCain
Viacom
$48,750
US West
45,600
BellSouth
24,750
Goldman Sachs
22,000
CSX
18,450
Microsoft
17,500
Del Webb
16,000
Sanford C. Bernstein
14,250
MGM Grand
14,163
Charles Schwab
14,000
One of the keys to Mr. Bradley's Santa Clara success is Daniel Okimoto.
Born to poor Japanese immigrants, Mr. Okimoto won a scholarship to
Princeton in 1960. There, he met what he calls a "country bumpkin" from a
one-stoplight town in Missouri, Mr. Bradley. Both outsiders in Princeton's
prep-school world, the two men quickly bonded. Mr. Bradley went on to
fame and fortune as a professional basketball player and U.S. senator,
while Mr. Okimoto pursued a career as a professor of international affairs
at Stanford University in Palo Alto.
The two stayed in touch, in part because of a mutual interest in Asia. When
Mr. Okimoto set up an Asian-studies center at Stanford, he helped
then-Sen. Bradley nurture his fascination with Asia by funding numerous
trips and conferences. Eventually, Sen. Bradley joined the board of
Stanford's Institute for International Studies.
By the time Mr. Bradley retired from the Senate in 1996, the area around
Stanford had come to be known as Silicon Valley. Mr. Okimoto
persuaded the university to offer Mr. Bradley a visiting professorship.
Presidential politics weren't on his mind, Mr. Okimoto says, just friendship.
Nonetheless, he says, Mr. Bradley certainly used the post, and some of
Mr. Okimoto's connections to California's Asian community, to gain entree
to the high-tech industry. Mr. Bradley also benefited from his ties to a
number of other Princeton classmates who made their careers in
California's high-tech world, including John Diekman, a major San
Francisco venture capitalist.
According to interviews with contributors, Mr. Bradley's appeal stemmed
from a centrist message laced with sophisticated analyses of often-arcane
financial, economic and technical issues. The presentation proved highly
alluring to the wealthy, intellectual, libertarian-leaning but rather apolitical
population that makes up the industry.
Father's Old Allies
Meanwhile, Mr. Bush, with the help of some Northern California allies of
his father, such as former Republican National Committee Finance
Chairman Howard Leach, put together an impressive roster of
cyber-entrepreneurs and the people who finance them, including Mr.
Kvamme, the venture capitalist. Many had never had much to do with
politics before being enticed by the Bush campaign. Gregory Slayton, chief
executive of the Internet direct-marketer MySoftware.com, says he had
donated to a few candidates in the past but had never engaged in fund
raising until agreeing to help head the Silicon Valley money effort. He, in
turn, roped in other political neophytes, many of whom previously leaned
to the Democrats.
Edward Brinskele, president of a new 100-employee software-solution
company called MVX.COM, says he reluctantly voted twice for Mr.
Clinton, but he and his wife have contributed $2,000 to Mr. Bush. "You're
talking about a new culture of companies that embraces change and thrives
on change, and right now, George is change and Gore is more of the
same," Mr. Brinskele says. There's also the usual self-interest. Mr. Bush's
positions on key issues dovetail with those of his high-tech backers: an
antiregulation bent, a record of fighting for tort reform, a free-trade
philosophy and a sympathetic ear on visas for high-tech workers.
To be sure, Mr. Gore remains popular with many technology executives,
and he continues to benefit from the support of venture capitalist John
Doerr, Mr. Kvamme's colleague at Kleiner Perkins, which has a broad
reach in the industry. Roger Salazar, spokesman for the Gore campaign,
says Mr. Gore's performance in the technology industry is in line with
expectations.
The Lawyer Connection
In addition, the kind of intensive focus Mr. Bradley brought to bear by
spending a year in Silicon Valley while at Stanford wasn't possible for the
vice president. Moreover, Mr. Gore has been caught in the middle of the
war between two constituencies -- the technology industry and its
tort-lawyer antagonists, who often pursue stockholder lawsuits against
high-tech companies with volatile stocks. A close inspection of Mr. Gore's
receipts indicates heavy reliance on trial lawyers. In Texas alone, Mr.
Gore's take from that group exceeds $200,000.
In all, Messrs. Bush and Gore received roughly $3 million each from
lawyers, but Mr. Bush's were of a much different stripe -- mostly
corporate defense lawyers. They favor revamping tort laws by limiting
punitive damages, one of the first things Mr. Bush pushed through the
legislature after being elected Texas governor in 1994.
No one private employer produced more for any candidate than
Houston-based law firm Vinson & Elkins, whose partners contributed
nearly $185,000 to Mr. Bush, according to a study of campaign records
by the Center for Responsive Politics. Thomas Marinis, a partner involved
in the fund raising, says 165 of the firm's 225 partners contributed; the total
tops $210,000 when friends and relatives of the firm's lawyers are
counted, he adds. The firm specializes in the energy industry, represents
many major corporations with issues pending before Texas regulatory
authorities and also has established a growing presence in the Washington
lobbying community.
On its Web site (www.vinson-elkins.com), the firm touts its lobbying
work. It says that it played "a major role" in the Texas legislature's recent
overhaul of telecommunications law and that "30 of the bills signed by
Governor Bush ... in 1995 were shepherded, in some part, through the
process by the firm's legislative section."
'General Proposition'
Heading the firm's fund-raising effort are two of the partners: Mr. Marinis,
who grew up with Mr. Bush in Midland, Texas, and Robert Whilden, a
friend of Mr. Bush's father. Messrs. Marinis and Whilden say their fund
raising for Mr. Bush had nothing to do with the firm's legislative interests
either in Washington or Texas. "We didn't do it on that basis," says Mr.
Whilden, adding that he has never called Mr. Bush and said, "I have a
client who needs something."
But "as a general proposition," says the firm's managing partner, Harry
Reasoner, "it's certainly true in our system that there's a relationship
between access and political contributions."
That clearly has helped Sen. McCain, the only other contender with
serious fund-raising abilities, though he remains a distant fourth place with
his $6.3 million raised so far, much of it transferred from his Senate
campaign.
He is chairman of the powerful Senate Commerce Committee, which holds
sway over many deep-pocketed industries. "Every U.S. senator is
important, and the chairman of the Commerce Committee is very
important," says Jonas Neihardt a lobbyist for Qualcomm Inc., whose
executives hosted a $20,000 fund-raiser for Mr. McCain in May at its
headquarters in San Diego. "He has been highly attentive to our industry
and our concerns," pushing, for example, to open overseas markets so
firms like Qualcomm can sell wireless telephones in Europe and China.
Separate Agendas
Mr. McCain's biggest contributors are from companies with interests
pending before his committee, including media group Viacom Inc., U S
West Inc. and BellSouth Corp., according to the Center for Responsive
Politics. Solomon Trujillo, CEO of U S West, is one of his top
fund-raisers. Richard Notebaert, CEO of Ameritech, headed a
fund-raising event in Chicago in March that collected $90,000 for Mr.
McCain, who advocates easing restrictions on the Baby Bells' access to
the long-distance market.
"When someone agrees to support John McCain, that person is signing on
with our agenda, we're not signing on with theirs," says McCain campaign
spokesman Dan Schnur. In fact, Mr. McCain opposed passage of the
1996 Telecommunications Act, which the Bells supported.
Several major sources of contributions for the top fund-raising candidates
are refusing to play favorites, at least in the aggregate. For example,
employees of the Wall Street investment bank Goldman, Sachs & Co.
contributed a total of $60,000 or so each to Messrs. Bush, Bradley and
Gore, and $22,000 to Sen. McCain -- earning the firm a spot on each
campaign's list of top-12 money sources.
-- Kathy Chen contributed to this article.
Return to top of page | Format for printing
|
