University Campaign Donations Surge, Most Go to Kerry

The Associated Press, 10/07/04

LOS ANGELES - Employees of colleges and universities nationwide are donating much more to the current presidential campaigns than they did in 2000, and the majority of the money is going to Democratic candidate Sen. John F. Kerry, according to a newspaper report.

 

This year, as of the end of August, Kerry had collected more than $4.6 million from faculty, staff and others affiliated with colleges and universities. That's compared with the about $740,000 flowing to President Bush, the Los Angeles Times reported Thursday. In 2000, Bush and former Vice President Al Gore collected less than $1 million on campuses.

 

The increase is due to the Iraq war, the surge in Internet fund-raising and recent changes in campaign finance regulations, according to political analysts and education officials.

 

But the overwhelmingly Democratic slant of these contributions has been an issue for some conservatives.

 

"How in a democracy and an institution which is committed to academic freedom and intellectual pluralism can such a monolith exist?" questioned David Horowitz, a conservative intellectual who has extensively criticized colleges and universities for bias against conservatives.

 

At the University of California, the surge in donations is striking. Employees have given nine times as much to the presidential campaigns as they did in the last election, with 95 percent going to Kerry, according to the Times.

 

UC employees have given more to Kerry's presidential bid than any other group of employees at a company or institution nationwide, according to data compiled by Dwight L. Morris & Associates, a nonpartisan research group that analyzes campaign finance reports for the news organizations.

 

As of the Aug. 31, UC employees - the majority of them professors - had given Kerry more than $580,000. Bush had received about $26,000. The high numbers reflect in part the university's vast size, with 10 campuses, and three national laboratories.

 

Harvard University employees ranked second on Kerry's overall list of industry contributors, with $261,000 donated. Stanford, Columbia and the University of Michigan were also in his top 20.

 

The University of Texas, in the president's home state, produced $49,000 in donations for Bush's campaign, more than any other school. Kerry received about $67,000 from its employees.

 

The donations will have a limited effect. Money from colleges and universities nationwide represent less than 3 percent of Kerry's total donations and about .5 percent for Bush.

 

But with states such as California a likely bet to go Democratic, raising money is the most effective way to influence the election, said Kirk R. Smith, a UC Berkeley environmental health sciences professor and a Kerry contributor.

 

"It doesn't do much good to go out and canvass locally," he said, "So what can you do, especially if you can't go to another state to campaign? Money is one thing you can do."

 

Issues of war and peace have historically energized college campuses in a way that standard domestic issues do not, said Travis Reindl, director of state policy analysis at the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. "That's drawing folks out with their checkbooks who might not have been drawn before," he said.

 

At UC Berkeley, professors Carl Shapiro and Marti Hearst held two fund-raisers this spring, raising more than $50,000 for Kerry.

 

"Everybody's got their issues. Mine are Bush's environmental policies, his fiscal recklessness, the arrogance of his foreign policy, misleading us on Iraq," Shapiro said. "It's a direction so misguided that I felt compelled to get involved."

 

Eugene Volokh, a constitutional scholar at UCLA's School of Law, also said Iraq was the reason he decided to contribute $1,000 to the Bush campaign. Volokh said mistakes have been made in Iraq, but that the Bush administration's approach to the war is better than what the Democrats would have done. "It's demonstrated the importance of military strength and proving to our enemies that if attacked, we'll hit back hard," he said.