Texas Slumber Parties

Let's say you're interested in politics, Republican politics in particular, and you're somewhat acquainted with Governor George W. Bush. And let's say, in a burst of friendliness, he asks you to stay the night at the Governor's Mansion in Austin, and you accept. Oh, and by the way, you've contributed money to Bush over the years.

Is there a problem here?

The Center for Public Integrity thinks there is. They've released a report listing folks who've spent a night at the mansion, indicating those who've also made donations. Some guests are so-called "Pioneers," people who've contributed at least $100,000 over the course of Bush's political life.

The study says that 60 of the 131 guests had contributed or raised more than $2.2 million for Bush's presidential campaign. The list of overnight guests includes former Christian Coalition executive director Ralph Reed; New York Gov. George Pataki, who helped deliver his state to Bush in the March 7 primary; and former Rep. Tom Tauke of Iowa, now the chief Washington lobbyist for Bell Atlantic.

Comparing these overnight stays to the Clinton administration's Lincoln Bedroom scandal, Peter Eisner, the CPI's managing director, says they show that the Governor's Mansion, like the White House, "is reserved for a certain class of people, beyond friends, who are contributing money and in return have access and are building something other than the public trust."

Eisner concedes that many of the guests were friends and family. But starting in mid-1997, he contends, political figures and power brokers also started to show up - people who later joined or advised the Bush campaign. Not all of the overnight guests contributed money. But what matters is "they were doing the work of a presidential campaign in the Governor's Mansion."

And that, Eisner believes, could prove to be a violation of a Texas law which prohibits the use of state funds to support a candidate - in this case, the state funds would be the taxpayer money meant for the upkeep of the mansion. The question of whether those overnight visits really do constitute a violation of Texas law is murky. But even without lawbreaking, the situation is bad enough, Eisner believes.

"It's restricted democracy, democracy for those who have the money to buy access." There doesn't have to any clear quid pro quo, he says. Rather, "it's buying into an ethereal group of high rollers that have influence."

Not everyone takes such a dark view.

Nolan McCarty, a political science professor at Columbia University, thinks the overnight visits "might look improper given a strict construction of how the laws are written, but it doesn't seem to be something where (Bush) was abusing the Governor's Mansion in a particularly egregious way." These weren't "fat-cat contributors, but rather people involved in the campaign." Whether campign strategy can be discussed in the Governor's Mansion is one of those "gray areas" where ethics are not always clear.

These Austin slumber parties first came up earlier in the campaign, when John McCain tried to make hay of them. At the time, Bush defended his hospitality: "These are my friends, John, these are my relatives."

On Wednesday, Bush reiterated that argument to CBS News, insisting there'd been no wrongdoing and challenging anyone to find a single person on the list who's not a friend of his. Of course, the definition of "friend" is a loose and personal one, especially in politics.

After the CPI report came out, the Bush campaign identified all those who had slept over at the Governor's Mansion. The campaign also issued a mocking press release that stated: "Watchdog group 'finds' evidence that friends and family support Governor Bush."

But is the mere appearance of an ethical problem enough to create a political headache for Bush? Probably not.

"It isn't any more a problem than allegations against other candidates," says McCarty.

And that brings us to Al Gore. The Gore campaign Wednesday criticized the Bush sleepovers. "It's another concern about campaign fund-raising practices that George Bush needs to address," said Gore spokesman Douglas Hattaway.

But the vice president still has his own fund-raising nightmares, dating back to 1996. While he's tried to put the matter behind him by acting born again on campaign finance, Gore still faces tough questions - potentially graver ones than Bush.

"The Gore campaign isn't going to be able to use this against Bush," says Professor Gregrory Wawro of Columbia's political science department.

"If anything, this will be used to defuse any attempts the Bush campaign might use to raise the campaign finance scandals of 1996 and attach those to Gore," he adds.

Bottom line: both Bush and Gore, who now call themselves reformers, might be reduced to a draw over campaign finance.