CANDIDATES' WEALTH COULD DECIDE RACE; MILLIONAIRES SPENDING FREELY.

Byline: Rick Orlov Daily News Staff Writer

The saying goes that money can't buy happiness. But whether in this election year it can buy the governor's office or a seat in the United States Senate is an open question.

With self-financed campaigns by a pair of mega-millionaires - businessman Al Checchi in the governor's race and auto alarm magnate Darrell Issa in the Senate race - the impact already has been felt.

Ask San Diego Mayor Susan Golding. She dropped out of the Senate race when she couldn't raise the funds necessary to compete effectively in the GOP primary against Issa.

Ask Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is unopposed in the Democratic primary and might have to face Issa in the general election.

``It is such an unfair advantage that it sets up a situation that you wonder if people who are poor can ever really run in these races,'' said Boxer, who reported raising $4.7 million for the race and had $2.8 million in cash at the start of the year. ``The question becomes, Do we want a society governed only by rich people?''

Ask former White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta. His decision to run for governor was stalled until U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein - who also cited the high costs involved - determine she would not run. Panetta said he didn't have the time to raise enough to compete with Checchi.

Issa could not be reached for comment. But Checchi campaign manager Darry Sragow acknowledges the concern that only the rich might be able to run.

``I think Al Checchi agrees with that concern,'' Sragow said. ``Is it good that only rich people run? No, of course not.''

Feinstein knows only too well the impact a rich opponent can have.

One of the state's most popular elected officials before her 1996 re-election drive, one-term Rep. Michael Huffington of Santa Barbara was able to drag her image down with his $30 million campaign. She narrowly squeaked out a victory, even after spending more than $13 million, including $1.5 million of her own money.

Feinstein's decision to not run for governor this year let another millionaire candidate, Rep. Jane Harman of Torrance, enter the race that also includes Lt. Gov. Gray Davis. Harman has said she will use some of her wealth to jump-start her campaign.

Having just announced her candidacy, Harman has not yet filed campaign finance records. But Davis reported having about $4 million on hand to take what he believes is a good shot at the governor's office, after more than 20 years in public life.

Davis campaign manager Garry South also worries about the rising cost of mounting a candidacy.

``I think what it says is California politics is becoming more and more a roller derby for rich people,'' South said. ``We have candidates with the flimsiest of credentials looking in a mirror one day and checking their checkbook balance and deciding they want to be governor. It will be up to the voters to decide if this is unsettling or not.

``I guess it's a case study in political epidemiology. One candidate - Huffington - comes close and these people have visions of sugarplums dancing in their heads.''

Buying TV time

Campaign reports showed that Checchi spent some $9 million last year, primarily for television commercials. He has run his commercials during two of the most expensive events, the Super Bowl and the Olympic Games.

Issa spent some $2.5 million last year in commercials to get known and has been on television repeatedly since the first of the year.

None of the other candidates have had any commercials broadcast.

Bill Carrick, a consultant for Harman's campaign who has worked all of Feinstein's statewide campaigns, said there is a long tradition of the rich becoming involved in politics, from Franklin Delano Roosevelt to John F. Kennedy.

``Those who have a level of economic comfort get involved in public service as part of their contribution back to society,'' Carrick said. ``Some are like (Los Angeles Mayor Richard) Riordan, who represents a hybrid of that. He was involved in a civic sense and then got involved in elected office.

``Feinstein is like that. She was involved in San Francisco and then went to the Board of Supervisors. Harman represents that. She started in politics at a young age and . . . then went on to Congress.''

Where there has been a change, he said, is candidates such as Checchi and Issa.

``It's relatively new to see this phenomena of people coming from nowhere and jumping in and spending enormous amounts of money,'' Carrick said.

Checchi's television ad bill is running above $600,000 a week, and the budget will swell even further as the June primary approaches, Sragow said.

And whatever amount Harman chooses to spend, Checchi will top, Sragow said.

Campaigning in luxury

He acknowledged that having an unlimited budget is a luxury.

``I usually work on campaigns that are underfunded,'' Sragow said. ``Every consultant should have one of these in their life. What makes it so different is that you are freed up from the time constraints imposed by having to raise large total amounts of money in small chunks.

``A candidate with self-funding can go out and talk to real voters and get a sense of what government and politicians have to do.''

There are other benefits as well. Checchi can contrast himself with others in the race by calling attention to their fund raising from political action committees, unions and other special interests.

And his money might help shield him from some of the negative personal attacks that have accompanied recent campaigns. Checchi has vowed to spend $10 million on a separate campaign against the first candidate who levels what he considers a personal attack on himself or his family.

``That's on the record,'' Sragow said. ``That's not a joke.''

Political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe said the surge of wealthy candidates is the result of a variety of factors.

``First is the cost of running in California,'' Jeffe said. ``This has always been more of a candidate-driven state rather than a political party-driven system. The parties don't raise money and can't recruit and finance candidates.

``Second is the strictures we've put on candidates in raising money. Before Proposition 208 was overturned, the limits were so strict that unless you are an incumbent or rich, you can't raise the money to compete.''

Tony Miller, the author of that measure, is seeking the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor. He disputes the impact of the campaign limits.

``We've had a history of wealthy candidates trying to buy elections in California,'' Miller said. ``I hear that 208 is to blame. I just simply don't think that's true. People like Checchi would have entered the race in any case.

``Money alone won't do it. He and others will have to have a platform, a purpose and a vision if they want to win.''