The four-figure checks taxied into Rep. Jerry Costello's campaign account in the final weeks of the 2006 congressional elections: $5,000 from American Airlines, $3,000 from United, $1,000 each from Delta, Southwest and a trade group for private jet owners. Together, they could have funded a few television commercials and helped in a tight race.
Too bad Costello was running unopposed.
Democrats, though, were surging toward a House majority, putting Costello, a Democrat from southern Illinois, in line to write a bill with multibillion-dollar implications for the air transportation industry. And so he became the object of newfound affection from the nation's airlines.
Now the new chairman of the House aviation subcommittee finds himself inundated with contributions from an industry that for a decade gave heavily to Republicans. It's a pattern that campaign finance records show is playing out across industries, in a tradition as old as lobbying itself.
Money, it seems, loves no friend, no political party, more than power.
"I don't think there's any question ... that when people find out who's going to be writing the legislation, who's going to be in the room when the decisions are made, [donating to them] is a major part of the process," Costello said in an interview, adding: "People want their voices heard."
He also said he welcomes all voices in his office, donors or not.
"The people who support me, some of them are going to be pleased" with the potentially industry-rocking bill he is set to introduce next month, Costello said. "Some of them are going to be disappointed."
In Washington, disappointment can be expensive for big industries, tallied in government contracts lost or major tax breaks missed. For every abortion-rights opponent or clean-water crusader, there is another well-funded lobbyist in town whose interests are more financial than ideological, and whose campaign contributions are more practical than partisan.
You can follow their pragmatism through data from the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-profit, non-partisan campaign finance watchdog group.
Consider just a few key industries: commercial banking, electric utilities, pharmaceuticals and air transport. For the 1994 election cycle, on the eve of the sweeping Republican takeover of the House, all four industries split their congressional donations nearly evenly between the major political parties.
Twelve years of GOP dominance later, in 2006, each industry was giving about two-thirds of its political cash to Republicans and a third to Democrats.
But in the first quarter of this year, after the Democratic takeover, they returned to an even split, or in some cases began to favor Democrats.
Industry groups often steer their contributions to members of Congress from their home states or ones who sit on the subcommittees that regulate them. More powerful members often reap more cash, particularly subcommittee chairmen, who set agendas, schedule hearings and draft bills that can make or break an industry's profit margins.
Money always a plus
Even when a congressman faces no discernible opposition on the horizon, the money can be helpful. It can help scare off would-be challengers, and the lawmaker can distribute the cash to colleagues and build up a bank of favors.
Take, for example, Costello and the bill that has sparked a civil war of sorts over America's skies.
Once every decade or so, Congress reauthorizes the Federal Aviation Administration and decides how to fund it. Currently the FAA is supported largely through excise taxes on air travel -- including some of the charges tacked onto an ordinary coach ticket -- for a budget that neared $14 billion in fiscal year 2005.
Lawmakers want to spend more in the coming years to upgrade the nation's air traffic control system from radar to satellites. There is no agreed-upon price tag yet for those improvements, but some industry groups estimate they could push the FAA budget to $15 billion to $22 billion a year.
The question is: Who pays?
Airlines want to revamp the FAA's funding formula. Currently, they contend, passenger and freight airlines pay 94 percent of the excise taxes but use only 70 percent of air traffic control services. Corporate jets pay the other 6 percent.
The airlines would like to change the tax structure, or impose a new fee, to make corporate jets pay more, commensurate with their use.
"What we don't want to do is continue to subsidize the corporate fat cats," said David Castelveter, a spokesman for the Air Transport Association, an airline trade group.
Corporate jet owners say they are willing to pay more for an air traffic upgrade but that shifting the entire cost structure would amount to a huge airline tax cut.
A dinner-tab analogy
"It's the airlines' hub and spoke requirements that are dictating the size and the cost of the system," said Ed Bolen, president of the National Business Aviation Association. "That's a little bit like being out to dinner with a guest and they order the most expensive things on the menu, and then they want to pay on a per-diner basis."
A lot is riding on who wins: Dropping from 94 percent to 70 percent of a $20 billion annual budget would save the airline industry nearly $5 billion a year.
Enter Costello, chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and, by his position, the man drafting the House version of the FAA reauthorization. (A companion bill is working its way through the Senate.)
Long a favorite of labor groups, including the air traffic controllers union, Costello saw his contributions from leading airlines and air trade groups double in the 2006 campaign cycle. United gave him $5,000 total, up from $2,000 in the 2004 campaign. American bumped him from $2,000 in '04 to $8,000 in '06 -- and added another $5,000 earlier this year.
A foot in the door
Ron Ricks, a senior vice president for Southwest Airlines, which donated to Costello for the first time last election, said Costello has assumed a "major role with respect to the development of aviation policy in the U.S" and that "it is important to understand what the new chairman's vision is."
Other airlines say donations do not buy them special access to Costello. "He at least will say hello to us," said Mary Frances Fagan, an American spokeswoman. "There are no other expectations of any kind."
Costello said he has met with all sides in the reauthorization debate and encountered informal lobbying on aviation issues from callers, constituents and even his neighbors. He won't say for sure what the draft bill will look like, but says he is skeptical of a Bush administration proposal that would give corporate jets a heavier FAA funding burden.
He also said his chairmanship has not changed his fundraising strategy and that he's not leaning on groups he oversees for donations.
Not that he'd need the money: As of March 30, Costello had $1.4 million in his campaign account, more than any other House member from Illinois.
Copyright 2005 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy
News stories provided by third parties are not edited by "Site Publication" staff. For suggestions and comments, please click the Contact link at the bottom of this page.
