14TH DISTRICT Cafaro's wealth triggers new rule

To buy ads in Cleveland media, Cafaro had to lend money to her campaign.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Ohio's most expensive congressional race this year could see a big influx of additional dollars, thanks to a new campaign finance rule created to level the playing field for races that feature a wealthy candidate.
The so-called "millionaires' amendment" was triggered in Ohio last month when shopping center heiress Capri Cafaro invested $1.3 million in her race for the 14th District. It allows her opponent, Republican Rep. Steve LaTourette, to raise $6,000 a person -- three times as much money as is usually allowed.
Will it work?
Cafaro is among a handful of candidates nationwide who have fallen under this rule, which went into effect for the first time this election. Meanwhile, political observers are watching to see if it accomplishes what lawmakers set out to do: limit the influence of money in politics.
Kent Cooper, co-founder of the Political Money Line campaign finance and lobbying tracking service, said that though the law is meant to make things more fair, it also can be seen as a measure to protect incumbents by changing the rules when millionaire candidates come into the picture. Larry Noble, head of the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, agrees.
"Sometimes these are unknowns who really do get traction and sometimes win," he said. "That had members of Congress concerned that it was really giving an unfair advantage to people who had access to their own funds."
Media market
For Cafaro, lending her campaign the money was necessary to buy into Cleveland's expensive media market. She has pledged to match LaTourette's spending dollar for dollar.
"The whole process is skewed toward incumbents, so I think it's helpful to have the ability to self-finance," Cafaro said. "I can turn down a check if I want to."
LaTourette, a five-term congressman from Madison, has worked hard to raise $1.7 million from individual contributors, Republican sources and political action committees. Now, thanks to the new rule, he plans to go back to his donors to see if they can give more.
"That won't hurt me, that's for sure," LaTourette said. "But we've had to raise a heck of a lot of money already."
The real test
Cooper said the real test will be to see whether candidates who now can raise more money from each donor actually go out and cash in on it. Even with this new rule, candidates who don't have personal wealth aren't guaranteed of winning, he said.
"There are more and more people with wealth who are running," he said. "They can come in quickly and in very short notice get out their message to the people."
However, not every hefty investment pays out with a ticket to Congress. In Illinois, Democrat Blair Hull, who built a multimillion-dollar commodities trading company from $25,000 in blackjack winnings, gambled $29 million on a bid for the U.S. Senate. He triggered the millionaires' amendment in the Democratic primary and ended up placing third.
Pros and cons
"Just because you self-finance doesn't mean that you're an attractive candidate," he said. "The bottom line is, there are pluses and minuses to being a self-financed candidate; it is not a guarantee of getting elected."
In other cases, candidates spending their own money may be helpful. Democrat John Kerry kept his campaign afloat before the presidential primaries began by lending himself about $6 million.