Citizen-set campaign limits too low, says judge.

• Author: Weintraub, Daniel M.

Raising money for campaigns just got a whole lot easier in California, thanks to a federal judge's decision to strike down a ballot measure limiting contributions. It also may have changed the direction of a leadership race.

The floodgates are open.

Within days of a federal judge striking down contribution limits in California legislative campaigns, lawmakers seeking cash were burying lobbyists in solicitations.

"As you probably know by now, Prop. 208 has been overturned!" wrote one giddy fund raiser in a fax to lobbyists alerting them to expect calls from four Democratic Assembly members in the days ahead.

Assemblyman Dick Ackerman sent lobbyists a poem hailing the decision and inviting them to attend his breakfast event. Senate Republican Leader Rob Hurtt was asking for $10,000 contributions - 20 times the limits struck down by the court - for a golf tournament he was sponsoring.

All of this was made possible by U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Karlton's Jan. 6 decision striking down Proposition 208, a ballot measure approved by 61 percent of California voters in November 1996. The initiative limited contributions in legislative campaigns to $250 or $500 to candidates who agreed to spending limits. Karlton said the limits were so low that they violated candidates' free-speech rights to communicate with potential voters.

Karlton's ruling, which is being appealed, also lifted other restrictions imposed by the ballot measure. Among them: a ban on transfers from one candidate to another and a provision prohibiting lawmakers from soliciting contributions from registered lobbyists.

The decision further roiled California's already chaotic 1998 election cycle. Lawmakers have already seen term limits struck down by one court and then re-imposed by another. They now appear certain to stay at least through this year. And 1998 marks the debut of the state's open primary, also the result of a ballot measure, in which voters will be allowed to choose any candidate in primary elections regardless of party affiliation.

One immediate effect of the ruling was to boost the power of legislative leaders again. The ban on transfers had crimped their ability to raise money and then shift it to candidates in key races.

"What 208 did was suck the power out of leadership in each caucus," said former Assembly Speaker Curt Pringle. "It neutered them. It took away their power to run and coordinate campaigns."

Pringle's successor as Republican leader, Bill Leonard...