To rearrange the old adage, the business of American business is government.

The increasing influence of big business in America is having an effect on Congress, the administration, and the general public. Political advertising, political campaign contributions, and lobbying expenditures from the business sector--especially from the largest corporations--are growing at an exponential rate. In 1978, business political action committees raised over $50 million, a fivefold increase from their less than $10 million campaign chest in 1976.

As more and more business dollars flow into politics, more and more chief executive officers (CEOs)--company presidents or chairmen of the boards--from the biggest corporations are becoming personally involved in all levels of government. No longer content to leave the dirty business of lobbying to a vice president for legislative affairs, modern CEOs join associations like the Business Roundtable, which requires them to lobby personally Congress and the White House. Or they simply stalk the halls of Congress on their own.

From the corporate aeries in New York, the view of federal government is different than the perspective from the bureaucratic niches in Washington or the lecture halls of Harvard. After digesting James Q. Wilson's political models in Gov. 30, and then spending an exhilarating, disillusioning and often perplexing summer in Washington, I sought one last perspective on business--that of the giant corporation.

The day is gray and wet, adding a touch of gloom to the usual anxiety in the New York air. High atop the American Telephone and Telegraph (AT & T) building, chairman of the board John deButts has a commanding view of the World Trade Centers. The rest of the building, as far as I can tell from the lobby and the hallways, seems to be a cross between a medieval castle and the Pentagon. The lobby is crowded with simple Roman columns, which part to reveal a statue set into the marble wall. It is the figure of a man with one arm outstretched, one cocked at the elbow; the head thrown to the side completes the modified Christ-image. Under each arm blazes an inscription, one reading IN PEACE AND WAR, the other SERVICE TO THE NATION. In contrast to the deadening solemnity of the lobby, the halls are brightly colored passageways strewn with security devices and guards.

DeButts is a large man with a relaxed, almost weary manner that reduces his tendency to lecture during the interview. He is clearly comfortable with the responsibilities of running AT&T, responsibilities that he believes extend to maintaining close personal contact with elected officials in Washington.

"Every businessman is finding he is spending more time with the federal government," deButts says, "and it's getting worse." He quickly amends this negative comment by adding, "Which is good, I think it's fine that there is a much closer relationship between the business community and the government."

Between meetings with Congressmen, administration officials, and the various business groups to which he belongs, deButts estimates that he spends 30 per cent of his time on federal issues. At least two business groups--the Business Roundtable and the Business Council (both collections of select members of the Fortune 1000, a list of the largest companies in the nation)--require deButts and his fellow CEOs to remain personally involved in the political process.

"For years, they left it up to their public relations directors," deButts explains. "But the government has such a big hand in the affairs of business today, if the CEO doesn't get involved he's in real trouble. If he doesn't give them the facts, no one will."

The CEO has a natural advantage in gaining access to Congressmen. Not many Congressmen can afford to turn away the head of a $50 billion corporation. In fact, many members of Congress welcome the CEOs, soaking up the glamour associated with extreme wealth. In the 95th Congress, Senator Howard O. Metzenbaum (D-Ohio) asked deButts to lunch to discuss public governance of the corporation, while Senator Jacob Javits (R-N.Y.) contacted deButts to solicit the business community's help on urban problems.

CEOs find it a bit more difficult to contact Carter, although they have had numerous meetings with his staff. DeButts recalls, "He used to tell us in the meeting he expected the only contacts the White House would have with the business community would be through Secretaries Kreps and Blumenthal. And we finally told him, 'That's fine, Mr. President, but we have to talk to you. If you want something from us you don't talk to some executive vice president. You ask for the CEO. Well, we want the same thing--to talk to the CEO.'"

"It took me a year to get him to talk to the Business Council," deButts adds. "He came. He didn't want to, but he did."

"We don't have any trouble getting to Carter now. Or Fritz Mondale. He's very easy to get to. I talk to Fritz Mondale fairly often," deButts says.

Once close relations were established with the Carter administration, CEOs found they could often do favors for the White House. Early in 1978, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance called to elicit business pressure on Congress for the Panama Canal treaty, also during the 95th Congress another Cabinet-level official came to a Business Council meeting to request pressure in the sale of F-15 fighter planes to Saudi Arabia.

Because much of the CEO's activity falls outside his specific area of expertise, deButts attributes the value of a business executive as a government adviser to his general expertise.. The government is "going to listen because these people (the CEOs) obviously have some sense or they wouldn't be where they were. They control a large segment of the economy."