Did Meg Whitman buy off a coveted political maven?

As the political consultant who helped engineer Arnold Schwarzenegger's unlikely rise to the governor's desk in California in 2003, Mike Murphy was a sought-after hand among candidates to succeed Schwarzenegger this year. So how far did Meg Whitman go to sign Murphy up for her campaign? According to the New York Times, she invested more than $1 million in his Hollywood production company.

The Los Angeles Times was the first to note, earlier this year, that Whitman's financial disclosure report for 2009 recorded an investment of more than $1 million in Tools Down!, the company Murphy founded in 2005 to house his screenwriting and producing efforts. But the New York Times adds today that the investment came at the very moment that, according to staffers for Whitman's primary rival, Steve Poizner, Murphy seemed ready to sign up with Poizner's campaign. All of a sudden, without much by way of explanation, he switched horses and joined Whitman:

“What I remember is, the guy was in, and there wasn’t any question about the fact he was in,” said Mr. Schroeder, a former chairman of the California Republican Party [who advised Poizner]. “Then, suddenly, something happened. At the time, we didn’t figure it out.”

In other words, according to the Poizner aides cited by the Times, it appears that Whitman bought Murphy's support with a million-plus investment in his Hollywood dreams (Tools Down! remains just that, and has yet to produce anything). Of course, she also bought him with an actual salary in exchange for working on the campaign — Murphy's other company, Bonaparte Films, which he uses for political work, gets a whopping $90,000 per month from Whitman's campaign coffers.

A Whitman aide told the Times that she just likes investing in entertainment companies sometimes; Murphy didn't comment to the Times or respond to an email from Yahoo! News. What would be wrong with someone like Whitman luring a consultant with a private investment? The Times says "a business investment, as opposed to a cash gift, offers tax advantages," and "if the investment’s purpose was actually political, there are also questions about whether it should have been legally disclosed as a campaign expense."

If Murphy is shaking down clients for investment, Whitman appears to be in rarefied company. A review of Schwarzenegger's financial disclosure forms shows that — despite having some entertainment industry holdings — he doesn't own a piece of Tools Down! Nor do any sitting members of Congress, according to the Center for Responsive Politics' database of financial disclosures.