Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the powerful House telecommunications and finance subcommittee, is a rarity in Congress: He refuses to accept campaign contributions from political action committees (PACs) and he turns down honoraria from special interest groups.

But money from special interest groups ends up in Markey's coffers, anyway. In the past three years, Markey has collected $333,675 in contributions of $200 or larger from donors living outside Massachusetts; about 75 percent of those out-of-state dollars came from people with ties to the telecommunications and financial industries. By contrast, he raised $146,950 from the folks at home.

Markey isn't alone. Increasingly, congressional candidates -- particularly incumbents -- are getting their campaign funds from outside their home states. Not all this money is tied directly to special interests, but much of it is the result of sophisticated fund-raising efforts aimed at givers with a business interest or an ideological cause they wish to promote.

In the Senate, for example, out-of-state contributions in the 1988 election cycle comprised 25 percent of all individual donations, up from 16 percent in 1984. In the 15 months ending March 31 of this year, 50 Senators and 107 House members received a majority of their large individual donations from out of state, according to a Washington Post study.

Federal election law allows individuals to contribute a maximum of $1,000 to each election campaign, and requires candidates to identify donors who gave $200 or more. Donations of less than $200 are not itemized by the FEC.

As the House and Senate debate this week whether to change the system of campaign finance, some who study the role of money in politics say this nationwide treasure hunt obligates members of Congress to economic or ideological interests outside their districts.

"There's a real problem with dual constituencies," said David Magleby, a Brigham Young University professor who recently published a book on campaign finance. "The member needs to devote large amounts of time to their financial constituencies. Typically, they have less time to devote to their voting constituencies."

While the campaign-finance debate is focused on the role of PACs, some people predict that banning or limiting PAC donations won't change the system. "Attempts to legislate increased reliance on individual contributions and reduce reliance on PACs might not only fail as a means of reducing the influence of special interests, but might actually increase the influence of certain narrowly based groups -- with very well-to-do Americans being the most obvious benefactors," the Democratic Study Group (DSG) concluded in a report on campaign donations by wealthy Americans.

Special interest money will still flow, the DSG report said, but it will come in the form of out-of-state individual contributions -- making it harder to identify which special interest is giving.

The Federal Election Commission already finds it impossible to enforce the requirement that contributors identify their occupation and place of business. For example, one-quarter of the large contributors during the current election cycle have not listed this information at all. And in thousands of other cases, they identify themselves merely as "lawyer" or "investor" or "consultant."

The constant search for campaign dollars takes congressional candidates far from their homes. Some hold fund-raisers in such wealthy areas as Beverly Hills in California or New York's Upper East Side, which lead the nation in political giving; others prefer the Washington event, inviting lobbyists and representatives of companies with business before Congress.

For example, Markey's most successful fund-raiser this cycle was held in Washington in January. FEC records show he raised $64,500 that night, virtually all of it from representatives of industries affected by the decisions of Markey's subcommittee. They included officials of the Pacific and American stock exchanges, the Public Securities Association, Pacific Telesis and BellSouth Corp.

Markey, whose districts includes the suburbs north of Boston, said in an interview that many of the people who attended the fund-raiser represented Massachusetts businesses. "If I accepted PAC contributions, I could have raised several hundred thousand dollars," he said.

Members in leadership positions have no trouble attracting long-distance contributions. House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), who has long received most of his campaign money from PACs, collected 95 percent of his individual donations of $200 or more from outside his home state.

In the first 15 months of this election cycle, Foley reported receiving $51,923 from out-of-state donors, $1,600 from Washington state residents and $1,000 from donors who did not give an address. Some of that money came from a fund-raiser last October in the wealthy New York suburbs of Westchester County, which was sponsored by executives of PepsiCo Inc., the soft drink company.

Spokesman Jeff Biggs said Foley did more fund-raising in his district in his early years in Congress. "But part of the phenomenon of becoming a part of the leadership is a quantum leap in the level of visibility. It became much easier to raise campaign funds," Biggs said.

Other members have increasingly targeted national constituency groups. These range from donors faithful to a party, to those who give on a single issue appeal for or against such causes as abortion, the arts, guns, or Israel.

Rep. Sidney R. Yates (D-Ill.), running in his first tight race in years, has raised more large individual donations than any other House member -- $228,427. Mary Bain, Yates's longtime top aide, said the money came from groups that support Yates's stand on certain issues: environmentalists, supporters of government funding for the arts, and Jewish Americans.

For the first time, Yates hired a professional fund-raiser, who actively solicited individuals and PACs and bought television time in the expensive Chicago market. "It was hard for him {Yates} to adjust to the fact it had to be done," Bain said. "He was uncomfortable with the whole idea."

Yates's fund-raising included a Washington event last December at the home of Roger Stevens, former chairman of the Kennedy Center, which raised about $80,000, Bain said. The congressmen also traveled to New York for a $60,000 event sponsored by the arts community, and to California, where he raised $100,000 from events in San Francisco and Los Angeles set up by Jewish supporters, environmentalists and arts groups, she added.

Of course, senators with national reputations have no trouble raising out-of-state money for their campaigns. Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.), a possible presidential candidate who faces token opposition this fall, leads the Senate in out-of-state donations, with $2.9 million. He has raised $1 million from New Jersey residents.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), while lesser known, has collected more than 90 percent of his $200-and-over donations from outside Iowa. He is among several senators who make regular fund-raising trips to richer states such as California and New York.

In the first 15 months of the election cycle, Harkin received $869,651 in contributions of $200 or more from outside his home state, compared to $95,759 in similarly large contributions from Iowa residents.

Harkin campaign spokesman Phil Roeder said Harkin had to raise money outside the state because "Iowa hasn't been a politically rich state, especially for Democrats." He said "candidates fly here to get votes in the presidential caucus, not to bankroll campaigns."

Harkin also "is fortunate," Roeder said, to be chairman of the second largest Appropriations subcommittee -- labor, health and human services, education -- where "he deals with a wide variety of people from across the country."

Harkin's opponent, Rep. Thomas J. Tauke (R-Iowa), has tried to make a campaign issue of this money, saying it is symbolic of the incumbent being out of touch with the state. Tauke has raised $627,242 from Iowans in donations of $200 or more, and $132,639 from outside the state.

The Post computer study found that individual contributions of $200 or more are the single biggest source of campaign dollars for congressional candidates -- with $28 million in itemized contributions going to candidates outside the donor's home state.

Almost 90 percent of that money went to incumbents. Democrats, who control both houses of Congress, received the bulk of these big out-of-state contributions, $18 million to $9 million for GOP candidates.

New York leads the country in giving to out-of-state candidates, followed by California and Texas. New Yorkers gave a total of $7.9 million in contributions of $200 or more to congressional candidates, with two out of every three dollars going outside the state.

Three of the 10 ZIP codes in the country that contributed the most to out-of-state candidates were located in Manhattan -- and three others were in the District of Columbia.

Out-of-state money takes time to raise -- time that some congressional leaders complain is stolen from their work on the Hill. Congressional leaders complain "they have a hard time getting members together for a vote," Magleby said. "The members end up being strewn across the country either at fund-raisers for themselves or as the draw to fund-raisers for a junior member."

Systems consultant Edward Dolbow and staff researchers Lucy Shackelford and Sharon Warden contributed to this report.

CAMPAIGN '90: WHO GETS THE MOST

In the 15-month period ending March 31, House and Senate cnadidates have received a total of $28 million in large contributions from donors living outside the candidates' home states. Here are the ten members from the House and the Senate who have collected the most in contributions of $200 or more from out-of-state supporters.

HOUSE OF....................TOTAL FROM...TOTAL FROM...PERCENT FROM

REPRESENTATIVES.............OUT-OF-STATE..HOME STATE..OUT-OF-STATE

Sidney R. Yates (D-Ill.).......$ 228,427...$126,106 ......64%

Lyndon LaRouche Jr. (Va.)* ......180,391 .....2,300 ......99

Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) ..............134,161 ....64,170 ......68

Joseph P. Kennedy III (D-Ma.) ...132,216....107,274.......55

Les Aspin (D-Wis.) ..............115,640.....23,417.......83

Edward J. Markey (D-Ma.) ........110,150 ....68,850 ......60

Craig Thomas (R-Wy.) ............103,725 ....85,209 ......55

Thomas H. Anderson Jr. (Tex.)* ...99,899 ...223,948.......31

Stephen H. Solarz (D-N.Y.)........92,805.... 51,400.......64

Pete Geren (D-Tex.).............. 87,100....430,430...... 17

Total for House incumbents:...$5,113,462..$19,851,857....20%

Total for challengers:...........960,154... 4,158,476.... 19

*Denotes challenger or candidate for an open seat.

............................TOTAL FROM...TOTAL FROM...PERCENT FROM

SENATE......................OUT-OF-STATE..HOME STATE..OUT-OF-STATE

Bill Bradley (D-N.J.).........$2,946,008 ..$1,028,681...74%

Rudolph Boschwitz (R-Minn.)... 1,392,844... 479,938......73

Carl Levin (D-Mich.).......... 1,193,656....580,435......67

John Kerry (D-Ma.)............ 1,045,019..1,035,063......50

Paul Simon (D-Ill.)............. 934,907....862,286......51

Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)............. 869,651.... 95,759......90

Phil Gramm (R-Tex.)..............625,450..3,665,710......14

John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) 621,124....366,097......63

Howell T. Heflin (D-Ala.) .......558,385....505,108......47

Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) .........546,132..1,233,525......32

Total for Senate incumbents: $18,207,948 $20,622,500....46%

Total for challengers:........ 1,559,597.. 5,559,597....21

Totals for candidates running for an open Senate or House seat--one where an incumbent is not running--are not shown.

WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM:

THE TOP 15 CONTRIBUTING ZIP CODES

Two Manhattan neighborhoods and Beverly Hills have given the most in large contributions to candidates for the Senate and the House, with most of the money going to out-of-state candidates and to Democrats. In fact, big donors living in 11 of the nation's 15 most generous ZIP codes gave more money to out-of-state candidates than they gave to candidates in their own state. And all but one gave more to Democratic than to Republican candidates.

...........................................PERCENT TO ...........

.....................................................OUT-OF-STATE

RANK ZIP....AREA.....................TOTAL..DEMS..GOP..CANDIDATES

1 10021 Upper East Side, NYC......$970,331...68%...33%...79%

2 10022 Upper East Side, NYC.......607,664...65....35....78

3 90210 Beverly Hills, Calif.......604,148...88....12....61

4 20036 D.C. (K Street)............437,295...67....33....99

5 77002 Houston (Downtown), Tex... 437,274...52....48....24

6 20007 D.C. (Georgetown)..........407,281...72....28....99

7 20006 D.C. (K Street)............378,445...68....32...100

8 60611 Chicago, (Near North),Ill..364,188...78....22... 48

9 90049 Brentwood, Calif...........338,563...80....20....55

10 10028 Upper East Side, NYC......322,670...72....28....77

11 76102 Fort Worth, Tex...........304,088...60....40....12

12 48640 Midland, Mich. ...........300,530... 1....99.... 1

13 90067 Century City, Calif. .....296,754...79....21....49

14 20016 D.C. (Upper Northwest)....270,638...69....31....99

15 10128 East Side, NYC............266,000...73....27....84

THE TOP THREE CONTRIBUTING ZIPS IN MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA

In Maryland, residents of Potomac and Chevy Chase suburbs outside the District gave the most to House and Senate candidates during the past 15 months, with virtually all of that money going to out-of-state candidates.

.........................................PERCENT PERCENT TO.......

......................................................OUT-OF-STATE

RANK.......ZIP....LOCALE......TOTAL......DEMS...GOP......CANDIDATES

24.......20854....Potomac.......$299,905..55%...45%......86%

31.......20815....Chevy Chase... 191,938..72....28....... 94

55.......20816....Chevy Chase... 150,450..69....31....... 93

Across the river in Virginia, three upscale northern Virginia suburbs provided the most money in large contributions to congressional candidates, with a majority of that money going to candidates outside the state.

........................................PERCENT PERCENT TO.......

..................................................TO OUT-OF-STATE

RANK.....ZIP......LOCALE.....TOTAL........DEMS...GOP....CANDIDATES

35.......22101....McLean.....$185,923.....51%....49%......69%

65.......22314....Alexandria..135,058.....70.....30.......85

84.......22207....Arlington...109,135.....55.....45.......78

Figures based on a Washington Post analysis of Federal Election Commission data on individual contributions through March 31 for the 1989-90 campaign cycle. The FEC only provides data on individual contributions of $200 or more.