The Education Coalition - which includes the biggest school-related unions and associations in California - has launched a statewide media campaign with a clear, unsurprising message: public schools need more money. The radio and TV campaign comes after a 1,700-page study that found California schools need at least $23 billion to meet basic standards.
 One part of the study recommended $1.5 trillion in new funding. But even the smaller number might seem scary to policymakers. There is concern that elected officials will instead focus on other reforms in the report, like how the state needs more teacher
training for English learners, more power for principals to fire teachers and better "collection of
student-specific data." The ad campaign keeps the focus on increasing funding for schools, not just bureaucratic reforms. The script:
Teacher: State leaders asked Stanford University to conduct 20 studies of California public schools.
Parent: There's progress, but much remains to be done. Compared to other states our schools lack resources.
Teacher: Continuing to improve our schools will take big changes but that can’t happen without more help.
Parent: California school funding is inadequate – the studies say we need forty percent more.
Teacher: It's time for the governor and the Legislature to invest in our children's future, and give our kids the schools they deserve.
"It really is embarrassing that in a state as wealthy as California, our schools are so severely under-funded, especially when compared to other states with fewer resources," Kathy Kinley, president of the California School Boards Association, said in a statement. "These studies validate the reality that we need more resources and flexibility in our schools, and if we don’t act now, our students will continue to suffer."
The education establishment is focusing on money, without mentioning reforms in the ads. The Stanford report, however, said both are needed: "Finally we cannot emphasize enough that asking the question, 'How much money will it cost to achieve state goals for students?' is meaningless without also asking, 'How can we develop a system that makes better use of whatever resources are available?' ... The message of the entire collection of studies is that serious fundamental change will be needed if California is to provide a high quality school system."
The advertising buy is relatively modest: about $500,000 for radio and TV spots in Spanish, English and four Asian languages on 60 stations in 21 communities from Medford, Ore. (which covers far Northern California) to El Centro. The real value of the campaign is to send a signal to lawmakers in Sacramento.
Listen to the spots or read transcripts here.
Rick Hasen of Loyola Law School, California's resident expert/blogger on campaign finance reform, performs some useful fear-mongering about a case headed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The outcome could potentially "increase corporate dominance over election
campaigns and make it easier for stealth donors to hide their true
identities. And that is something we all should fear." "What's really at stake is whether General Motors and
the AFL-CIO will get to spend millions from their treasuries on TV and
radio ads likely to influence the outcome of federal elections, and
ultimately whether they and wealthy individuals funding these ads who
want to shield their identities from public scrutiny will get a
constitutional right to do so."
Get scared by reading his article here.
As if the deluge of political TV ads were not confusing enough, political slate mailers are now pouring into California mailboxes just in time to really bewilder voters.
Lest anyone forgot from previous races, mailers are one of the more mercenary features of California elections. Political consultants and a smattering of associations sell many of the spots on their slates to candidates and propositions, often creating an ideologically contradictory potpourri of recommendations. Thus:
 The California State Firefighters' Assn. slate embraces one of the most flammable industries around: The cigarette companies that are opposing Proposition 86's $2.60 per pack smoking tax. The two groups last year were on opposite sides of AB 178, which banned the sale of cigarettes that don't automatically extinguish when you fall asleep while smoking — a major cause of home fires. This year, it's all cool: The tobacco industry paid the firefighters' group $84,000 and the firefighters' slate asks readers to "join California firefighters" in opposing the tobacco tax.
The boys in blue did even better: Big Tobacco paid the Peace Officers Research Assn. of California $100,000 to appear in PORAC's "Official Law Enforcement Voters Guide." (Cops got more even though they don't have to run into burning buildings!)
 The Early Voter slate touts three leaders "you can trust" though they are from different parties: Democratic attorney general candidate Bill Lockyer sandwiched between Republicans Tony Strickland and Steve Poizner, running respectively for controller and insurance commissioner. All paid for their inclusion. Even more confounding: the slate endorses both the $5.4 billion parks bond (Proposition 84) and Republican Bill Leonard, a Board of Equalization candidate who wrote the ballot argument against the parks bond, calling it the "special-interest-hidden agenda bond."
- The California Democratic Party supports the cigarette tax, the alternative energy tax on oil producers (Proposition 87) and a crackdown on sex offenders (Proposition 83) — just take a look at the party's official slate. But a widely distributed private slate labeled "Voter Information Guide for Democrats," boasting of "evaluations and recommendations" by the Democratic Party and others, opposes all three initiatives. The fine print notes that the slate was prepared by Voter Information Guide, "not an official political party organization." Tobacco paid the slate $75,000 and the oil companies put up $300,000. But the slate's rejection of the politically popular sex offender crackdown initiative — which has no funded opposition even though it has been a disaster in Iowa, as our colleague Jenifer Warren reported on Monday — seems actually a stance of genuine conviction with no dollars attached. Go figure.
-- By Times staff writer Jordan Rau
 The California Democratic Party is amping up its campaign against Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, the Republican from Riverside County in a tight race. Garcia is known to the outside world mostly because Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger speculated about her ethnicity during a private, taped conversation about "hot-blooded" people.
Garcia's campaign was rolling along until she told a high school class she wouldn't mind bedding Schwarzenegger. It was not the smoothest thing to say in the middle of her contested reelection fight against Democrat Steve Clute. The Dems now have another mailer attacking Garcia for the comments.
Garcia has been fighting back herself. As Times reporter Sara Lin writes this week, Garcia "calls Clute a career politician shopping for a district to represent.... 'There is no community connection with him. He can't raise money here, he can't get volunteers to walk for him here,' Garcia said. 'I think people see this outsider who is trying to buy a seat.'" And Garcia has her own radio ad chastising Clute, a former lawmaker, for sponsoring the naming of a freeway after a man who masturbated in public.
I love politics.
I'm not sure what to make of this new campaign by the AARP: "Don't Vote." A Republican consultant sent this to Political Muscle with the note, "Somebody thought this was a good idea and paid a lot of money for it."
The 50-and-over lobbying group is encouraging people to find out where the candidates stand on health care reform, Social Security and other issues. If you don't get answers, then don't vote, the influential group advises. There's a TV commercial featuring ordinary Americans intoning over and over again: "Don't vote," and an interactive site called Ask the Candidate, which features a fake politician giving cheesy answers to whatever important policy question you ask him.
I asked him about abortion and he answered: "I have no specific recollection, but I appreciate the thought you put into that." His environmental record: "I'd like to answer that question honestly, but in order to do that, I'm going to need a little more time to study the intricacies of that particular issue."
If this blog has taught me anything, it's that huge segments of the public have no ability to detect irony or sarcasm. I wonder if the good citizens who are viewing this AARP ad really understand that the group actually wants them to vote. (The main AARP site, on the other hand, lists "Seven Reasons to Vote.") While they may get more people to read the ballot pamphlet, the Don't Vote campaign takes a pretty cynical view of politicians.
Well, maybe they got one thing right.
 An independent-expenditure group calling itself Bipartisans to Rebuild California is unveiling a new TV ad campaign tomorrow in which Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein are "appearing." That's technically true.
This does not mean, however, that the Republican governor and the Democratic senator shared the same studio or participated in producing the new ad, which promotes $37 billion worth of infrastructure bonds on Tuesday's ballot.
 The newly formed committee took separate footage of both Schwarzenegger and Feinstein endorsing the bonds, and put it together into one big "bipartisan" ad for Propositions 1A to 1E. Under federal campaign finance rules, Feinstein cannot participate in an independent expenditure campaign if she also appears on the ballot, which she does. Schwarzenegger also did not participate in producing the ad.
So state Treasurer Phil Angelides, who has been endorsed by Feinstein, can sleep tonight without wondering why the popular senior senator from California is sidling up to Schwarzenegger on the tube.
Who is paying for these ads? Bipartisans to Rebuild California includes representatives from the construction industry, city governments and unions, who in turn have raised money from individuals to pay for the TV ad campaign.
(Photos: Steve Yeater / AP; Reed Saxon / AP)
 Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante certainly has run one of oddest campaigns in California, if not the country. That's not necessarily a bad thing, given the extremely boring nature of most of the campaign ads out there.
Bustamante, right, has made his quest for insurance commissioner almost entirely about his self-described obesity and efforts to lose weight. He has shed 70 pounds so far, and he can't stop talking about it. Perhaps this is some brilliant way to connect with ordinary Californians, many of whom are struggling with their own weight issues, but it sure sounds weird.
Now, Bustamante is spending the last of his dwindling campaign money on two new TV ads — about $780,000 worth of airtime as the election draws near. The 15-second ads are sort of jarring in how quickly Bustamante starts out "Oprah" and ends up a politician.
The first ad begins: "I was really fat. I promised my family I would lose 70 pounds. I kept that promise. I'll keep this promise: I'll lower your insurance rates." In the second he says, "I worked hard to lose weight because our individual behavior matters. That's why your driving record, not where you live, should lower your car insurance."
(Photo: Bustamante campaign)
Deep inside in the new Public Policy Institute of California poll is this nugget: "Whose ads have you seen the most?" Surprisingly, a large percentage of those surveyed said they had seen Phil Angelides' TV ads more than Arnold Schwarzenegger's ads.
 Angelides won by a 12-point margin in this category, 37% to 25%. And yet, Angelides remains mired behind Schwarzenegger in the poll. Voters see him on TV, and nothing changes. To be fair, these people may be thinking they are seeing an "Angelides ad" when in fact they've absorbed tens of millions of dollars of negative ads attacking him. They just see him on TV a lot, thanks to his opponents.
Nevertheless, Angelides has been running TV ads supporting himself and attacking Schwarzenegger on and off for nearly two years. The photo at right is of Angelides at a Jan. 4, 2005, press conference releasing ads criticizing the governor for failing to deal with the state's budget shortfall.
Bill Carrick, Angelides' media consultant, dismissed the PPIC poll in a press conference today announcing a new Angelides TV ad. He said the poll didn't reflect a growing Democratic surge and was a "very static look at the electorate, very conservative, very old and a very low-turnout electorate. My own view is we're going to have Democrats turn out in disproportionate numbers to Republicans."
With only 57% of Democrats supporting Angelides in the new poll, Angelides is spending the rest of the week with prominent members of his own party. Democratic chairman Howard Dean appears with him today and U.S. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois shows up tomorrow. The new Angelides TV ad shows him standing in front of photographs of Schwarzenegger saying the governor wins the award for "best performance by a Republican pretending to be someone he's not."
(Photo: Rich Pedroncelli / AP)
A group of casino-owning Indian tribes calling itself Team 2006 just reported spending $917,000 to purchase TV advertising time for Tony Strickland, the Republican candidate for controller. They also listed a $100,000 TV expenditure for Strickland's wife, Assemblywoman Audra Strickland (R-Moorpark) and her reelection campaign.
 This makes the race between Democrat John Chiang and Strickland — both little-known to most Californians — competitive. Republicans believe they can take this seat away from Democrats, along with insurance commissioner and possibly lieutenant governor. If the GOP also retains the secretary of state office and governorship, it would be a huge victory for Republicans in California, while the rest of the country appears to be tilting Democratic.
Why would the tribes care about the Republican candidate in the controller's race? The state controller sits on influential tax boards, but Democratic leaders also believe the casino owners are sending a message to Democratic lawmakers: We reward friends, like the Stricklands. The Democrat-controlled Legislature failed to approve gambling compacts before they ended their 2006 session, angering the tribes seeking to expand their operations.
UPDATE: Dan Morain reports: In another indication that the controller's race is emerging as a major battleground, software giant Intuit reported today that it had poured $1 million into an independent campaign committee called Alliance for a Better Tomorrow, which in turn made an initial $66,000 television purchase for Strickland. The Alliance has taken five-figure donations from an array of other businesses, including tobacco companies, utilities and liquor interests.
And L.A. Times tax expert Evan Halper says that Intuit is hoping to kill off for good California's popular ReadyReturn program, which provides already-completed tax returns to some Californians. In surveys, taxpayers praised the program, which is managed in part by the state controller. But Intuit sees it as a threat to its TurboTax business. The Legislature opted not to renew the program next year after the company spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on a lobbying campaign against it. Intuit wants to make sure it stays dead.
(Photo: AP)
 The Proposition 89 campaign has a new ad that probably won't get on TV very much, given the campaign's funding woes. But it's one of the slickest and most engaging political ads in California right now. Which is ironic, because the ad argues for a halt to the oleaginous, overly simplistic but sometimes engaging political ads that dominate the airwaves during election season.
Watch the ad here.
In this ad, the medium is the message. Rather than targeting corporate donations and their influence on politicians, it attacks television advertising funded by those donations. In essence, they want to clamp down on political speech — the wrong kind, of course. Prop. 89 would severely restrict donations to candidates and limit corporate donations for initiative campaigns to $10,000. That would presumably end advertising campaigns filled with lies and distortions.
Unless, of course, you are a trial lawyer, an Indian tribe or someone extremely wealthy. (Or all three!) As Dan Morain found out, the initiative backers say Prop. 89 would exempt those groups from the $10,000 cap on donations to initiatives. The ad is somewhat misleading because it implies that "rich politicians" would be muzzled. But people like movie producer Steve Bing — who is funding an oil-tax initiative with $40 million of his own money — would be free to run as many ads as they want for their own ballot measure campaigns. And Prop. 89 creates a $200 million pot of money for publicly financed candidates to access; that money could be used for ads filled with lies and distortions as well.
To their credit, the backers make fun of themselves by including their own pro-Prop. 89 ad in the montage as an example of the awful messages on TV.
The new Prop. 89 ad is produced by Bill Hillsman, who first gained national exposure for helping Paul Wellstone win office in Minnesota. Since then, he has worked for the likes of Gov. Jesse Ventura and Texas gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman, whose campaign action figure sells for $20.
 You could almost hear the gasps from the governor's office last May when a media investigation reported numerous sex offenders living near Disneyland in motels. You know, being the happiest place on earth and all, having the state house sex offenders nearby is not something you want pinned on the governor.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's aides scrambled to fix the problem and contain the damage, but it seemed clear this would show up in the 2006 election.
Presto! A group of firefighters, prison guards and teachers has produced a new mailer that uses the Disneyland scandal to paint Schwarzenegger as soft on crime. One of them landed in my mailbox at home this weekend. This is a very tough piece, featuring a rogues' gallery of pedophiles and new clippings about similarly awful types living "within a half-mile radius of schools and children," and Disneyland.
The brochure was funded by Teachers United with Firefighters and Correctional Officers, TUFCO, which is spending at least $525,000 on the mail campaign. The mailer is landing now because many voters are making their decisions on absentee ballots and in early voting locations across the state. More than a dozen cities started early voting last week at satellite locations such as libraries.
Meanwhile today, the Contra Costa Times has a map showing where sex offenders would be barred from living in the Bay Area if Proposition 83 passes next month. Some of the nicest areas — with lots of parks and schools — would be banned to predators under the initiative.
According to the attorney general's website, five sex offenders live in Schwarzenegger's zip code in the very wealthy Brentwood area of Los Angelides. Two are in "violation" and their whereabouts are unknown. The offenses include child molestation, lewd acts on a person under 14, and "sexual battery on a medically institutionalized person" where the victim was "unconscious of the nature of the act." Angelides, who lives eight blocks from me but on a much nicer street, has 123 sex offenders listed in his zip code.
 Known for spending big money on his TV advertising productions — including hiring Hollywood cinematographers — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this year has been saving money in one place: His new TV ad, dubbed "Tomorrow," shares classroom images with TV ads produced for the reelection campaign of Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue of Georgia.
Well, somebody is saving some money. Schwarzenegger and Perdue (in photo) share the same media guy, Fred N. Davis III of Strategic Perception Inc., headquartered in the Hollywood Hills.
Perdue also uses similar "forward" and "backward" imagery that Schwarzenegger has been using against state Treasurer Phil Angelides — "Sonny is moving Georgia forward" and "Gov. Schwarzenegger will keep moving California forward." One of Perdue's ads shows black-and-white images moving backward, much the same as Schwarzenegger's earlier TV ads against Angelides.
 In the Perdue ads and Schwarzenegger's new "Tomorrow" ad, viewers see the same copper-headed teenager raising his hand in the classroom and the same teacher in front. Schwarzenegger's ad uses images from San Francisco as well, and Perdue's pitches feature plenty of scenes with the Georgia governor interacting with average citizens.
A senior Schwarzenegger campaign official said the backward-forward imagery was used first in their ads; Perdue viewed the California governor's ads and liked them, the official said.
For her part, Katie Levinson, communications director for the governor, said the campaign views the ads as "fantastic. We're not surprised they are being mimicked by other people running for office. I suppose imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."
 Speaking of imitation: Angelides' new campaign slogan, "Always on Your Side," which was put on the side of his bus today, is the same slogan that Democrat John Garamendi, candidate for lieutenant governor, has been using for more than a year.
 View the new Schwarzenegger ad here.
View the Perdue ads here and here and here.
(Item updated with images from ads, comment from Schwarzenegger campaign, and Angelides' campaign slogan.)
(Photos: Ric Feld / AP; Campaigns of Schwarzenegger, Perdue)
Alliance for a Better California, the union-backed group that defeated Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's legislative agenda last year, starts a TV advertising blitz Tuesday for Phil Angelides.
The advertising buy is certainly multiple millions of dollars and could last through election day.
This is the big union buy Angelides has been waiting for. The ads say nothing about Angelides, however; they are all about Schwarzenegger. This is an independent expenditure, outside the control of the Angelides campaign.
"We're doing this to make an impact," said Gale Kaufman, the lead consultant to the group, which is receiving money for the ads from the California Teachers Assn., the Service Employees Union International, California Professional Firefighters, and the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn.
There are two ads. The first features three teachers. The second, a teacher, a firefighter, a nurse and a police officer. The general theme, as expected, is trust. Do voters trust the governor from the recall? The special election? This year?
"There is really no evidence what he believes in," Kaufman said. "Our concerns is, were he to be re-elected, we have no idea which Arnold Schwarzenegger would show up for work on Jan. 1."
The ads were produced by McNally Temple, the same firm that helped the Alliance demolish Schwarzenegger during last year's special election. Kaufman declined to say how big the advertising buy would be.
Here is the script of the two 30-second Alliance for a Better California ads hitting the airwaves today supporting Phil Angelides (by questioning whether voters can trust his opponent, Arnold Schwarzenegger.) They are produced by McNally Temple.
TITLE: "In His Own Words"
Announcer: He promised a new beginning.
Schwarzenegger (video clip): I do not have to bow to any special interest. I have plenty of money. No one can pay me off. Trust me. No one.
Firefighter: But he's taken more special-interest money than any governor in history.
Teacher: Over $100 million from oil companies, drug makers and other big business.
Cop: He stands with them against working people and real reform.
Schwarzenegger (video clip): I'm always kicking their butt. That's why they don't like me.
Nurse: No governor. It's because we don't trust you.
TITLE: "In the Eye"
(Three teachers are in a classroom talking directly to the camera.)
Teacher One: We sat across the table from Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Teacher Two: He looked us in the eye and promised to repay the $2 billion he took from our public schools.
Teacher Three: But he broke that promise. (Screen cuts to protest footage.)
Teacher Two: Parents and teachers protested.
Teacher One: He wasted $70 million on a special election.
Teacher Three: To get more power to cut school funding without asking anyone.
Teacher Two: But voters said no.
Teacher One: When he first ran, he promised schools would be his top priority.
Teachers Two: Now he's promising it again.
Teacher Three: But why would we trust him?
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign is using the long tail of cable television to reach voters. Shane Goldmacher of Capitol Weekly looks at slice-and-dice politics. By advertising on the Golf Channel and Fox News, a Republican campaign can still mobilize GOP voters in liberal strongholds like San Francisco.
According to 2005 data compiled by Scarborough Research, a leading market-research company, a Republican is 78% more likely than the average San Francisco resident to be watching the Golf Channel, and 69% more likely to be watching Fox News.
What's more, a campaign can choose to air cable ads in only the more conservative pockets of the Bay Area media market.
|
|
|
One part of the study recommended $1.5 trillion in new funding. But even the smaller number might seem scary to policymakers. There is concern that elected officials will instead focus on other reforms in the report, like how the state needs more teacher
training for English learners, more power for principals to fire teachers and better "collection of
student-specific data." The ad campaign keeps the focus on increasing funding for schools, not just bureaucratic reforms. The script:
Our Blogger