 The first big campaign contributions are rolling in for an initiative that would alter California's 1990 term limits law, allowing lawmakers to serve 12 years in either house. The initiative, which also would extend the power of Senate leader Don Perata and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (pictured), received a nod of approval yesterday from AG Jerry Brown.
Not surprising, the donations are coming from public employee unions. On Monday, the California State Council of Service Employees Issues Committee, representing one of the largest unions in the state, contributed $200,000 to the Committee for Term Limits and Legislative Reform. Another $50,000 came from the California School Employees Assn., which represents the cafeteria workers, attendance clerks, office staff, janitors and other "classified" employees.
View PDF filings of contributions here and here. It takes about $1.5 million to place an initiative on the ballot. The term limits effort is expected to eventually attract many millions - from all corners of the establishment, not just unions.
(Photo: Rich Pedroncelli/AP)
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.
 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)
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)
 Over the weekend, two Southern California tribes that own casinos dumped $2 million each into a new committee to wage independent campaigns for and against candidates, our money expert Dan Morain reports.
That pushes the overall sum poured into the hitherto nonexistent Team 2006 committee to $7.1 million. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, owners of two casinos in the Palm Springs area, and the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, which owns a casino near Temecula, put $2 million a piece into Team 2006.
 Rumors spread last week that the tribes intended to spend $4 million on behalf of Republican Tony Strickland in his run for state controller — though a spokesman for the committee would not discuss the matter. In a report filed Saturday, Team 2006 disclosed one expenditure of $23,800 on Strickland's behalf. They also are putting a lot of money into legislative races, including more than $400,000 for Assemblywoman Nicole Parra, a Democrat in the competitive Central Valley district.
Strickland and his wife, Republican Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, have been solid supporters of the tribes' efforts to operate casinos on their land. The post of controller may be somewhat obscure.
But controllers sit on the state Franchise Tax Board and Board of Equalization and thus have significant sway over tax policy. Tribes have raised a variety of tax issues before the boards. If Strickland beats Democratic candidate John Chiang, Republicans would hold majorities on both tax boards.
(Photo: Denis Poroy / AP; AP File Photo)
Turns out, it's not just the unions that have put millions behind the Democratic Party effort to attack Schwarzenegger (and boost Angelides.) The Sacramento Bee finds a $2.5 million contribution from Angelo Tsakopoulos, Angelides' longtime friend and mentor, mixed in with union donations to the party.
The California Democratic Party is launching a new television ad statewide tomorrow, once again trying to play on comparisons between Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and President George W. Bush. The ad, titled "Both," is produced by Morris & Carrick, whose co-owner, Bill Carrick, is helping state treasurer Phil Angelides on his media strategy.
The new CDP ad doesn't mention Angelides. But the Democratic party thinks it has a winner with the Bush-Schwarzenegger connection. Here is the script of the new ad: "George W. Bush wants to privatize Social Security. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to privatize the pensions of firefighters, police and teachers. Bush fails to fund his own education program. Arnold Schwarzenegger cuts school funding by $3 billion. George W. Bush raises the cost of college loans. Arnold Schwarzenegger raises college tuition and fees. Both are leaving our children behind. Call Arnold Schwarzenegger. Tell him he is too much like George W. Bush."
The Democratic Party also struck back today at Republicans for accusing them of illegally running "issue ads" attacking Schwarzenegger, like the one above. The state GOP believes that the law clearly forbids the party from running any ads attacking one candidate or supporting another — if the ads are paid for using unlimited donations. This rule kicks in during the 45-day window before an election, which started Saturday.
The GOP filed a complaint Monday with the Fair Political Practices Commission over the Democratic Party ads. But Rick Hasen, expert election law blogger, says it's complicated. He thinks the Democratic Party may have a point — that they can run the ads without being subject to contribution limits. Read his post for more details.
Art Torres, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, just wrote a scathing letter back to Duf Sundheim, chairman of the GOP, telling him he has the law wrong.
Torres says the FPPC has been clear: since the Democratic Party ads are about Schwarzenegger, and since Schwarzenegger obviously didn't ask for them to be produced at his "behest," they don't have to fall under contribution limits. Torres wrote: "Subdivision (c) of section 85310 imposes a contribution limit to persons who pay for communications that feature a clearly identified candidate where that communication is made at the behest of that candidate. Logically, then, if the candidate that is clearly identified in the communication does not behest the communication, then no such contribution limitation would apply." (Emphasis added by Torres.)
The courts or the FPPC will sort it out. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.
UPDATE: Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the California GOP, said this legal back-and-forth won't be the end of it. He criticized Angelides for supporting Proposition 89, which would install modified public financing of campaigns and even stricter donation limits, while allowing the Democrats to "flaunt the law. ... We will be pursuing all of our legal remedies."
Duf Sundheim, chairman of the California GOP, has written his counterpart over at the Democratic Party, Art Torres, asking whether he is still running "issue ads" supporting Phil Angelides. The state is now inside the 45-day window before an election, which means political parties are prohibited from running soft-money ads that support or oppose candidates. That is, unless the ads are produced independently of the candidate. Duf writes: "If you are airing these ads paid for with soft money, you are in violation of the law and you are obligated to inform those media outlets who continue to run them to cease and desist from airing these ads immediately."
Here is an earlier post on this.
The biggest unions in California are inching closer to helping Phil Angelides with a multimillion-dollar advertising blitz. The S.F. Chronicle reports today: "Representatives of the labor group said Tuesday that that their campaign against the governor's re-election will be carried out regardless of its impact on Angelides — mostly because unions do not want Schwarzenegger emerging from November believing he's received a mandate from voters."
The Chronicle says unions could spend as much as $25 million from a coalition of the California Teachers Assn., the Service Employees Union International, and the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn. and others.
The gameplan is not entirely firmed up yet. Sources told Political Muscle that the CTA wants to pitch in $10 million, and we already know the prison guards have booked $5 million in TV time for the final two weeks of the campaign. This pot of $15 million would be coordinated by the McNally-Temple political consulting firm that helped lead the assault on Schwarzenegger during the special election last year.
This week, there should be a decision about the entire buy-in from everyone, and possibly the overall strategy they adopt. The most critical decision will be whether the money gets spent tearing down Schwarzenegger or building up Angelides with biographical spots.
Stay tuned.
 Phil Angelides has raised half as much money as Arnold Schwarzenegger this year — $13.4 million compared to $26.4 million. To compete on television, Angelides must rely on independent groups ponying up millions of their own money to make his case.
Rather than work alone, California's most powerful unions are meeting behind the scenes to form a coordinated campaign for Angelides. But enthusiasm for Angelides is damped by his low poll numbers and confusion over his message, participants said. Few decisions have been made — with about 60 days left.
The unions' level of intensity to defeat Schwarzenegger is only a pale shadow of the effort made by the same groups during the 2005 special election. There are disputes now over the amount of money to be spent, who participates, and when to start.
"Smart people are having trouble figuring out how to be helpful," said one participant.
Some union operatives said the current TV ads by the California Democratic Party linking Schwarzenegger with President Bush are not effective. The polls overshadow everything: If Angelides is still 13 percentage points behind Schwarzenegger in early October -- like he is now in one influential poll -- participants said they undoubtedly will write smaller checks.
The unions believe they have time to get their act together and put ads on the air supporting Angelides. The pro-Angelides group could include the California Teachers Assn., SEIU, California Professional Firefighters, prison guards and perhaps police groups.
Lou Paulson, the firefighter union chief, said launching this month could be meaningless anyway, since most voters are not paying attention. "Last year, the electorate was fired up and angry, but this year they are much more weary," he said.
California Correctional Peace Officers Assn., the prison guards union that has endorsed Angelides, already has booked $5 million in TV time around the state for the final two weeks of the campaign. But they could use that valuable time for any number of things: ads for Angelides, for down-ticket candidates, or even for their own image-building.
Who will control the pot of money? The Alliance for Better California — which includes most of the unions mentioned above and which proved pivotal support in the special election last year — could be fired up again to help Angelides. Or a splinter group may control the campaign, such as TUFCO, Teachers United with Firefighters and Correctional Officers.
"There have been no decisions made yet about whether we do our own thing or work with other groups," said Lance Corcoran with the CCPOA. The delay "sometimes translates into us weakly supporting Mr. Angelides. I don't think that is accurate. This is going to be a hard-fought race."
(Photo: Nick Ut / AP)
|
|
|
The first big campaign contributions are rolling in for an initiative that would alter California's 1990 term limits law, allowing lawmakers to serve 12 years in either house. The initiative, which also would extend the power of Senate leader Don Perata and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (pictured), received a nod of approval yesterday from AG Jerry Brown.
Our Blogger