{"id":32621,"date":"2025-10-31T23:09:10","date_gmt":"2025-10-31T23:09:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/32621\/"},"modified":"2025-10-31T23:09:10","modified_gmt":"2025-10-31T23:09:10","slug":"independent-campaign-spending-on-proposition-50-tops-26m","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/32621\/","title":{"rendered":"Independent Campaign Spending on Proposition 50 Tops $26M"},"content":{"rendered":"

Voters in Sacramento got a mailer in recent weeks declaring that \u201cCalifornia\u2019s landmark election reform \u2014 under attack by Sacramento politicians.\u201d Orinda residents have received flyers that shout \u201cFight back against Trump \u2014 Vote Yes.\u201d The narrator on a video ad shared on X<\/a> intones, \u201cTwo wrongs don\u2019t make a right \u2014 Vote No.\u201d<\/p>\n

These are among a barrage of advertisements, yard signs and billboards bombarding Californians with direction to support or oppose redrawing the state\u2019s congressional districts four years ahead of schedule.<\/p>\n

The proposed district map would have little impact on Bay Area congressional districts.<\/p>\n

But none of it was paid for by the major campaigns advocating for and against Proposition 50, the ballot measure put forth by Gov. Gavin Newsom to counter Republican redistricting efforts in Texas. Instead, nonprofits, political parties and a billionaire have financed an independent effort as election day approaches Tuesday.<\/p>\n

Groups not directly affiliated with any Prop. 50 campaign have reported spending nearly $26 million to influence voters as of October 30, more than any ballot measure in California history, according to a CalMatters analysis of secretary of state campaign finance data. The spending does not include the $118 million reportedly spent by the three major campaign committees.<\/p>\n

Proposition 50 has been the subject of more independent expenditures than any previous ballot measure.<\/p>\n

The next largest amounts were spent by independent organizations on two Californa ballot measures rejected by voters: $10.8 million for Proposition 32 in 2012 \u2013 which would have raised the state minimum wage \u2013 and $10.3 million on Proposition 76 in 2005 \u2013 which would have limited increases in state spending.<\/p>\n

The campaigns for or against the two most recent propositions, Proposition 36 in 2024 \u2013 in which voters increased penalties for drug and theft crimes \u2013 and the Newsom Recall Proposition in 2021 \u2013 which was rejected by voters \u2013 spent $2.5 million and $4.3 million, respectively.<\/p>\n

Anybody can buy ads, pay canvassers, or otherwise promote their position on a California ballot measure as long as they register a state committee, disclose major funders in the ads themselves and don\u2019t coordinate with the primary campaigns. Once they\u2019ve spent at least $1,000, they must report their spending to the secretary of state as independent expenditures.<\/p>\n

Independent spending for the redistricting measure is significantly more than the previous record-setting Prop. 32 in 2012, which drew $10.8 million in similar spending and would have restricted campaign contributions from labor unions if it passed.<\/p>\n

The largest spenders outside of the major campaigns this time are billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer, who reported more than $12.8 million in expenditures and the California Republican Party, which poured more than $10.2 million into ads and messaging opposing the measure. As a result, Steyer and the state GOP have become the second- and third-largest independent ad buyers in state history. The only group to have spent more was run by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger\u2019s \u201cCalifornia Dream Team,\u201d which reported spending a combined $27.8 million on multiple ballot measures in 2004 and 2005.<\/p>\n

In yet another example of how the campaign has drawn national attention, Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC, gave $8 million to the state GOP in October, which they used to buy nearly $2.9 million worth of digital ads<\/a> two weeks ago; the super PAC also gave $5 million directly to one of the major campaigns against Prop. 50 \u2014 \u201cStop the Sacramento Power Grab.\u201d<\/p>\n

Some large nonprofit organizations are spending money on Prop. 50, too. The largest expenditures come from the California Community Foundation, which reported spending $800,000 to support the proposition, although that doesn\u2019t capture all of the money the nonprofit is putting into the election.<\/p>\n

Miguel Santana, president and CEO, said that the foundation is additionally spending more than a million dollars to convince voters to participate in the election without telling them specifically how to vote, though efforts to increase turnout without taking a position are not reported to the secretary of state.<\/p>\n

\u201cCalifornia representation at the federal level matters,\u201d Santana said. \u201cOur power is being diluted by the gerrymandering that is taking place in other parts of the country.\u201d<\/p>\n

Not just Democrats and Republicans<\/p>\n

Other political parties and groups in the state have also reported independent expenditures for Prop. 50. The left-leaning California Working Families Party reported spending more than $36,500 on digital ads and outreach to reach voters who might be less receptive to Newsom as a messenger.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis isn\u2019t the fight we wanted, but I think it\u2019s important that California, the most populous state in the country, fights back,\u201d said Jane Kim, California Director of the Working Families Party. \u201cWe really want to hit younger voters who are less party loyalists.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Libertarian Party of California spent more than $6,400 for postcard mailers opposing the proposition. Loren Dean, chairman of the state party, said the outreach was an opportunity to raise the party\u2019s profile. \u201cIt is important to us to take every opportunity to remind people that the \u2018two-party\u2019 choice is a fiction built by would-be monopolists who yearn for authority over their neighbors,\u201d Dean said. \u201cThird-party voices matter.\u201d<\/p>\n

Though not a registered political party, the California Democratic Socialists of America reported spending more than $3,500 to try to persuade voters to vote yes while maintaining distance from Gov. Newsom.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe are not doing this to support him,\u201d said William Prince, co-chair of the organization. \u201cWe must ally with him in the struggle against fascism.\u201d<\/p>\n

Similarly to the Libertarian Party, the DSA also sees value in putting out campaign materials stamped with \u201cDemocratic Socialists of America.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen voters think about who encouraged them to vote against a permanent MAGA majority in Congress, more are going to think of [California] DSA than they would have if we sat this out,\u201d Prince said.<\/p>\n

Elected officials, local parties campaign<\/p>\n

More than two dozen county parties, along with current and former elected officials, have reported more than $1 million in independent expenditures for and against Prop. 50.<\/p>\n

The Sonoma County Democratic Party reported spending nearly $90,000 on postcards, phonebanking and radio ads to support the initiative, while the Yuba County Republican Party reported almost $55,000 to spread opposition signs around Northern California.<\/p>\n

Pat Sebo, chairperson of the Sonoma County Democratic Party, said the county party spent money on its own mailers and canvassing because it wanted to move faster than its state counterpart. \u201cWe wanted to act, we had volunteers, we had them basically beating down the doors at headquarters here,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

\u201cBallot measure campaigns usually do not distribute signs to local Republican groups,\u201d said Johanna Lassaga, chair of the Yuba County Republican Party. She credited her group\u2019s expenditures for raising visibility of the party\u2019s unified position: \u201cIf you drive through the North State, you will see [our signs] everywhere.\u201d<\/p>\n

Along with a $5,000 contribution to the main Yes campaign, former Democratic state Sen. Steve Glazer from Orinda used his ballot measure committee to spend more than $160,000 in support of Prop. 50, because he said he could reach voters in his district in a way a statewide campaign could not.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen you\u2019re running a statewide campaign, you don\u2019t always have that luxury of microtargeting,\u201d\u00a0 Glazer said. \u201cI felt that I had a good handle on the pulse of the voters in my area, where I believe I have a heightened level of credibility.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWe decided we want to do it quicker, better, faster,\u201d said Assemblymember Juan Alanis, Republican from Modesto, whose ballot measure committee<\/a> reported spending more than $12,500 on signs to oppose Prop. 50. He said the short election cycle meant the statewide campaigns could not ensure enough signs would reach his district in time, so he decided to \u201cmake sure my area is taken care of.\u201d<\/p>\n

Assemblymember Maggy Krell, a Democrat who represents Sacramento, said that the most valuable way she could have spent $8,000 was to organize door-knocking in her district. \u201cMy best contribution to the campaign is my network of volunteers \u2014 people who are going door-to-door and engaging voters one conversation at a time,\u201d she wrote in an email.<\/p>\n

Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio from San Diego spent more than $430,000 from his Reform California committee, because he didn\u2019t think the official No campaign was up to the task. He released a final ad<\/a> last week that urged voters statewide to reject Prop. 50.<\/p>\n

\u201cI don\u2019t trust the failed consultants of these mega-committees,\u201d he said. \u201cMy intuition was correct. The ads were horseshit, off-message.\u201d<\/p>\n

Jeremia Kimelman is a reporter with CalMatters.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Voters in Sacramento got a mailer in recent weeks declaring that \u201cCalifornia\u2019s landmark election reform \u2014 under attack…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":32622,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29],"tags":[7,23599,23600,11234,5037,1361,23601,88,90,89],"class_list":["post-32621","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-san-jose","tag-california","tag-campaign-spending","tag-census","tag-congressional-districts","tag-gov-gavin-newsom","tag-proposition-50","tag-reapportionment","tag-san-jose","tag-san-jose-headlines","tag-san-jose-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32621","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=32621"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32621\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32622"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32621"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=32621"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=32621"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}