Obama vs. Romney - How California's Slates of Presidential Electors Are Selected

(For the list of 55 Obama/Biden electors from California, see below.)

California has 55 electoral votes in the 2012 presidential election "electoral college."  Under California law, whichever presidential candidate wins the statewide popular vote is awarded all 55 votes.  The electors assemble in mid-December in Sacramento to formally cast California’s votes for president and president. 

In recent presidential elections, the individual Democratic presidential/vice-presidential electors have been selected by the Democratic party nominee in each congressional district and by the party’s most recent U.S. Senate nominees for each Senate seat.  However, the adoption of Proposition 14 in June 2010 (“top two” primary system) has caused a change in this system.  Beginning with the 2012 presidential election, according to California Elections Code sec. 7100, “the candidate in each congressional district who received the largest number of votes in the primary election among the candidates who disclosed a preference for the Democratic Party shall designate one presidential elector …”

The new system for selecting Democratic presidential electors in California has at least two major implications.  First, in congressional districts where two Democrats will appear on the November ballot, the top vote-getter in the June election selects the Obama-Biden presidential elector for that district.  Therefore, “Pete” Stark, Brad Sherman and Joe Baca will select the Democratic electors in the 15^th, 30^th and 35^th districts respectively, even if their Democratic opponents Eric Swalwell, Howard Berman and Gloria Negrete McLeod end up winning in November. 

Second, in congressional districts where no Democratic candidate advances to the November election, the losing Democrat with the most votes in June gets to name a presidential elector.  Democrats Jackie Conaway in the 8^th District and Pete Aguilar in the 31^st District will not appear on the November ballot, but each has the authority to name a Democratic presidential elector for California.

In other congressional districts, even where “sacrificial lamb” Democratic candidates are unlikely to defeat Republican opponents in November, the Democrat has the authority to name a presidential elector. This must be a valuable “consolation prize” for those Democrats who are unlikely to win.

The Republicans have a different system for selecting presidential/vice-presidential electors in California.  Proposition 14 did not directly affect it.  According to Elections Code section 7300, “the Republican nominees for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Treasurer, Controller, Attorney General, and Secretary of State, the Republican nominees for United States Senator at the last two United States senatorial elections, the Assembly Republican leader, the Senate Republican leader, all elected officers of the Republican State Central Committee, the National Committeeman and National Committeewoman, the President of the Republican County Central Committee Chairmen's Association, and the chairperson or president of each Republican volunteer organization officially recognized by the Republican State Central Committee shall act as presidential electors …”

This means that if “Mitt” Romney wins the California popular vote, then Meg Whitman, Abel Maldonado, Mimi Walters, Tony Strickland, Steve Cooley, Damon Dunn and Carly Fiorina, all of whom have lost bids for statewide office, would meet in Sacramento in mid-December as members of the Electoral College.

The names and residence and business addresses of each presidential elector on each slate must be filed with California Secretary of State Debra Bowen by October 1, 2012.

UPDATE: NAMES OF CALIFORNIA'S 55 ELECTORS PLEDGED TO OBAMA/BIDEN
The following are the names of California's 55 Democratic electors.  At least eight of the 55 are relatives by blood or marriage of the congressional candidates who appointed them.  At least nine electors are non-residents of the congressional districts that they represent. (There is a cluster of non-resident electors in the San Joaquin Valley, where four of the six congressional districts will have electors who reside outside of the Valley.)  Some are financial contributors to the congressional candidates who appointed them.  Some are political consultants to their appointing powers.

California's 55 presidential electors will assemble in Sacramento on Monday, December 17th at 2:00 p.m. to cast the state's electoral votes for Barack Obama for President and Joe Biden for Vice President:

Dolores Clara Huerta - USS (Senator Boxer)
Bakersfield, CA
(Ms. Huerta is a prominent/legendary civil rights/labor leader)
 
Barbara Schraeger - USS (Senator Feinstein)
Sausalito, CA 
(Ms. Schraeger is a retired business consultant who is a campaign contributor to Sen. Dianne Feinstein)

Brooke Reed - CD 1
Fall River Mills, CA
(Democratic candidate Jim Reed appointed his daughter)
 
Daniel Leroux - CD 2
San Rafael, CA
(Democratic candidate Jared Huffman appointed a San Rafael attorney)
 
Patricia W. Garamendi - CD 3
Walnut Grove, CA
(Rep. John Garamendi appointed his wife)
 
Michael Williams Adams - CD 4
Roseville, CA
 
Kyriakos Tsakopoulos - CD 5
Carmichael, CA
(Rep. Mike Thompson appointed a non-resident of his district)
 
Sandy L. Nixon - CD 6
Sacramento, CA
 
Janine Vivienne Bera - CD 7
Elk Grove, CA
(Democratic candidate Dr. Ami Bera appointed his wife)
 
Aaron Samuel Conaway - CD 8
Phelan, CA
(Democratic candidate Jackie Conaway apparently appointed her son)

Ernest Joseph Vasti - CD 9
Stockton, CA
(Rep. Jerry McNerney appointed a local physician)

Ruben Antonio Villalobos - CD 10
Modesto, CA
(Democratic candidate Jose Hernandez appointed a Modesto criminal defense attorney)
 
Gwen Regalia - CD 11
Walnut Creek, CA
(Rep. George Miller appointed a former Walnut Creek city council member/mayor)
 
Jane Morrison - CD 12
San Francisco, CA
(Rep. Nancy Pelosi appointed a longtime San Francisco Democratic Party member, age 92+)
 
Geoffrey Pete - CD 13
Oakland, CA
(Rep. Barbara Lee appointed a local nightclub owner)
 
Ranada Stephenson - CD 14
Hillsborough, CA
(Rep. Jackie Speier appointed a local political activist/campaign donor)
 
Meriam Reynosa Louise - CD 15
San Leandro, CA
(Ms. Reynosa Louise, a nonresident of the district, is President of Southern Alameda County Young Democrats.  She is staff member for state Sen. Ellen Corbett.  As the highest Democratic vote winner in the congressional district in the June 2012 election, Rep. "Pete" Stark appointed her.)

Terry Reardon - CD 16
Sacramento, CA
(Rep. Jim Costa appointed Mr. Reardon, a former member of his state Assembly staff in Sacramento in the 1980s and a nonresident of his congressional district.  Mr. Reardon, who lists his employer as "retired," is a financial contributor to Rep. Costa's campaigns.  In the 1990s,, Mr. Reardon formed an organization called "Californians for Rail Transit.")

Susan Johnson - CD 17
Fremont, CA
(Rep. Mike Honda appointed Ms. Johnson.  She likely is the "Susan M. Johnson" of Fremont who was a delegate to the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Charlotte.)
 
John Freidenrich - CD 18
Atherton, CA
(Rep. Anna Eshoo appointed Mr. Freidenrich, an investor with Regis Management Co.  Mr. Freidenrich is a major financial contributor to Democratic political campaigns.)
 
Jang Badhesha - CD 19
San Jose, CA
(Rep. Zoe Lofgren appointed Jang Badhesha, who apparently is a lab manager at Juniper Networks and a golfer.)

Dennis Donohue - CD 20
Salinas, CA
(Rep. Sam Farr appointed the outgoing Salinas mayor)
 
Dean E. Vogel - CD 21
Davis, CA
(Democratic candidate John Hernandez apparently appointed the president of the California Teachers Association, a non-resident of the district)

Maeley Lock Tom - CD 22
Sacramento, CA
(Democratic candidate Otto Lee apparently appointed a public affairs firm operator, ex-CalPERS board member and State Personnel Board president, a non-resident of the district)
 
Louis Paulson - CD 23
Walnut Creek, CA
(There was not a Democratic candidate for Congress in this congressional district centered on Kern County.  The California Democratic Party apparently appointed Mr. Paulson, a Contra Costa County Fire District employee and political campaign donor, mostly to an International Association of Firefighters political action committee.  He apparently does not reside in this district.)
 
Mollie Culver - CD 24
Santa Barbara, CA
(Rep. Lois Capps appointed Ms. Culver, her campaign manager and a former political director of the California Democratic Party, according to the Ventura County Star website on Dec. 16, 2012.)
 
Christopher Tumbeiro - CD 25
Simi Valley, CA
(Democratic candidate for Congress Lee C. Rogers appointed Mr. Tumbeiro, who is an 18 year-old Royal High School senior, according to the Ventura County Star website on Dec. 16, 2012.)

Sandy Emberland - CD 26
Thousand Oaks, CA
(Ms. Emberland is a volunteer for Democratic congressional candidate Julia Brownley's campaign, according to the Camarillo Acorn of Oct. 19, 2012.  The Ventura County Star reported on Dec. 16, 2012 that Ms. Emberland is a "69-year-old grandmother and retired computer teacher.")

Xiaoguang Sun - CD 27
Cupertino, CA
(Rep. Judy Chu appointed Dr. Sun, who apparently is president of the U.S.-China Agricultural Development Center and president of Ecrossland, Inc. of Cupertino.  He is a non-resident of the district.)

William H. Kysella, Jr. - CD 28
Hollywood, CA
(Rep. Adam Schiff appointed Mr. Kysella, a deputy attorney in the Los Angeles city attorney's office and a member of the state Board of Optometry.)
 
Felipe Fuentes - CD 29
Sylmar, CA
(Congressional candidate Tony Cardenas appointed Mr. Fuentes, who is now a former assemblyman and running for Los Angeles city council in 2013.)
 
John Harold Simpson - CD 30
Encino, CA
 
Alisha Aguilar - CD 31
Redlands, CA
 
Andre Quintero - CD 32
El Monte, CA
(Rep. Grace Napolitano appointed the mayor of El Monte.)
 
Sanford Weiner - CD 33
Los Angeles, CA
 
Maria Teresa Becerra - CD 34
Sacramento, CA
(Rep. Xavier Becerra appointed his mother)
 
Alfonso Sanchez - CD 35
Sacramento, CA
(As the top vote getter among Democratic candidates in the June election, Rep. Joe Baca had the authority to appoint an elector.   Mr. Sanchez, campaign manager of his Democratic rival state Sen. Gloria Negrete McLeod, was somehow appointed. Mr. Sanchez also served as her press secretary in the state senate.  He is a non-resident of the district.)
 
Gregory Lucas Rodriguez - CD 36
Palm Springs, CA
(Democratic congressional candidate Raul Ruiz appointed Gregory Lucas Rodriguez, a self-described "long time Democratic Party and LGBT activist and consultant.")

Diane Watson - CD 37
Los Angeles, CA
(Rep. Karen Bass appointed a former member of Congress)

Laura Lee - CD 38
Cerritos, CA
(Rep. Linda Sanchez appointed a Cerritos city councilmember.)

Karen Chang - CD 39
Hacienda Heights, CA
(Congressional candidate Jay Chen appointed his wife.)

Ricardo Roybal Olivarez - CD 40
Glendale, CA
(Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard appointed her son, a non-resident of the district. Ricardo Olivarez is an attorney with the firm of the Olivarez Madruga law firm.  The law firm website says that he is "Managing Shareholder of the Firm and the current City Attorney for the City of El Monte and the City of Cudahy.")  He has written about the Ralph M. Brown Act, California's primary local government open meeting law, among other matters.
 
Laurie Stalnaker - CD 41
Highland, CA
(Democratic congressional candidate Mark Takano appointed Ms. Stalnaker, the longtime Executive Secretary/Treasurer at Central Labor Council AFL-CIO of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties.)

Mark Macarro - CD 42
Temecula, CA
(Democratic congressional candidate Michael Williamson apparently appointed Mr. Macarro, tribal chairman of the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians.)

Karen Waters - CD 43
Inglewood, CA
(Rep. Maxine Waters appointed her daughter, a political consultant whose firm has done significant business with the congresswoman's campaign committee.)
 
Alexandra Rooker - CD 44
West Sacramento, CA
(Rep. Janice Hahn appointed Ms. Rooker, who apparently is a non-resident of her district.  Ms. Rooker apparently is Alex Gallardo-Rooker, first vice chair of the California Democratic Party and vice president of Communication Workers of America Local 9400.)

Dave Low - CD 45
Sacramento, CA
(Congressional candidiate Sukhee Kang apparently appointed a non-resident.  Dave Low apparently is Executive Director and Director of Governmental Relations of the California School Employees Association.)
 
Michael Ray - CD 46
Laguna Beach, CA
(Rep. Loretta Sanchez apparently appointed Mr. Ray, a non-resident of the district.  He writes a column called "Musings on the Coast" for the Laguna Beach Independent newspaper.  His column describes him, "He makes a living as a real estate entrepreneur and is involved in many non-profits.")

Raymond Cordova - CD 47
Garden Grove, CA
(Congressional candidate Alan Lowenthal appointed Mr. Cordova, who is active in California Democratic Party affairs.)
 
Steven Ray Young - CD 48
Newport Beach, CA
[Congressional candidate Ron Varasteh appointed Mr. Young, who is an attorney.  He is active in state Democratic party affairs and has been Democratic candidate for Congress (2006, 2008) and state senate (2012).]
 
Bobby Glaser - CD 49
San Diego, CA
(Congressional candidate Jerry Tetalman appointed Mr. Glaser, who apparently is owner and president of the La Jolla Group, a firm that specializes in signature gathering for local initiatives.)
 
Bonnie Burns Price - CD 50
La Mesa, CA
(Congressional candidate David Secor appointed Bonnie Burns Price, who has written editorials and other items favoring Democratic political candidates.)
 
Ernesto Encinas - CD 51
San Diego, CA
(Congressional candidate Juan Vargas appointed Mr. Encinas, who apparently is a retired San Diego police detective.  As a retiree, he was a witness in an underage alcohol sale violation case, in which he instructed the "decoy" in the sting operation.)
 
Donald Mullen - CD 52
San Diego, CA
(Congressional candidate Scott Peters appointed Mr. Mullen, chief of staff to San Diego Councilmember Marti Emerald.)
 
Gary Rotto - CD 53
San Diego, CA
(Rep. Susan Davis appointed Mr. Rotto, Director of Health Policy for the Council of Community Clinics, a consortia of 16 private, non-profit health care organizations that provide primary care services primarily to the uninsured and underinsured in San Diego, Imperial and Riverside counties. Mr. Rotto is a frequent contributor to San Diego Jewish World.)

California's Most Politically Independent Cities-By Party Registration

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen has released city-level voter registration statistics as of May 21, 2012.  The percentage of voters registered with "No Party Preference" has increased in recent decades.

Just under 17.2 million voters are now registered in California: 43.4% are Democrats, 30.2% are Republicans and 21.3% have "No Party Preference," commonly known as "independent" or "decline-to-state" registered voters.

The following are the top fifteen cities with the highest percentages of "No Party Preference" registered voters:

(1)   Cupertino (Santa Clara County), 39.7%
(2)   Milpitas (Santa Clara County), 34.5%
(3)   Walnut (Los Angeles County), 32.7%
(4)   Arcadia (Los Angeles County), 32.1%
(5)   Arcata (Humboldt County), 31.9%
(6)   Monterey Park (Los Angeles County), 31.2%
(7)   San Marino (Los Angeles County), 31.1%
(8)   Rosemead (Los Angeles County), 31.1%
(9)   Sunnyvale (Santa Clara County), 30.8%
(10)  San Francisco, 30.6%
(11)  Saratoga (Santa Clara County), 30.5%
(12)  Temple City (Los Angeles County), 30.4%
(13)  Irvine (Orange County), 30.2%
(14)  Foster City (San Mateo County), 29.8%
(15)  San Gabriel (Los Angeles County), 29.8%

Seven of these cities are located in the San Gabriel Valley of Los Angeles County.  Four are located in Santa Clara County.  Two are college towns (Arcata and Irvine).

A common demographic feature among most of these "politically independent" cities is their high percentage of residents of Asian ancestry, as reported in the 2010 Census of Population: Cupertino (63.3% Asian), Milpitas (62.2% Asian), Walnut (63.6% Asian), Arcadia (59.2% Asian), Monterey Park (66.9% Asian, mostly Chinese), San Francisco (33.3% Asian), Saratoga (41.4% Asian), Temple City (55.7% Asian), Irvine (39.2% Asian), Foster City (45.0% Asian) and San Gabriel (60.7% Asian).  Arcata is an outlier, with just 2.6% of its population with Asian ancestry.

Cupertino, the most politically independent California city in terms of voter registration, is perhaps best known as the headquarters of Apple, Inc.  It is the only California city where "No Party Preference" registered voters (39.7%) outnumber both Democrats (36.7%) and Republicans (21.1%).  The 2010 Census of Population found that 63.3% of Cupertino's 58,000 residents are of Asian ancestry (mostly Chinese and Indian).

The most Democratic cities in California are Coachella in Riverside County (73.8%) and Inglewood (73.7%) and Compton (72.4%) in Los Angeles County, followed by three Salinas Valley/U.S. 101 cities in Monterey County, Greenfield (71.0%), Soledad (69.2%) and Gonzales (68.2%).  The least Democratic cities are Villa Park in Orange County (17.8%), Indian Wells in Riverside County (18.3%) and Rolling Hills on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles County (19.5%).

The most Republican cities in California are Indian Wells (64.3%), Villa Park (63.9%), Canyon Lake in Riverside County (58.3%), Rolling Hills (58.0%), and Kingsburg in Fresno County (56.7%).  Yorba Linda, President Richard Nixon's birthplace, is the sixth most Republican city (56.5%).  Ripon in San Joaquin County, sharing the same name as the city where the Republican Party was founded in the 1850s in Wisconsin, is no. 7 (56.0%).  The least Republican cities are Berkeley (4.8%), Inglewood in Los Angeles County (6.7%) and Oakland (6.9%) and Albany (7.1%) in Alameda County.

The cities with the highest American Independent Party registrations tend to be rural communities: Tehama in Tehama County (9.0%, Montague in Siskiyou County (6.7%), Vernon in Los Angeles County (6.7%), Portola in Plumas County (6.7%), Loyalton in Sierra County (6.3%) and Maricopa in Kern County (6.2%).   Some American Independent Party registrants select this party preference in error, assuming that "American Independent" means "No Party Preference."
 
The cities with the highest Green Party registrations are all in the North Coast counties: Arcata (7.4%) and Blue Lake (6.0%) in Humboldt County, Point Arena in Mendocino County (5.1%), Fairfax in Marin County (4.7%), Trinidad in Humboldt County (4.7%) and Sebastopol in Sonoma County (4.5%).

California State Route 99: Road to the Presidency

The January 31st Florida Republican presidential primary has bought much attention to the Sunshine State's Interstate Highway 4 corridor.  Many reports conclude that winning the I-4 corridor communities, extending from Daytona Beach to Orlando to Tampa, is the key to winning Florida and the presidency. (See, for example, the January 27, 2012 report on PBS-TV's Need to Know and the January 30, 2012 report on NBC News Rock Center.)  California has its own "road to the presidency," State Route 99 in the San Joaquin Valley.

California has not been regarded as a "swing" or "battleground" state since 1992.  However. many communities within the Golden State are presidential bellwethers or microcosms of the national electorate.  As these California cities vote, so goes the presidency.

CalPolitiCal has analyzed city-level presidential voting statistics for all California communities for the five presidential elections beginning in 1992.  Democratic candidates won California in all five elections, but the bellwether cities have generally voted like the nation as a whole, backing George W. Bush in 2004, for example.  CalPolitiCal calculated the absolute value of the difference between each community's presidential vote percentage for the Democratic and Republican candidates and the national vote percentage for each election.  These numbers were summed for five elections to create a "score."  The lower the score, the closer the city voted to the national result.

The following are the twenty California communities that have most closely followed the national popular vote since 1992:

(1) Live Oak (Sutter Co.), 13.9%
(2) Brentwood (Contra Costa Co.), 16.7%
(3) Highland (San Bernardino Co., 17.1%
(4) Riverside (Riverside Co.), 17.8%
(5) Fresno (Fresno Co.), 18.6% (on State Route 99)
(6) Vacaville (Solano Co.), 18.9%
(7) Kerman (Fresno Co.), 20.6%
(8) Grover Beach (San Luis Obispo Co.), 21.1%
(9) Woodland (Yolo Co.), 21.9%
(10) Rio Vista (Solano Co.), 22.4%
(11) Madera (Madera Co.), 23.4% (on State Route 99)
(12) Modesto (Stanislaus Co.), 23.8% (on State Route 99)
(13) Vernon (Los Angeles Co.), 23.8%
(14) Merced (Merced Co.), 24.0% (on State Route 99)
(15) Torrance (Los Angeles Co.), 24.3%
(16) Fowler (Fresno Co.), 24.4% (on State Route 99)
(17) Lakewood (Los Angeles Co.), 24.6%
(18) Sonora (Tuolumne Co.), 24.8%
(19) Stanton (Orange Co.), 25.1%
(20) Dinuba (Tulare Co.), 25.2%

Five of the top 16 California presidential bellwether cities are State Route 99 communities in the San Joaquin Valley: Fresno, Madera, Modesto, Merced and Fowler.  Most of these communities were established around Central Pacific Railroad (later Southern Pacific Railroad) stations in the 1870s.

The City of Live Oak (on the Sacramento Valley segment of Route 99) voted Obama 52.5%-McCain 45.8% in 2008, very close to the national results of Obama 53.1%-McCain 45.8%.  Live Oak voted 0.6% below the nation for Obama and exactly the same as the nation for McCain.  Consequently, Live Oak's "score" for the 2008 presidential election was 0.6%. In 2004, Live Oak voted Bush 51.0%-Kerry 47.7%.  Its results closely corresponded with the national outcome: Bush 51.0%-Kerry 48.5%.

San Joaquin County is the best presidential bellwether county in California, although none of its seven incorporated cities is in the top twenty.  Its "score" for the 1992-2008 presidential elections is 19.3%, comparable to presidential bellwether states such as Florida (18.8%) and Nevada (24.8%).  In other words, if San Joaquin County were a state, presidential candidates likely would flock to it.

Presidential Campaigning in the San Joaquin Valley
Numerous presidents and presidential candidates have visited the Route 99 communities in San Joaquin Valley.  The only Democratic presidential nominees who have won the eight Valley counties since World War II were Harry Truman in 1948, Adlai Stevenson in 1956, John F. Kennedy in 1960 and Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.  Hubert Humphrey in 1968 and Jimmy Carter in 1976 came close to winning the Valley -- both lost the Valley to Republicans by under 6,000 votes.  The Route 99 corridor is bellwether or "swing" territory, but the rest of the Valley is reliably Republican, generally speaking.

The Valley vote helped to re-elect President Harry Truman in his surprise 1948 victory after his tour through Route 99 communities. Truman won California based on his 32,000 vote margin in the San Joaquin Valley -- he won California as a whole by 18,000 votes.  Truman took special pride in helping to defeat longtime Republican Congressman Bertrand Gearhart, a staunch conservative who had represented Fresno County since 1935.  (Cecil White, the Democrat who defeated Gearhart, lasted just one term in Congress.)

Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower won the San Joaquin Valley in 1952 to Democrat Adlai Stevenson by 30,000 votes, but lost the re-match in the Valley in 1956 by 10,000 votes.

In 1960, John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon campaigned vigorously down the Route 99 corridor.  Sen. Kennedy conducted a "whistle stop" train tour of the San Joaquin Valley on September 9, 1960.  The train stopped in Stockton, Modesto, Turlock, Merced, Madera, Fresno and Tulare, among other Valley communities.

Kennedy said from the rear platform in Stockton: "I think here in this valley you know what can be done. Today is the 110th anniversary of California's admission to the Union. This country and this valley was a desert 100 years ago. It shows what this State can do. It shows what this country can do." In Modesto, Kennedy responded to a question concerning religion from the audience assembled along the train tracks: "There is a question of do I believe all Protestants are heretics. No, and I hope you don't believe all Catholics are. May I say that it seems to me that the great struggle today is between those who believe in no God and those who believe in God. I really don't see why we should engage in close debate over what you may believe and what I may believe. That is my privilege and your privilege."These remarks carried special significance because three days later Kennedy delivered a major speech on religion before Protestant ministers in Houston.  Kennedy said in Turlock, "This valley shows what can be done by community effort. Here in this valley you have harnessed the land and the water for the use of the people."  In Merced, Kennedy noted that it was the 110th anniversary of California statehood, touched on the Lincoln presidential campaign a century earlier and called for the creation of the federal Medicare program.  He also said, "We are campaigning in this State of California because I think this is the place where this election can be won in November."  

The stop in Madera was brief because of rain, Kennedy told the people assembled there.  Fresno was the site of a significant Kennedy speech called "Pathways to Peace."  His advance text said in part, "We are not satisfied with a so-called peace that is merely an interval between two wars. And we are unwilling to accept a peace of slavery, imposed upon us by foreign rulers. Neither do we want the peace of the prison or the grave."  Kennedy also said in Fresno: "This valley and this State have many problems. We traveled today from Sacramento, down through the rain. If that rain continues, there is a chance that the farmers of this valley who grow raisins could lose in 1 day $50 million. It indicates as nothing else does why I think it is important that this country concern itself with what I conceive to be the No.1 domestic problem that the United States faces, and that is the decline in agricultural income."  Kennedy introduced his sister Pat Lawford, then a California resident, at most stops. 

In the final days of the 1960 campaign, on November 4th, then-Vice President Nixon addressed a rally  in downtown Fresno, where he said, "[C]oming to Fresno and seeing all these signs reminds me of the trips that Pat and I have made in previous years out through Sanger and Reedley and all the other towns that we couldn't get to this time - and we thank you for coming not only from there, but we understand from clear down Bakersfield way, from Modesto, Merced, and all the way around. This is really a central California meeting - and, believe me, it means we're on the way in the great Central Valley, and if we're on the way there it means California all the way on November 8 for our ticket."  He also delivered a major television address via KFRE-TV in Fresno (then a CBS affiliate on channel 12).  Also in Fresno on November 4, 1960, Nixon  issued statements on oil and Social Security proposed policies.

In 1960, Kennedy ended up winning the eight San Joaquin Valley counties collectively by 11,000 votes, but losing California by 36,000 ballots.  (Kennedy decisively won Merced, Madera, Fresno and Kings counties, won narrowly in Stanislaus County and lost San Joaquin, Tulare and Kern counties.)

President Lyndon Johnson was the last Democratic presidential nominee who won the San Joaquin Valley.  In 1964, he defeated Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater there by 140,000 votes.  In 1968, Nixon won the Valley by 5,600 ballots, narrowly defeating Democratic Vice President Hubert Humphrey.  Nixon took the Valley decisively in 1972, defeating Democratic Sen. George McGovern by 81,000 votes.

President Jimmy Carter visited Merced (where he held a town hall meeting) and Modesto on the July 4, 1980 Independence Day holiday.  Joy Karin Boese, a girl who asked a question at the Merced event, was invited with her family to a private dinner at the White House with the Carter family and the family of U.S. Rep. Tony Coehlo on August 28, 1980.  (Carter returned to Merced on May 3, 2010 to receive the Alice and Clifford Spendlove Prize in Social Justice, Diplomacy and Tolerance at U.C. Merced.)

Carter lost the San Joaquin Valley to President Gerald Ford in 1976 by a mere 5,000 votes.  Carter came closer to winning the Valley than has any Democratic presidential candidate since the 1964 Johnson landslide.

Read more here: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2010/05/04/1409543/uc-merced-honors-carter-39th-president.html#storylink=cpy

In 1980, Republican Ronald Reagan swept the Valley as he did most of the nation, winning the Valley by 104,000 votes.  Reagan defeated former Vice President Walter Mondale by 152,000 votes in the Valley in 1984.  Vice President George H.W. Bush won the Valley by 82,000 ballots in 1988.

Democratic Gov. Bill Clinton lost the Valley to President George H.W. Bush in 1992 by 17,000 votes.  Independent presidential candidate Ross Perot won 19.6% of the Valley's 1992 vote. President Clinton had a question-and-answer session with students at Abraham Lincoln Middle School in Selma in September 1995.  A year later, Clinton returned to the Route 99 corridor to speak at another school, Morris E. Dailey Elementary School in Fresno.

Clinton lost the Valley by a wider margin in 1996 to Republican Robert Dole, by 49,000 votes.  Fresno County went narrowly to Clinton in 1992, but flipped to Dole in 1996.  The Republican margin of victory increased in Kern County from 20,000 votes in 1992 to 30,000 votes in 1996.

In 2000, Gov. George W. Bush defeated Vice President Al Gore in the Valley by 118,000 votes.

First Lady Michelle Obama addressed the graduates of U.C. Merced in May 2009.  A few months earlier, Barack Obama lost the Valley by 32,000 votes, but won San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced and Fresno counties.  Four years earlier, Democrat John Kerry lost the Valley to President George W. Bush by 214,000 votes.

San Francisco Bay Area Television-25 Years of Early Morning News

Today the early morning television airwaves in the San Francisco Bay Area are saturated with local news broadcasts.  Five stations (KTVU, KRON, KPIX, KGO and KNTV) produce a total of 17 hours of local news on weekdays between 4 a.m. and 9 a.m.  Twenty-five years ago, in the summer of 1986, the same stations produced zero hours of local news (excepting the local cut-ins to network programs at 7:25 and 8:25 a.m.).

The world of Bay Area television news broadcasting changed on Monday, September 1 (Labor Day), 1986 when KRON-TV (channel 4, then an NBC affiliate) debuted "Daybreak," a half-hour local newscast from 6:30 a.m. to 7 a.m.  "NewsCenter 4 Daybreak" was then the only local newscast on the Bay Area television dial between 4 a.m. and 9 a.m. (aside from the five-minute cut-ins to the network morning programs at 7:25 and 8:25 a.m.).  Lloyd Patterson and Lila Petersen were the co-anchors.  This half-hour program a quarter century ago spawned the seven hours on KRON (4 a.m. to 11 a.m.), 4 1/2 hours on KTVU (4:30 a.m. to 9 a.m.) and 2 1/2 hours on KPIX, KGO and KNTV (4:30 a.m. to 7 a.m.) that Bay Area viewers see today.

"Daybreak" had a texture that was different from KRON's other newscasts in 1986.  Traffic reporting was heavily emphasized.  Newscasts generally began with live shots of traffic conditions at the toll plazas of the Bay Bridge and Golden Gate Bridge (live traffic cameras were a rarity then).  Much of the content was from KRON's newscasts that aired the previous day.  [For example, the evening anchors' (Jim Paymar and Sylvia Chase) laughter sometimes could be heard during the taped Wayne Shannon commentaries that aired during "Daybreak."]  The New York Stock Exchange began trading at 6:30 a.m. PT, giving 'Daybreak' an opportunity to be among the few broadcast television sources of opening-bell market trends (aside from the Financial News Network on San Jose's channel 48, which had yet to convert to its Spanish language Telemundo format.)  "Bumpers" before commercial breaks included trivia questions and cartoon clips.  A mid-1987 promo summarized what made 'Daybreak' distinctive: "“When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  Daybreak – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30.”When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  'Daybreak' – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30."

“When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  Daybreak – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30.”“When the day begins, ‘Daybreak’ is ready.  With local news, stocks, weather and live traffic reports.  Daybreak – the Bay Area’s first newscast.  Weekdays at 6:30.”

KNTV (channel 11), then the ABC affiliate in the San Jose/Salinas/Monterey television market, in 1987 or early 1988 followed KRON with its 15-minute "Good Morning San Jose" program at 6:45 a.m., displacing the last quarter of the hour-long "ABC World News This Morning."

In January 1988, KGO-TV (channel 7, ABC owned & operated station) announced that it would challenge KRON with its own early morning newscasts, two 15-minute newscasts at 6:00 a.m. and 6:30 a.m., interspersed with 15-minute segments of "ABC World News This Morning" at 6:15 and 6:45 a.m.  It was on the air by mid-1988.  Russ Coughlan, former KGO general manager, was the anchor of a low-budget newscast that featured Coughlan holding up and reading morning newspapers on the air.  KGO touted the fact that its newscast began earlier than KRON's, beginning a "war" for earlier and earlier start times.

The earth literally shook before KPIX-TV (channel 5, then a Westinghouse-owned CBS affiliate) entered the early morning news race.  Its 6:30 a.m. newscast evolved out of special coverage following the October 17, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake.  By that time KRON had already expanded "Daybreak" to a full hour, beginning at 6 a.m.

KTVU (channel 2, Cox Broadcasting-owned Fox affiliate) began competing in the early morning news market in January 1991 when "Mornings on 2" debuted from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., featuring host Steve McPartlin, news anchor Terry Lowry and reporter Eric Greene.  Its competitive advantage was that it was the only local newscast against the network programs during its two-hour time slot.  It was then said to be the first local newscast in the western United States to challenge the network programs.  "Mornings on 2" replaced a two-hour children's block, including "G.I. Joe," "Adventures of the Gummi Bears," "Duck Tales" and "Merrie Melodies."

In August 1996, KTVU added a 6 a.m. to 7 a.m. newscast called the "KTVU Morning News," anchored by Dianne Dwyer and Ross McGowan.  That newscast expanded earlier to 5:30 a.m. in August 1998.  Today it begins at 4:30 a.m.

In the early 1990s, local stations increased their local cut-ins to network programs.  In 1992, for example, KRON added 7:55 and 8:55 a.m. five-minute newscasts to join its 7:25 and 8:25 a.m. ones.  "Daybreak" had expanded to two hours (5 a.m. to 7 a.m.) by 1998.  Now KRON begins its local newscasts at 4 a.m., a half-hour earlier than its four rivals.

KPIX ran a local newscast called "Channel 5 This Morning" during the 7 a.m. to 8 a.m. hour in mid-1996.  Anchored by Marcia Brandwynne, it was blended with network content.  KPIX ran a network news program from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m.

Cox Broadcasting, KTVU's owner, bought KICU-TV in San Jose in 1999.  In 2000, KTVU simulcast "Mornings on 2" on KICU. KICU occasionally broke away from KTVU to air Santa Clara County-focused items.

KRON "Daybreak" anchors in the 1990s included Susan Blake (began in 1990) and John Kessler.  [Here are "Daybreak" promos from 1997 and 1999 (featuring John Kessler, Darya Folsom, Christine Nubla, Michelle Franzen and Brian Hackney).]  In January 2002, KRON lost its NBC affiliation and became "independent."  It created its "KRON 4 Morning News" in the 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. timeslot to replace the "Today" program that moved to KNTV.  Eventually the "Daybreak" name was removed from the pre-7 a.m. broadcast.

KCRA-TV, the NBC affiliate in Sacramento, has produced an early morning newscast longer than any Bay Area station.  Well before "Daybreak" premiered on KRON in 1986, KCRA had long broadcast an hour-long "Channel 3 Reports" program from 6 to 7 a.m.

KMST-TV (now KCCN-TV), the CBS affiliate in Monterey (channel 46), also may have beaten KRON to the early morning airwaves.  In September 1986, it aired a 15-minute program called "Morning in Monterey" at 6:15 a.m.

KSBW-TV, the NBC affiliate in Salinas (channel 8), was perhaps one of the last NBC stations that had no local morning newscast whatsoever.  It began producing 7:25 and 8:25 a.m. newscasts in early 1987.  Its first early morning newscast began in August 1987 in the 6:30 to 7 a.m. time slot, featuring Diane Guerrazzi as anchor and Jim Adamson as weatherman.  (KSBW's 11:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. newscasts began the same day, effectively doubling the station's weekday local news productions.)

To make room for "Daybreak," KRON moved the half-hour "NBC News at Sunrise," then anchored by Bob Jamieson, to the 6 to 6:30 a.m. time slot.  "Sunrise" displaced an morning re-broadcast of the previous evening's "Entertainment Tonight."  In August 1986, KRON's five-minute news breaks at 6:45, 7:25 and 8:25 a.m. were called "Daybreak" so that program title antedated the half-hour newscast that began in September 1986.

The "Daybreak" logo was a rising sun that was reminiscent of the logo for NBC's "Today" program.  "Today" co-anchors Bryant Gumbel and Jane Pauley cut promos in 1986 for KRON's "Daybreak."  Pauley's five second promo implored viewers to "Give your 'Today' a great start.  Watch NewsCenter 4 'Daybreak.'"

Today five Bay Area stations air local newscasts at 6:30 a.m. weekdays.  When "Daybreak" premiered on KRON in that time slot in 1986, its competition was "Alvin and the Chipmunks" cartoon on KTVU, the "CBS Early Morning News" on KPIX, the last half-hour of "ABC World News This Morning" on KGO.

California State Senate District Numbering: Special Election Law Should Be Amended

The issue of odd/even state senate district numbering has vexed the California political system after every decennial redistricting since the scheme began 132 years ago. Due to shifting district numbers and lines, citizens inevitably are subject to “deferrals” (having no senator until a year ending with “4”) and “accelerations” (having two senators during that period).

If a senate seat that will be elected in November 2014 becomes vacant early, current state law strangely requires use of “old” district borders in special elections held before then, even though “new” districts take effect for other senators in 2012. Absurdly, un-represented residents of the new district are deprived of an opportunity to resolve their “deferral” while residents of the old district may get to elect two senators a few months apart (or even on the same day).  

Courts have upheld this practice, but have not forbidden alternatives.  In Legislature v. Reinecke (1973), the California Supreme Court held there was no violation of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause in the continuance of staggered terms in state senate elections following redistricting.
The court observed that if the California Constitution's provision concerning staggered terms were given effect, the senators in odd districts elected in 1972 were entitled to serve until 1976, and if vacancies occurred in those districts before 1976, they would be filled using the 1972 districts.  This is a longstanding principle, earlier upheld in People ex rel. Snowball v. Pendegast (1892).  However, no court apparently has required this practice.

California Elections Code sec. 10704 mandates that special elections be held in "the district in which the vacancy occurred." The Legislature ought to revise sec. 10704 to mandate that new senate district boundaries be used in all special elections on and after November Election Day in years ending “2.” Otherwise, Governor Brown should order use of new districts in special election proclamations that he issues pursuant to California Constitution, Article IV, sec. 2 (“When a vacancy occurs in the Legislature the Governor immediately shall call an election to fill the vacancy.”). These remedies would ensure that senators represent as many Californians as possible.

UPDATE (December 8, 2012): State Sen. Doug LaMalfa resigned his senate seat in September 2012 in anticipation of his victory in the vacant 1st Congressional District race in November 2012.  Consequently, a special election to determine his replacement in the "old" 4th Senate District was held on November Election Day.

The "old" 4th Senate District included all of Del Norte, Siskiyou, Shasta, Butte, Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, Sutter and Yuba counties and portions of Nevada and Placer (Rocklin, Lincoln, Loomis) counties.  The "new" 4th Senate District encompasses a much smaller geographic area: all of Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, Sutter, Yuba and Butte counties plus portions of Placer (city of Roseville) and Sacramento counties.

Siskiyou and Shasta counties, western Nevada County (Grass Valley/Nevada City) and the Lincoln/Loomis/Rocklin area of Placer County, have been transferred to the new 1st Senate District.  Consequently, voters in those areas voted for two state senators on the November 2012 ballot (the "old" 4th District and the new 1st District).  Del Norte and Trinity counties were transferred from the old 4th District to the new 2nd Senate District (but they voted in November 2012 for the special senate election in the "old" 4th District).

The city of Roseville in Placer County presently does not have representation in the state senate as it was part of the "old" 1st Senate District (which no longer exists) and is part of the "new" 4th Senate District (next election is in November 2014).  Therefore, Roseville is a "deferral" state senate jurisdiction.

Had Elections Code sec. 10704 been amended or had Governor Brown issued a special election proclamation declaring that the "new" Senate District 4 been "the district in which the vacancy occurred," then the city of Roseville would be represented in the state senate the next two years and Siskiyou and Shasta counties and the Grass Valley/Nevada City area of Nevada County would have been spared the second senate election.

California's 11th Congressional District: U.S. Rep. Jerry McNerney's Remarkable Electoral Success

California’s sprawling 11^th Congressional District (most of San Joaquin County, Brentwood, Pleasanton, Dublin, San Ramon, Danville and Morgan Hill) almost certainly will be changed significantly in the 2011 re-districting. It has proven to be among the state’s most politically volatile constituencies.

U.S. Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) was the only successful general election challenger in all of California’s 173 legislative districts (federal and state) in the past decade, when he defeated seven-term Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Tracy) in 2006. McNerney barely won re-election against San Ramon attorney David Harmer (R) in 2010 (48.0% McNerney vs. 46.9% Harmer, a 2,658 vote plurality). No other incumbent than Pombo was defeated in a general election in a California congressional, state senate, or assembly race in the past decade.

McNerney’s victory in 2006 was improbable, but his win in 2010 was astounding. Last November, McNerney was the only Democrat who won a "Whitman-Fiorina" congressional or state legislative district. Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman defeated Democrat Jerry Brown by two percentage points in the 11^th Congressional district (48.9% Whitman vs. 46.7% Brown). McNerney was the only Democrat who prevailed in the 59 federal and legislative districts that favored Whitman (19 Congress, 13 state senate, 27 assembly). Carly Fiorina, the Republican senatorial nominee, defeated Sen. Barbara Boxer by nearly seven percentage points in CD-11 (50.7% Fiorina vs. 43.8% Boxer).

McNerney's percentage in CD-11 in 2010 (48.0%) was higher than Brown's (46.7%) or Boxer's (43.8%). This was his victory. There were no "top-of-the-ticket coattails" for him to ride on.

Brown and Boxer won in the other 33 congressional districts won by a Democratic congressional candidate. Boxer even won in the two other San Joaquin Valley districts represented by Democrats, despite the Delta water pumping controversy. She defeated Fiorina in the 18^th congressional district, stretching from central Stockton to Merced County (represented by Dennis Cardoza, 47.9% Boxer vs. 44.5% Fiorina) and in the 20^th congressional district, including Kings County and portions of Fresno and Kern counties (represented by Jim Costa, 48.3% Boxer vs. 43.5% Fiorina).

The only Republican congressional candidate who won in a “Democratic” district in 2010 was Dan Lungren in CD-3 (Rio Vista and Sacramento, Amador, Calaveras and Alpine counties). Jerry Brown barely defeated Meg Whitman in CD-3 (47.6% Brown vs. 47.4% Whitman, a 725-vote plurality for Brown), but Carly Fiorina handily defeated Barbara Boxer in CD-3 (Fiorina 52.9% vs. Boxer 40.7%). So, in other words, all congressional districts that elected Republican U.S. Representatives voted for Fiorina, Dan Lungren was the only Republican to win a “Brown for Governor” congressional district and Jerry McNerney was the only Democrat to win a “Whitman for Governor” or “Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senator” congressional district.

In 2008, CD-11 voted Barack Obama 53.8% vs. John McCain 44.5% in the presidential race as McNerney defeated Republican Dean Andal, 55.3% vs. 44.7%. In 2006 in CD-11, Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarznegger trounced Democratic State Treasurer Phil Angelides, 65.3% vs. 31.1%, while Sen. Dianne Feinstein prevailed over Republican Richard "Dick" Mountjoy, 55.4% vs. 40.3%. Riding on a national Democratic trend, McNerney defeated Pombo 53.3% vs. 46.7% in that election. While “top of the ticket” Democrats won CD-11 in 2006 (Feinstein) and 2008 (Obama), McNerney prevailed in 2010 despite losses by Brown and Boxer in his district. McNerney in 2010 won despite an anti-Democratic trend in his district and national antipathy towards his party.

McNerney’s political success also is remarkable because most CD-11 communities are “bellwether cities” in statewide elections, full of independent-minded voters (considered “fickle” by partisans). As “bellwether city” voters decide, so goes California. Tracy, for example, voted closer to the statewide result in the 2010 gubernatorial election than any other California city. Dublin was no. 27.

Senator Boxer’s loss of CD-11 in 2010 was in contrast to her victory there six years earlier. In 2004, Boxer defeated former Secretary of State Bill Jones (R), 50.2% vs. 46.6%. She lost 6.4 percentage points in 2010 compared with 2004. Her narrow victory in 2004 demonstrated that it was possible for a Democrat to win in CD-11, even as Republican President George W. Bush defeated Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the presidential race there, 53.9% vs. 45.3%. [In 2004, Boxer won in all congressional districts that elected Democrats to the House and in three congressional districts that elected Republicans: CD-11 (Pombo), CD-26 (Dreier) and CD-45 (Bono).] Boxer’s success in 2004 in CD-11 helped to persuade McNerney to re-challenge Pombo in 2006. Although Pombo strongly defeated McNerney in 2004, 61.3% vs. 38.7%, McNerney rose 14.6 percentage points to oust Pombo in 2006.

Republicans have won all four gubernatorial elections in CD-11 in the past decade. In addition to Whitman's defeat of Brown there in 2010, Schwarzenegger won CD-11 in 2003 and 2006 and Bill Simon (R) defeated Gov. Gray Davis (D) in 2002 (Simon 50.5% vs. Davis 40.9%).

McNerney's Wins More Impressive Than Tauscher's In 1990s

McNerney's victories in 2006 and 2010 were more impressive than Ellen Tauscher's wins in the 10th Congressional District in the 1990s because she was aided by "coattails" from Democratic presidential and gubernatorial candidates at the top of the ticket who won in her district. In the 1996 presidential race, CD-10 voted 48.2% Bill Clinton (D) - 42.6% Bob Dole (R) - 6.2% Ross Perot (Reform). Tauscher (D) narrowly unseated two-term Rep. Bill Baker (R) that election, no doubt aided by Clinton's 5.6 percentage point advantage. CD-10 voted 56.0% Gray Davis (D) - 41.3% Dan Lungren (R) in the 1998 gubernatorial election. In the 2000 presidential contest, CD-10 favored Al Gore (D) over George W. Bush (R) [Gore 52.1%, Bush 44.8%, Nader 3.1%]. With Gray Davis and Al Gore decisively winning CD-10 in 1998 and 2000, Tauscher won both of those elections comfortably. With Democratic gubernatorial nominees losing CD-11, McNerney had no such help in 2006 and 2010.

State Senate Districts - 2010 Election - Two Republican Districts "Crossed Over"

In 2010, 38 of the 40 state senate districts voted for the gubernatorial and U.S. Senate nominees of the parties that won the state senate seat in the most recent election. In other words, these districts elected Democratic state senators and voted "Brown-Boxer" or elected Republican senators and voted "Whitman-Fiorina." None of the districts that elected Democratic state senators voted for Whitman or Fiorina. However, among the 15 districts that elected Republican state senators, SD-12 (Cannella) and SD-15 (Blakeslee) crossed party lines and favored both Brown for Governor and Boxer for U.S. Senate.

State Assembly Districts - 2010 Election - One Republican District for Brown; Two Democratic Districts for Fiorina

Three Assembly districts were "crossovers" in the 2010 elections for governor and U.S. Senate. All three were "Brown-Fiorina" districts: AD-5, AD-10 and AD-30.

In November 2010, 52 Assembly districts elected Democratic assembly members; 28 districts elected Republican assembly members. A total of 53 Assembly districts supported Brown for Governor (all of the districts that elected Democratic assembly members plus AD-30, which elected Republican David Valadao). Twenty-seven Assembly districts favored Whitman. The only "crossover" Assembly district in the gubernatorial election was AD-30.

In the U.S. Senate election, 50 Assembly districts supported Boxer and 30 Assembly districts favored Fiorina. Two districts that elected Democrats to the Assembly supported Fiorina for U.S. Senate: AD-5 (Pan) and AD-10 (Huber). All districts that elected Republican assembly members voted for Fiorina.

Final Analysis: McNerney Is Only Democratic Federal or State Legislator Who Represents "Whitman-Fiorina" District

Congressman Jerry McNerney is the only Democrat who represents a "Whitman-Fiorina" district. Of the 111 federal and state legislative districts now represented by Democrats, only McNerney's district favored Whitman for governor. McNerney is one of the three Democratic federal and state legislators whose districts supported Fiorina for U.S. senator [along with AD-5
(Pan) and AD-10 (Huber)].

Of the 62 federal and state legislative districts currently represented by Republicans, four crossed over and voted for Brown for governor [CD-3 (Rep. Lungren), SD-12 (Sen. Cannella), SD-15 (Sen. Blakeslee), AD-30 (Assemb. Valadao]. Sixty of the 62 legislative districts represented by Republicans voted for Fiorina for U.S. Senate; the two "crossover" districts that voted for Boxer for U.S. Senate were SD-12 and SD-15.

"Air War": Political Advertising on San Francisco Bay Area Broadcast Television: November 2010 Election: Part Two: Ballot Measures

This is Part II of CalPolitical’s analysis of political advertising on San Francisco Bay Area broadcast television in the days leading up to the November 2010 election (a.k.a. "The Air War"). This article focuses on advertising for and against the various statewide ballot measures. Part I discussed candidate advertising.

CalPolitiCal compiled all political ads that appeared during the 11 p.m. newscasts on four television stations in the San Francisco Bay Area on the six nights leading up to the November 2010 election.

The 11 p.m. “late news” generally is the most-watched local newscast produced by a particular television station, according to the November 2010 Nielsen ratings. CalPolitiCal’s analysis included the following four newscasts:

(1) KRON’s “KRON 4 News at 11 p.m.” (16,000 viewers, Independent/My Network station)

(2) KPIX’s “CBS 5 Eyewitness News at 11 p.m.” (49,000 viewers, CBS owned-and-operated)

(3) KGO’s “ABC 7 News at 11 p.m.” (48,000 viewers, ABC owned-and-operated)

(4) KNTV’s “NBC Bay Area News at 11 p.m.” (28,000 viewers, NBC owned-and-operated)

Omitted were KTVU’s “Ten o’clock News” (88,000 viewers), which airs an hour earlier, the Spanish language 11 p.m. newscasts on KDTV (29,000 viewers) and KSTS (3,000 viewers) and the hour-long Mandarin News at 10 p.m. on KTSF (channel 26). The 11 p.m. newscasts on KPIX, KGO and KNTV are 35 minutes long; KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast generally ends by 11:30. Perhaps to take advantage of the abundant political advertising, KRON temporarily expanded its 11 p.m. newscast to 35 minutes during the weeks leading up to the November 2010 election.

The “Study Period” included six nights: Wednesday, October 27^th through Monday, November 1^st (Election Eve). Television commercials that ran immediately before, during and immediately after the 11 p.m. newscasts were included.

Ballot measure and issue ad spots tend to be much more expensive than candidate advertising on broadcast television. In the 60 days preceding a general election, television advertising for candidates generally may be purchased at "lowest unit rates."

"Jobs" was the keyword of the November 2010 election. "Jobs" was worked into many ads for propositions. It was the major theme of the successful "No on 24" television campaign and a major point in many of the "No on 23" TV ads, for example.

I. Proposition 19 (Marijuana Legalization)

No ads supporting or opposing Proposition 19 aired during the Study Period. "No on 19" won with 53.5% of the statewide vote.

II. Proposition 20 (Citizens Redistricting Commission-Congressional Districts)

“Yes on 20” ran a total of ten spots during the study period, all of them the “children playing marbles” ad. Four of the ten spots ran on KRON; two spots apiece ran on KPIX, KGO and KNTV. “Yes on 20” ran ads on all four stations on Election Eve. "Yes on 20" won the election with 61.3% of the statewide vote.

III. Proposition 21 (Vehicle License Fee for Parks)

“Yes on 21” ran at least 15 spots during the six-day Study Period. “Yes on 21” ads ran seven times on KPIX, five on KGO and three on KNTV. None ran on KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast. Many of the “Yes on 21” spots were “bookends;” in many airings, the same 15-second ad ran at the beginning and end of each commercial break. The favored “Yes on 21” ad changed during the Study Period. Whereas on October 27^th the ad ending with the girl at the drinking fountain was mostly commonly aired, by October 29^th the ad with the fox at the end was most commonly used.

No “No on 21” ads were aired during the Study Period. "No on 21" won the election with 57.3% of the statewide vote.

IV. Proposition 22 (Ban on State Borrowing from Local Governments)

No ads supporting or opposing Proposition 22 aired during the Study Period. "Yes on 22" won with 60.7% of the statewide vote.

V. Proposition 23 (Suspension of AB 32, Global Warming Act of 2006)

During the weeks leading up to the November 2010 election, the main 30-second ad against Proposition 23 was "Forward Backward." The YouTube posting characterized this ad, "Our first TV spot against Prop 23, the deceptive ballot measure bankrolled by two Texas oil companies, that would give them the license to pollute our air." Windmills and solar panels were shown. It emphasized onscreen "California 500,000 clean energy jobs and growing". Onscreen text said that Proposition 23 was "Dirty Energy" that "Would keep California addicted to oil" and "Threatens 500,000 California jobs."

On or about October 29th, a new 30-second ad began appearing on Bay Area television, "Enough." The image at the beginning was of an oil refinery with the phase "Haven't we had enough of dependence on oil?" on the screen and spoken by a male narrator. This ad repeatedly referred to "two Texas oil companies." "Two Texas Oil Companies Prop 23 would kill clean energy jobs," "Two Texas Oil Companies' Prop 23 hurts California's economy," "Two Texas Oil Companies' Prop 23 increases pollution" and "Two Texas Oil Companies' Prop 23 increases health risks" were other onscreen messages. (The anti-Texas theme had particular resonance in the San Francisco Bay Area at the time because the San Francisco Giants were in contention with the Texas Rangers for baseball's "World Series.") The ad indirectly alluded to the Louisiana "Deep Horizon" oil spill by showing video of a burning offshore oil rig. The final onscreen message in the ad was "STOP the Dirty Energy Proposition NO on 23."

The disclaimer for the "Enough" ad said that it was "Paid for by No on 23 - Californians to Stop the Dirty Energy Proposition. Sponsored by Business and Environmental Organizations for Clean Energy and Jobs. Major funding by Thomas Steyer and the National Wildlife Federation." Thomas Steyer is founder and co-senior managing partner of Farallon Capital Management, LLC.

During the Study Period, "No on 23" ran two ads focusing on public health problems associated with "dirty energy." The 30-second American Lung Association ad featured Jane Warner, president of the American Lung Association in California. The 15-second ad featured Dr. Arti Desai. The YouTube posting for Dr. Desai's ad stated, "Pediatrician Dr. Arti Desai, M.D. talks about why the American Academy of Pediatrics, CA urges a NO vote on Prop 23. Prop 23 would weaken air pollution standards, threatening the health of children and all Californians."

On or about October 29th, "No on 23" also introduced the 15-second "Scales" ad. The YouTube posting described this ad, "This spot weighs who supports and opposes Prop 23, the Dirty Energy Proposition."

Twenty-four (24) “No on 23” spots aired during the Study Period: eleven spots on KGO, eight on KPIX and five on KNTV. No "No on 23" spots aired on "KRON 4 News at 11 p.m." during the Study Period. Some these spots were 15-second ones. On Election Eve, one "No on 23" spot aired apiece on KPIX (Enough), KGO (Scales) and KNTV (Scales).

In addition, KTVU aired half-hour "No on 23" paid programs at 11 p.m. on Sunday, October 31st (displacing "A Second Look," a KTVU production) and Monday, November 1st (displacing a "Seinfeld" re-run).

No “Yes on 23” ads aired during the Study Period.

"No on 23" won with 61.6% of the statewide vote and 72.7% of the Bay Area vote. "No on 23" won all nine Bay Area counties: Alameda (76.2%), Contra Costa (67.4%), Marin (78.2%), Napa (65.0%), San Francisco (82.3%), San Mateo (73.3%), Santa Clara (70.2%), Solano (60.8%) and Sonoma (73.1%).

VI. Proposition 24 (Repeal of Corporate Tax Breaks)

Both sides of Proposition 24 were evenly matched during the Study Period. Eight spots aired favoring Proposition 24 and eight spots ran opposing it. Proposition 24 lost statewide (58.1% no) and in the Bay Area, but the Bay Area outcome was close (49.5% yes, 50.5% no).

A. Yes on 24 - LOST (41.9% of statewide vote, 49.5% of Bay Area vote)

The main “Yes on 24” ad was called “Handout.” The YouTube posting says, “Vote Yes on Prop 24 -- because it's time to give our SCHOOLS a break, not the big corporations.”

“Handout” featured Martha Millan-Schimon, a fourth grade teacher in Bakersfield. She began the ad by stating to the viewer, “State budget cuts are crippling my classroom.” The closing onscreen message was “VOTE YES ON PROP 24 GIVE OUR SCHOOLS A BREAK, NOT THE BIG CORPORATIONS.” The disclaimer stated, “Paid for by Yes on 24, the Tax Fairness Act. Sponsored by taxpayers and public employee groups, California Teachers Association Issues PAC and America’s Families First, Inc.”

A second “Yes on 24” ad began running on October 28^th, which included teacher Tamara Carr, an elementary school teacher in Pittsburg (Contra Costa County).

"Yes on 24" aired eight spots total on 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period, two apiece on KRON, KPIX, KGO and KNTV. "Yes on 24" aired no ads on the weekend 11 p.m. newscasts (Oct. 30th and Oct. 31th). On Election Eve, "Yes on 24" aired ads just on KPIX and KGO, the two highest-rated 11 p.m. newscasts.

"Yes on 24" won in three Bay Area counties: Alameda (55.7%), Marin (50.2%) and San Francisco (59.5%).

B. No on 24 - WON (58.1% of statewide vote, 50.5% of Bay Area vote)

“No on 24” ran two ads during the Study Period. The first “No on 24” ad (dubbed “More Layoffs”) consisted of a series of people completing each others’ sentences as they criticized Proposition 24. The transcript of the last 40 percent of the ad underscores its simple (and simplistic) message, “Prop 24 would force more layoffs. More layoffs. More layoffs. And that’s something that hurts everyone. Everyone. Everyone. Stop the Jobs Tax. Vote No on 24.” The ad left viewers with the words, "more layoffs" and "everyone" echoing through their minds.

The YouTube posting stated, “A Giant Step Backward on California's Road to Recovery. Prop. 24 throws roadblock after roadblock in front of the state's economic recovery and threatens decades of vital service cuts. The slower our recovery, the fewer tax revenues we'll have to fund our schools and hospitals and roads. With 2 million Californians out of work and an unemployment rate higher than almost every other state, we need to encourage job growth, not penalize it.”

To underscore the “jobs” message, the only onscreen text during the first 25 seconds is “Up to 322,000 Jobs Lost.” The disclaimer at the end of the ad stated, “Paid for by No on 24-Stop the Jobs Tax, a coalitions of taxpayers, employers, small businesses, educators and hi tech and bio technology organizations, with major funding from Genetech and General Electric Company including aggregated contributions.”

The second “No on 24” ad, “Job Killer,” featured a man in a white apron who presumably was a small hardware store owner on the typical "Main Street." This man spoke to the viewer throughout the ad as he walked about the hardware store. His opening lines: “Small businesses are struggling. Over two million Californians have lost their jobs. And now Sacramento politicians are promoting Proposition 24, a jobs tax and a job killer.” In a YouTube posting dated October 21, 2010, “NoProp24” stated, “Watch our new ad! Prop 24 is a job killer that is opposed by EVERY major newspaper in California!”

The disclaimer on “Job Killer” said, “Paid for by No on 24-Stop the Jobs Tax, a coalition of taxpayers, employers, small businesses, educators & high tech and biotechnology organizations, with major funding from Cisco Systems and Viacom.” (Apparently a hardware store owner made for a better “small business” than Cisco and Viacom.) (See Part I of the "Air War" post for discussion about Meg Whitman's "Job Killer" TV ads.)

“More Layoffs” ran five times during the Study Period, four times on KRON and once on KGO. It did not run on the KPIX and KNTV 11 p.m. newscasts during the Study Period. “Job Killer” ran three times during the Study Period, once apiece on KRON, KPIX and KGO’s 11 p.m. newscasts.

"No on 24" won in six Bay Area counties: Contra Costa (53.8%), Napa (57.7%), San Mateo (51.3%), Santa Clara (56.1%), Solano (55.9%) and Sonoma (53.0%).

VII. Proposition 25 (Majority Vote for the Legislature to Pass the Budget)

A. Yes on 25 - WON (55.1% of statewide vote, 66.6% of Bay Area vote)

The only “Yes on 25” ad that ran during the Study Period was “Big Check.” The tagline that was stated four times in the ad (twice verbally and twice in on-screen writing) was “No budget, no pay.” The main feature of the ad was a fictitious $4.9 million check representing pay to state legislators during the 100 days that the state budget was not passed on time. As a hand tore up the check, the narrator stated, “This ends with Prop. 25.” Later a yellow highlighter pen is seen coloring the phrase “permanently forfeit” as the narrator stated, “With Prop. 25, legislators permanently forfeit their pay and benefits for every day the budget is late.”

The phrase “majority vote” did not appear until the 22^nd second (spoken by the male narrator) and never appeared once on the screen. There was no mention of the existing two-thirds vote requirement to pass state budgets through each house of the Legislature.

“Big Check” ran 14 times during the Study Period: four times on KRON, three times on KPIX, four times on KGO and three times on KNTV. It ran on no 11 p.m. newscasts on October 27^th. It ran on all 11 p.m. newscasts except KPIX on Election Eve.

"Yes on 25" won all nine Bay Area counties: Alameda (70.7%), Contra Costa (62.8%), Marin (68.4%), Napa (60.0%), San Francisco (75.8%), San Mateo (65.6%), Santa Clara (62.7%), Solano (59.3%) and Sonoma (67.2%).

B. No on 25 - LOST (44.9% of statewide vote, 33.4% of Bay Area vote)

“I’ll Drink to That – No on 25” was only “No on 25” ad that ran during the Study Period. The YouTube description of the ad stated, “Our ad, titled "I'll Drink to That -- No on 25″ highlights the loophole in Prop 25 that would allow the State Legislature to raise its tax-free expense accounts, known as per diems, with a simple majority vote, but would do nothing to ensure an on-time, balanced budget. The ad also draws attention to language hidden in Prop 25 that would make it easier for majority-vote tax increases.”

This ad featured five well-dressed people who are presumably state legislators seated at a table in what was presumably a fancy restaurant. They are served fine wine and fancy desserts. The ad subtly conveys that the legislators have spent long hours there celebrating as all of the other tables are empty at the end of the ad and the tuxedoed waiter glances at his watch. The opening narration states, “While many Californians are struggling, many politicians are living it up at taxpayer expense.” The closing narration said, “Put a stop to politicians’ higher taxes and spending. Vote No on 25.”

The onscreen message at the end of the ad stated that it was “Paid for by Stop Hidden Taxes – No on 25/Yes on 26, a coalition of taxpayers and employers, with major funding from CA Business PAC, sponsored by CA Chamber of Commerce and Small Business Action Committee PAC.”

“No on 25” ran spots on 11 p.m. newscasts just during the first two days of the Study Period (Oct. 27^th and Oct. 28^th). It ran a total of five spots during those days. Two spots ran on “CBS 5 Eyewitness News at 11 p.m.” on Oct. 27^th and one spot apiece on KPIX, KGO and KNTV on Oct. 28^th. “No on 25” did not advertise on KRON’s 11 p.m. newscast during the Study Period.

"No on 25" won no Bay Area county.

VIII. Proposition 26 (Supermajority to Pass New Taxes & Fees)

Proposition 26 is regarded is one of the most consequential ballot measures passed in the November 2010 election. It has major effects on fiscal policy at the state and local levels.

A. Yes on 26 - WON (52.5% of statewide vote); LOST in Bay Area (41.8%)

No overt “Yes on 26” ads ran during the Study Period (the “No on 25” ad nominally also was a “Yes on 26” ad, but only in the disclaimer at its end). "Yes on 26" ran ads on Bay Area broadcast television before the Study Period. "Yes on 26" apparently suspended its television advertising on Bay Area broadcast TV before the Study Period.

"I just love fees!" was a 30-second "Yes on 26" television ad. It was uploaded to YouTube by "StopHiddenTaxes" on October 12th. The YouTube posting stated, "Vote YES on Prop 26 to protect our right to vote on local taxes." The ad depicted a group of well-dressed men and women sitting around a conference table, presumably a gathering of lobbyists and/or public officials. The highlight was when the man at the head of the table (who looked like a distant relative of corrupt former U.S. House Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay) gleefully announced to the gathering, "I just love fees!", curling his fingers as if to form quotation marks. The men and women at the table then smiled and laughed.

The ad began with with a darkened screen with the words, "Behind Closed Doors". The other onscreen messages were "Yes on 26: Closes Tax Loophole," "YES on 26: Voter Approval for Higher Taxes" and "YES on 26." The onscreen disclaimer read, "Paid for by Stop Hidden Taxes - No on 25/Yes on 26, a coalition of taxpayers and employers, with major funding from CA Business PAC, sponsored by CA Chamber of Commerce and Small Business Action Committee PAC."

Versions of this ad ran on KICU's "Bay Area News at 7 p.m." on October 21st (7:21 p.m.), KGO's "ABC News Nightline" on October 22nd (11:56 p.m.) and KNTV's "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" on October 23rd (12:09 a.m.). By the beginning of the Study Period on October 27th, "Yes on 26" ads apparently had vanished from Bay Area TV airwaves.

Although "Yes on 26" won statewide, it lost in the Bay Area. "Yes on 26" won in two Bay Area counties: Napa (51.1% yes) and Solano (53.5% yes).

B. No on 26 - LOST (47.5% of statewide vote); WON in Bay Area (58.2%)

“No on 26” ran a series of 15-second ads. The YouTube posting with the ads stated,

“SCN produced "Gulf Horizon," "Cigarette Man," and "Oil Derrick," as a set of 15 second spots designed to educate voters on the environmental consequences of California Proposition 26. Often, the spots were aired back-to-back or as book ends to commercial breaks.

"Gulf Horizon" served as a stark reminder of the recent consequences of allowing corporations to evade paying for the environmental damage they cause. Visually, the ad eliminated jarring cuts by simulating the motion of a camera panning across boxes of images and footage. This technique gave the spot the illusion of being longer than just 15 seconds.

On "Cigarette Man," SCN partnered with digital animators to design and create a walking talking cigarette pack to deliver the Big Tobacco's message that, "You pay so we don't have to!"

In creating "Oil Derrick," SCN again partnered with digital animators to design a giant robot built entirely out of rigs, derricks and fuel pumps. "Oil Derrick" was like no other political ad, and the robot was like no other political spokesman.”

Common to all three ads were onscreen quotations from the San Jose Mercury News that Proposition 26 was “Sponsored largely by oil, tobacco and alcohol companies” and from the Los Angeles Times that Proposition 26 “Makes it extremely difficult to charge businesses for the damage they cause.”

The disclaimer at the end of the ads stated that they were “Paid for by No on 26, teachers, police and other public and private employee groups protecting taxpayers, Democratic State Central Committee of California and Thomas Steyer.”

These ads were difficult to monitor because they were so brief. At least 20 of these 15-second ads ran on 11 p.m. newscasts during the six-day Study Period. “Cigarette Man” ran on at least one 11 p.m. newscast every night; it ran at least once on each station, a total of at least nine spots. At least six spots of “Oil Derrick” ran on 11 p.m newscasts during the Study Period. At least five spots of “Gulf Horizon” ran during the Study Period.

"No on 26" lost statewide, but won in seven Bay Area counties: Alameda (62.5% no), Contra Costa (53.5% no), Marin (66.1% no), San Francisco (69.9% no), San Mateo (58.9% no), Santa Clara (52.9% no) and Sonoma (58.5% no).

IX. Proposition 27 (Repeal Citizens Redistricting Commission)

No television ads aired supporting or opposing Proposition 27. Perhaps to avoid confusion, the "Yes on 20/No on 27" campaign made no overt mention of its opposition to Proposition 27 in its "Yes on 2o" ad. "No on 27" won with 59.5% of the statewide vote.