The June 6th primaries for lieutenant governor feature two candidates who have already run for governor and a third who would love to be governor. Tom McClintock has no serious opposition for the Republican nomination; he ran for governor in the 2003 recall. John Garamendi is the Democratic frontrunner; he ran for governor in 1982 and 1994, and pulled out of the 1986 race.
Garamendi, the twice-elected state insurance commissioner, is facing a stiff challenge from state Senator Jackie Speier, who harbors gubernatorial aspirations of her own. She has launched a $2.7 million TV ad blitz around the state. The Bay Area Democrat has trailed Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi in public polls, running ahead of Bay Area state Senator Liz Figueroa. Each seeks to be the running mate of Steve Westly or Phil Angelides.
Garamendi seemed to be hurt by an insurance industry advertising campaign against him, but garnered plenty of press for not backing down from an auto insurance regulation when, he says, the industry threatened him. Speier’s principal ad, narrated by Emmy Award-winning actor Peter Coyote, highlights her dramatic story of being shot on an airstrip in Guyana in 1978, while on a congressional fact-finding tour with her boss, Congressman Leo Ryan, who was himself assassinated by followers of the Jim Jones People’s Temple cult. Who were then killed in the infamous “Jonestown” massacre.
It’s a dramatic story and Speier has a creditable record as a legislator and consumer advocate. But she is hampered by the presence of Figueroa in the race, and by Garamendi’s long track record. In addition to his two actual runs for governor — he finished a distant second in the Democratic primary to then LA Mayor Tom Bradley in 1982 and then Treasurer Kathleen Brown in 1994 — and the aborted 1986 bid, Garamendi lost to Gray Davis in a 1986 bid for state controller.
Davis had only been in the Assembly for four years at that point, but he represented Beverly Hills, and had served for seven years as Jerry Brown’s chief of staff, making him one of the most powerful and best-connected politicians in the state, and Garamendi’s run against him a risky one. Then in 1990, Garamendi was elected state insurance commissioner, the post he gave up in 1994 to run for governor.
After serving several years as Bill Clinton’s deputy secretary of the interior, Garamendi was a merchant banker in Democratic rainmaker Ron Burkle’s Yucaipa Companies empire, then returned to public life in 2002, again winning election as state insurance commissioner. He’s a highly experienced figure, and California Democrats are used to voting for him.
Indeed, Garamendi is one of those figures who, had several things gone differently, might well have been governor by now. He was a ‘70s wunderkind, elected to the state Assembly in 1974, then the Senate in 1976, and rose quickly to the post of Senate majority leader. But he ran afoul of the Legislature’s internal politics, and in the mid-’80s launched a leadership challenge against then Senate President Pro Tem David Roberti which gained no backing.
As a moderate Democrat with consistent environmental and organized labor backing, Garamendi’s politics are a good fit for California. A big, good-looking guy, an ex-Cal football star with a Harvard MBA, this rancher and former Peace Corps Volunteer seems straight out of Central Casting.
Typically, he has not raised as much money as his principal opponent, Jackie Speier, for this race, but his frequent practice has been to borrow against his family’s land when necessary and pay off the loan after the campaign. Going into the Memorial Day weekend, this transaction had not occurred.
Garamendi leads in the new LA Times poll, with 30% of the Democratic primary vote to Speier’s 16% and Figueroa’s 11%. He has bought some TV advertising time as well — though at less than a million dollars, not nearly so much as Speier — and has bought into some slate mailers. Figueroa is also on the air, with about a $600,000 TV ad buy.
The winner goes up against the man who is California’s most prominent conservative politician, Republican Tom McClintock. This veteran state senator from Southern California’s Ventura County is brainy and engaging, one of the most consistent voices in the state against tax increases and for government reorganization.
After narrowly losing a race for state controller in 2002 to ex-eBay honcho Steve Westly, McClintock shot to fame as a candidate for governor in the dramatic 2003 recall election. He infuriated many pragmatic Republicans by refusing to get out of the race in favor of Arnold Schwarzenegger. But in the end, he was helpful to Schwarzenegger. Sitting next to him in the only debate in which the action superstar participated, McClintock might have seriously damaged the former Mr. Universe’s candidacy by turning to him and confronting him on his scanty budget plans. But he did not, and ended up with a respectable 13% of the vote while Schwarzenegger won in a landslide.
Although he was no favorite of the Pete Wilson crew — McClintock and Wilson frequently clashed during Wilson’s governorship — that then dominated Schwarzenegger’s operation, McClintock, never a big fundraiser, found that the grateful governor returned the favor by helping him raise money and win re-election to his senate seat.
In February, with Schwarzenegger under severe fire from conservative activists for his post-special election return to the center and hiring of controversial Democrat Susan Kennedy as his chief of staff, Schwarzenegger and McClintock announced that they would run together this year as a team. This greatly helped the governor and his new political operation quell the anti-Arnold rebellion on the right at the party’s state convention.
But lately, with McClintock voting in the Senate against all but one of the four infrastructure bonds that Schwarzenegger and Democratic legislative leaders Don Perata and Fabian Nunez succeeded in placing on the November ballot, the Schwarzenegger-McClintock team has seemed more problematic.
McClintock has only raised $600,000 this year, though with no primary opposition to speak of has $1.2 million cash on hand.
He has high favorable ratings as well, coming out of the recall campaign as a highly respected figure. But he benefited greatly in the recall by virtue of the fact that it was in no one’s interest to attack him. Governor Davis and the Democrats didn’t want to attack him, because they wanted him to cripple Schwarzenegger’s candidacy. Some felt Schwarzenegger should attack him, but the movie star realized that move could backfire, and moved instead to establish his dominance in the party and wean away potential McClintock supporters.
McClintock is widely respected as a man of principle. But in California, those principles may not stand him in such good stead with the Democrats going after him in earnest this fall.
… HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY, ALL!
VERY IMPORTANT HOLIDAY POINT. IF YOU GO TO THE NEW “X-MEN” MOVIE, DON’T LEAVE UNTIL AFTER THE CREDITS ROLL. THE ENDING OF THE MOVIE BECOMES DIFFERENT.
Read 
| Comments (0) |
You’ll see my colleagues at that awful LA Times have two negative stories on Angelides today. One which goes after him for that ad he has running ripping Westly for raising money from a “corrupt Chicago businessman” — who had recently been finance chairman for both Al Gore and the Democratic National Committee — because, you see, Angelides himself had tried to raise money from the guy! The guy’s assistant says Angelides and his aides pushed so hard for money from him that he was being “stalked.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-me-cari29may29,0,752202.story?coll=la-home-headlines
There is also a George Skelton column on Angelides’ infamous campaign against David Roberti in the 1994 Democratic primary for state treasurer.
So you see they have run negative stories on Westly and on Angelides.
Although their story yesterday on Angelo Tsakopoulos, while good, just scratches the surface. Of course, if Phil survives the primary, there will be ample opportunity to get into all that.
Now, folks, I didn’t post that comment to start a thing on Angelides-Westly, merely to point out the Times’ broader coverage than they are frequently criticized for here.
Let’s focus on the LG race.
Garamendi is okay but I get tired of him running all the time. I’d like to see somebody new like Jackie Speier.
It’s clear that Figueroa is the spoiler here. Spier could have a real chance if she weren’t in the race. I don’t get what Liz’ obsession is.
I am with Omar…but honestly, I think Jackie wins in the end. Anybody know what Liz has raised to date. Oh, and WHAT is with the John Garamendi billboards off I-5 in LA? Jesus, scared the crap out of me driving one night along the 5 on the way to LAX.
I don;’t see how a few million in last minute TV vaults Speier past Garamendi. He has a big lead and her ads are in a blizzard.
Good point…but Jackie has a real likability to her that connects with local people. She has been a very, very good state senator both in the Building and in her district. Her public speaking skills are pretty solid and her attractiveness comes across well on camera. And she has a really solid base in the Bay Area, coupled with an interesting mix of business and labor support. But, John has the HUGE benefit of being a well-known and well-respected name in CA politics. Garamendi’s name ID is pretty high statewide if the polls are to be believed. Plus, the guy has the entire insurance industry jumping on him with a significant, high dollar IE. C’mon, don’t ya just love an insurance commissioner who is attacked on the air by the industry he governs because he won’t do what they want him to– I mean, seriously, how often does that happen?
Unfortunately, I don’t know Liz Figueroa at all…
I think Jackie’s ads are the best I’ve seen this cycle. Don’t know if they are enough, but this one will be close.
Ann is right about being lost in a blizzard.
She needed to get those ads on earlier before everyone got sick of seeing the Westly & Angelides ads every three minutes. Downballot candidates should never wait until the last three weeks to run ads.
Don’t forget Garamendi’s abortive run for the 2003 gubernatorial race during the recall. He wanted to run against Bustamante but pulled out at the eleventh hour. I heard an interview with Garamendi on the KABC Brian Whitman show and it wasn’t pretty, with Garamendi unable to answer a single question about why has running, nor did he defend Gray Davis. A scheming political opportunist at every turn, though not a very successful one.
I might support Jackie Speier another time, but not now, not with a Tom McClintock so close to the Governor’s Mansion. Amazingly, McClintock has 40% favorability ratings—Californians don’t get how bad this guy is. Forget financing for public education, choice, environmental regulation.
John Garamend not only has high name ID, but high favorabilities himself. I know he can beat McClintock. I don’t know that Speier can.
Moreover, there is a reason hat the insurance industry spent 1.5 million trying to beat Garamendi in 2002 when he was running for Ins Com’r and is now spending $2.4 million now to bring him, as the frontrunner, down. He has never been their flack. Remember Quackenbush? Who took millions in campaign contributions from this industry and then had to resign in disgrace for stalling implementation of Prop 103?
We keep saying we want clean campaigns and decent politicians.
We also keep saying we want independent politicians who aren’t tied up in Saran Wrap by their consultants and go with their consciences—John wrote some of the first clean campaign bills in the country in the early 1980s (angering many of his Dem colleagues), one of the best received universal health plans in 1991 (vetoed by then Governor Pete Wilson), and was the first constitutional officer to endorse Howard Dean in the 2004 Presidential race.
What more do we want?
Jackie Speier has much to offer—and in fact, will win by losing in this election. She will come in close and garner tremendous name ID for her next run.
Meanwhile, we send a strong message to the insurance industry and every other industry that Californians will not tolerate “Swift Boat” style attacks and we work like hell to implement clean campaigns in CA so we get more politicians, who, like John, refuse to accept money from industries they regulate.
Was the Angelides-Roberti piece a Skelton or skeleton story? Both perhaps?
Thank you for putting this all into perspective. John Garamendi is a moderate, fiscally intelligent candidate with a legacy of state and federal experience. He is front and center on most of the critical issues facing the state and has the best opportunity to beat the popular Republican opposition. The bottom line is that we need to win and Garamendi can bring this one home for the Democrats and make the Lt. Governor’s office a real platform for change and innovation.
The real issue is that “Swift Boat” style attacks cannot and should not be tolerated in California or anywhere else. I believe that California’s down ballot races are vulnerable and that complacency is not a winning strategy. We are at risk.
So please pay attention and vote. These races are more important than ever to the sixth largest economy in the world. And despite Senator Speier’s up and coming political career — it is clearly John Garamendi that can win this one for us.
Either Speier or Garamendi would make an interesting foil to McClintock, which means that race should be a lively one. All three are farily articulate and seem unafraid to say what is on their minds. My early guess is that McClintock finishes a lot closer to Garamendi than folks might expect.
McClintock may poll in the 40’s now but he will still be in the 40’s in the general and won’t move from that. Why? One, he has little or no star power outside of the right-wing Reepers. The ground sucks this year for anyone that is even remotely painted as a conservative (whether Tom is or isn’t doesn’t matter). His money will all be sucked into the Arnold orbit and, outside of Orange County and parts of the Central Coast, he won’t play earned media wise. If its Jackie, the game is over. Jackie can raise money and will get moderate women, Dems, labor and quite possibly bite into McClintock with Republican women (and men) because of her fight for privacy rights. IF its Garamendi, the chances for improvement are better but only slightly — cause while John has high positives, he also may carry some higher negatives because of his long (and honorable) service in government as opposed to an unknown like Tom.
Besides, if I am a guy like Bruce McPherson running for SecState, I don’t want a McClintock or Poochigian dragging my numbers down in what is may be a bad year for Reeps all ’round. McPherson, et al. will probably steer clear of each other…unless the numbers improve for the R’s.
CADTS: I’m not sure I follow your logic. McClintock stays in the 40’s but has a chance against Garamendi because his long service in government is a negative.?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but if McClintock stays in the 40’s he’s not beating anyone. Also, I’m pretty sure McClintock has been in office for more than 20 years – the difference being that more people are familiar with Garamendi.
I think the only way McClintock wins is if there is a depressed Democratic vote. Conservatives will walk over hot coals and swim through pools of poison to vote for McClintock.
Mr. Bradley! I am so glad you warned everyone about the X-Men film “credits” scene! (I was dying to do it. But I did not dare, because everyone has to remember this is your blog and we are only the “caboose”…)
Hey,…Mr. Bradley, I just remembered, when you took that quiz you were Prof. X ! !! Well, we will also have to remember to watch the credit roll here at NWN …because the whole ending could be different from what everyone thinks it is …was….will be!!!!…..Toodles!
P.S. Parke Skelton, (I just love saying your name!) it will be close… but Jackie will win. People always forget to factor in …that some things are just meant to be….I don’t know why people do that? …I never forget that!
ha! it’s meant to be! that is what a good friend of mine says about winning the lottery. this friend also happens to be addicted to gambling.
JC…he doesn’t get out of the 40’s and thats why he CAN’T win because he can’t move the needle forward even against more favorable opposition like Garamendi. Thats my point. Garamendi is better known because he has already served at the state level in a MUCH higher profile than Tom. Tom’s big claim to fame is that he ran against the Governor in 2003 when everyone told him not to — not exactly the stuff of legends against higher name ID.
What I am saying is that, in my opinion, McClintock is an unknown compared to Garamendi — and surprisingly, while it hurts, it also might help him given that, as an unknown commodity, its harder to put him in a box and brand him. Whereas, Garamendi most certainly has a higher name ID than any of the candidates in the race and can be more easily framed as just another politician doing the “Sacramento Job Shuffle.” And again, reread my post, I said his chances were only SLIGHTLY better against John than against Jackie. Tom also suffers from being a conservative in a Democratic state (a place where many Reeps hate Bush and Arnold these days…for different reasons of course) It may help in Orange County but not much place else. I said it might get closer if the Reeps pull some negatives out that of a higher profile nature than anythin Tom might have done. Being in the 40’s now ain’t bad — but if he is still in those low 40’s in October — Tom might wanna find a new job.
CADT… in an election, to say that someone can do better against a certain opponent (even slightly) means they have a chance of winning. no one cares if mcclintock can muster 47 percent instead of 45 percent against an opponent.
as far as being defined goes… that all depends on whether the candidates allows themselves to be defined by there opponents.
JC, no it doesn’t….my point was, while McClintock may do better against Garamendi…he still loses in the end. THAT was my point…go back and reread the post again.
I would have thought Garamendi was sitting pretty in this race with his name ID, but judging fromt the nasty attack ads he’s running against Speier in LA, the guy seems to be scared. As for Novemeber, no way McClintock beats Speier. Against Garamendi, it’s close. And it’s a no brainer which candidate Westly/Angelides would like with them on the ticket. Speier is an asset to every other democrat on the ballot.
if you say so.
Garamendi is not only more qualified than Speier, but a better bet for the general election as well. More qualified due to both legislative and executive experience, and both state and federal experience. Better for the general because he has much higher positive name recognition, much stronger appeal in the Central Valley, and can face down McClintock’s “integrity/consistency” appeal because of his own integrity and consistency in refusing donations from the insurance industry.
McClintock has been the true blue (excuse me, True Red) Republican for along time now, especially on fiscal matters.
My question at this juncture is whether his teaming with Arnold helps Arnold with the conservatives (directly, and/or by giving conservatives a reason not to sit on their hands in November; maybe once they turn out to vote for Tom they hold their noses and vote for Arnold too, especially if it’s against Angelides), or whether McClintock is finally tarnishing his True Red credentials?
I really think Jackie Speier can win this whole thing. Her numbers are rising steadily and the more people know about her the more they seem to like her. Also all the negative campaigning that the Westly-Angelides campaign is doing is making the average voter sick of negative ads. This plays right into Speier’s hands as the public will reject Garamendi’s attacks, as Speier stays positive throughout the entire race. Not to mention these ads show that Garamendi’s scared and that the race might be closer than it appears. After all, pollings on Lt. Gov races are never that accurate or up to date (especially since the last one happened before Speier’s latest ad campaign).
In the general election Jackie only has to show McClintock in his true light to beat him. The last time I checked California is still a blue state and if the Democrats finally put up a solid candidate they’ll definitely win. Plus Speier has already shown she can raise the necessary money to buy the name ID to beat the well known McClintock. The $3 million in ads we’re watching right now are only the first drops of the thunderstorm that will be Speier’s campaign. And once she gets going, she won’t be stopped.