PG&E, unions, and law enforcement groups spend to assist Becerra

Law enforcement groups, energy companies and other organizations have spent big on independent expenditures to reelect Attorney General Xavier Becerra, according to a new report.

One of these law enforcement groups came under fire earlier this year for donating to Sacramento County’s district attorney. Yet the spending on Becerra has mostly come with little notice by the media or campaign watchers.

Becerra has been the beneficiary of $454,000 spent by independent groups. Meanwhile, independent expenditure groups known as “IEs” have spent $250,000 to campaign against Becerra’s Republican opponent, retired El Dorado County Judge Steven C. Bailey.

Zero IE money has been spent against Becerra or for Bailey. These are funds that can be spent to run commercials, or fund mailers or phone banks, all without any direct connection to the candidate.

The new figures come from Dollar Dollar Bill, a new campaign finance watchdog website from attorney Ryan C. Hughes, founder of Tuple Legal in Los Angeles. Hughes made waves last December when he released a report showing the Legislature has spent $1.9 million over 25 years to settle sexual harassment claims. He said his new campaign database was inspired by courts striking down various campaign finance laws.

The site tracks all state races in California, and includes both official donations and IEs. He acknowledged this year’s attorney general’s race hasn’t really been on his radar “because it was kind of settled in the primary.”

The big IEs appear to agree, only spending a few thousand on the race since June. The man most seen in the news media as the threat to Becerra in deep blue California, Democratic Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones, was eliminated after finishing third.

Hughes’ figures, confirmed by a search of the California Secretary of State’s website, show the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association’s committee spent $228,000 supporting Becerra. A spokesman for Becerra’s campaign declined comment, saying they had no involvement with independent expenditure money.

The spending was little noticed at the time. But the association was widely criticized after another one of its campaign committees gave Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert $22,600, helping the now-former Republican fend off a Democratic challenger.

The spending patterns make sense, said Pacific McGeorge School of Law Professor Mary-Beth Moylan: After 24 years in Congress, some thought Becerra needed to up his in-state name identification and could be vulnerable to Jones.

By contrast, the Schubert donation was made the same month Sacramento police officers killed Stephon Clark, an unarmed black man, in his grandmother’s backyard. Black Lives Matter activists have picketed Schubert’s office for months since then, demanding she file charges. Several other law enforcement groups have been also criticized for donating to conservative incumbent district attorneys.

“There were big issues going on with the ways district attorneys were involved with these police shootings,” Moylan said. “There wasn’t any big concern about the attorney general’s office and its involvement in police discipline.”

But the association does have issues before Becerra’s office: They represent more than 500 special agents working in the California Department of Justice.

The other big IE spender in the attorney general’s race is Californians for Jobs and a Strong Economy, which bills itself as a coalition of “Firefighters, building trades, realtors, correctional officers organizations and energy providers.” It spent $197,000 for Becerra and an equal amount against Bailey.

The group shares a phone number with the Sacramento office of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Its donors include PG&E, Sempra Energy, and groups representing prison guards, real estate, and firefighters.

These groups could also have business before Becerra. SB 901, a bill passed with support from PG&E and others in the wake of recent devastating wildfires alleged to have been started by power lines, requires an advisory opinion “regarding whether competition will be adversely affected” by the bill’s implementation. The California Statewide Law Enforcement Association did not respond to calls or emails. Bailey’s campaign did not reply to an email seeking comment.