While the most significant election news after the midterms will focus on control of Congress, the measure of success of a slew of election deniers, and what the results mean for the increasingly conspiratorial and authoritarian Republican Party and for the country’s democratic institutions, in this post I focus briefly on the mayoral race (nominally nonpartisan) in a large Democratic city in the largest blue state. The campaign for mayor of Los Angeles, which has attracted national attention, features several factors -- big money, partisan polarization, voter turnout, and racial relations -- worthy of attention.
Rick Caruso is on track to spend more than $100 million by Nov. 8 in his bid for Los Angeles mayor, an astounding sum that puts the real estate developer on par with candidate outlays in some of the country’s most closely watched and expensive midterm races.
The latest reporting period (10/22/22) shows Caruso spending $92,272,088, compared with $8,141,094 by his opponent Karen Bass. Most of Caruso's lavish campaign spending has delivered wall to wall television advertising. (Note: Bass’s campaign has relied on matching funds from the city; Caruso, who declined to stay within proscribed spending limits, was ineligible for matching funds, relying instead on the billionaire’s own deep pockets.)
With no single ad or image dominating, it’s the sheer size of Caruso’s advantage that will leave the most lasting impression of the 2022 campaign. Caruso is sometimes recognized at campaign stops by Angelenos who have no real idea who he is — beyond the certainty that he must be famous because they’ve seen him on TV.
This media barrage has included, of course, “tens of millions of dollars spent on attack ads that appear to have succeeded in raising doubts about Bass in many voters’ minds.”
As election day approaches, polling suggests that the lead Bass held over Caruso in the June primary has shrunk considerably. When all the votes have been counted, what will have made a difference in the outcome?
Let's begin with a bit of context. In a discussion of the battle for Congress, Jonathan Bernstein offered commentary that's instructive in this mayoral race: Elections may not turn on factors such as "policy questions or advertising or the candidates themselves."
This is perhaps a counterintuitive conclusion. The tendency is always going to be to assume that whatever the winning party did helped them and whatever the losing party did hurt them. But the truth is far more complicated. The big things that drive elections are largely out of the control of campaign operatives and perhaps even out of the control of elected officials. And the small things that may matter at the margins almost certainly don’t all push the results in the same direction.
I acknowledge Bernstein's take on campaigns and elections. I have no crystal ball. I don't know who will win. I don't know which factors will determine, or will be regarded as determinative, in the outcome. Nor will I comment on the most widely discussed issues, such as homelessness (a highly visible issue that has divided neighborhoods), crime (often linked to the homeless among the folks most concerned about it), or charges of corruption (hurled, unconvincingly in my view, by both camps at the other). Instead, I simply comment on three factors that I regard as significant.
First, partisan polarization
Caruso became a Democrat a few weeks before declaring his candidacy for mayor. (Don't doubt for a minute that he'd still be a Republican if the number of registered Republicans in the city were within shouting distance of the number of registered Democrats.) Even as a Democrat, he'll pick up most of the votes cast by registered Republicans, but also many tens of thousands of votes (which would not be there if Caruso had not changed his party affiliation) from registered Democrats.
Caruso's consultants undoubtedly watched Alex Villanueva's successful campaign for sheriff in Los Angeles County four years ago. While Villanueva touted himself as a "reformer," savvy observers couldn't help but notice that he had the strong backing of the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, which has consistently opposed reform.
The bilingual Villanueva pitched himself as a Latino advocate and emphasized (in a nonpartisan race) that he was a Democrat (while his opponent, an independent, was a former Republican). He ran as a Democrat in a heavily Democratic county:
It has been 138 years since our last Democratic Sheriff. In order to protect our communities and our families we need to elect a Democrat for Sheriff.
This November, help make history. Elect a Democrat for Sheriff.
Vote Democrat for LA County Sheriff. Vote Alex Villanueva.
The strategy worked. The Los Angeles County Democratic Party and Democratic clubs across the region climbed aboard. Los Angeles elected a Democratic sheriff (who subsequently has catered to the ALADS and fought against accountability for himself and his deputies at every turn). The Democratic Party, bamboozled last time, opposes Villanueva this time around. He will almost certainly be turned out of office this week.
Democrats, including elected officials all the way up to Joe Biden and Barack Obama, are mostly in Bass's corner in the 2022 race for mayor. (Gavin Newsom, who received Caruso's support to the tune of $60,000 to his 2018 campaign for governor and $500,000 to the governor's COVID-19 Response fund, has declined to make an endorsement.) While many voters are not be paying all that much attention, at least Caruso has distanced himself from a Republican identity, which could have sabotaged his campaign. Caruso, like Villanueva before him, is running as a loud and proud Democrat.
While most Democratic clubs oppose Caruso, there is a prominent exception. During a debate, when Bass challenged Caruso's authenticity as a Democrat, he replied: "The largest Latino Democratic club, one of the largest in the country, endorsed me." She replied, "How much did you pay for it?"
Caruso: "Oh, are you insulting Avance?" Bass: "Yeah."
Avance Democratic Club took exception to her remarks, demanding an apology. Bass complied.
The incident brought attention to clubs’ cutthroat and seemingly mysterious endorsement process, and their practice of charging for memberships, which can in turn confer the ability to participate in high-stakes endorsement votes.
Dozens of Democratic clubs in the Greater L.A. region are chartered under the L.A. County Democratic Party, with Stonewall Democratic Club and Los Angeles County Young Democrats among the better-known groups. The volunteer-run groups host events and may have hundreds of members.
Candidates can rally their allies to buy memberships or, in some cases, simply buy multiple memberships themselves ahead of an endorsement vote. They also can woo existing club members ahead of a vote.
What was the membership of Avance (cost: $25 each) before Caruso's candidacy compared to the time of the endorsement vote? When did the money come in? The president of Avance (which allows all members who have joined at least 5 days prior to vote on endorsements) said she had no internal records to show when Avance boosted its revenues through new memberships this year.
While details are murky, what we know suggests that billionaire candidates willing to dig deep can in effect buy endorsements and, hence, credibility as genuine party members.
Partisanship circa 2022 is hugely significant. A party label, and signals from affiliates of the party, can make a difference even in campaigns for nonpartisan elective offices, such as sheriff and mayor.
Second, a bought and paid for ground game
Caruso's campaign includes a $13 million investment in a field operation. While only a fraction of $100M, that's one and a half times what Bass has spent on her whole campaign. Most campaigns, at best, call on volunteers to walk door to door, to make calls, and to send text messages. Grassroots support -- from individuals and groups representing constituencies on board with the campaign -- is critical.
Caruso, with his deep pockets, has found a workaround. Just as he hasn't had to raise campaign funds (as a self-funded candidate), he hasn't had to draw on activists willing to pitch in with voluntary labor. "Caruso has spent big money on a canvassing and voter outreach operation and hired 300 to 400 door knockers across the city, at $25 to $30 an hour."
Caruso's bountiful fortune has generated the best campaign that money can buy -- from high priced political consultants to extravagant television advertising ... all the way down to paid staffers to knock on doors. Earlier this year, they identified folks committed to, or leaning toward voting for Caruso. They are now hard at work in neighborhoods across the city nudging Caruso voters to cast ballots. (They have also plastered a gazillion lawn signs in public medians, parkways, telephone and sign poles -- anyplace where visibility is good, traffic is heavy, and no homeowner or business is likely to object.)
In a close race, whether the turnout is high or low by election day, this investment in a field operation could make a difference, especially in turning out occasional voters (who are less likely to return a ballot or make it to a polling place in an off-year election).
Third, differences among racial/ethnic groups
The state of racial relations in Los Angeles has been jolted by the infamous recorded conversation with three members of the city council and the head of the Los Angeles County Labor Federation, wherein Latino power brokers were heard demeaning their Black opponents. Bass is Black. Caruso's campaign has focused on Latinos, who represent nearly half of the city's residents.
At least one Caruso supporter -- the president of the aforementioned Avance Democratic Club -- believes the attention this episode has gotten may benefit her candidate:
Nilza Serrano — president of Avance, a Latino Democratic club that has endorsed Caruso — told me “that whole controversy with the recording is being overplayed, and it’s going to upset Latinos.” She added, “I think that the president should have never gotten involved,” referring to the Biden White House’s call for the city councilors on the recording to resign.
While Black and Latino communities are often regarded as Democratic constituencies, their respective political perspectives often diverge, as illustrated in a recent article by Tim Alberta. Most Latinos voted for Biden over Trump in 2020, but the margin was smaller than in the Clinton/Trump race in 2016. And in many places in the country, such as along the border in Texas, Latinos have increasingly abandoned the Democrats in recent years.
Alberta spoke with several Democratic activists who complained that the Democratic Party has not been responsive to Latino concerns.
Danny Ortega of Arizona, a Democratic activist and civil rights attorney, who "has spent decades working in households and neighborhoods where voting is a foreign behavior, and where fear of filling out government forms runs deep, pleading with first- and second-generation Hispanics to get involved with politics," told Alberta that the younger generation is abandoning the Democratic Party and registering independent. These voters doubt Democrats' commitment to resolving the immigration issue.
In his view, the Democratic Party has a credibility crisis, and it’s not specific to immigration. Ortega said that so many adjacent Democratic causes—voting rights, LGBTQ rights, abortion rights—are viewed skeptically, particularly by younger Hispanics, who perceive Democrats as manipulative at worst and tone-deaf at best. Even if their social-justice efforts are regarded as genuine, Democrats are pushing an agenda that doesn’t resonate with a wide array of voters during this time of economic uncertainty.
María-Elena López, who left the Republican Party to become a Democrat when Obama ran for president the first time, is vice chair of the Miami-Dade Democratic Party. She regards herself as progressive across the board, but notes that most Latino voters are unmoved by such issues.
“We’re not a political party; we’re a charity. And you know what? These people don’t want charity,” López said. “These immigrants come here to make money and keep their families safe. They are not here because the sea levels are rising, or because of social justice, or anything else. We’re out there talking about racism and the Green New Deal and defunding the police, and we’re freaking them out.”
Karen Bass, longtime Democratic leader, embraces the progressive issues of the party base. Although she has never served in city government, Rick Caruso has portrayed her as an insider. Caruso's campaign has sought to attract Republicans, conservatives (regardless of party), and others who are dissatisfied with the status quo (including a City Hall replete with scandal). As a first-time candidate, and recent 'Democrat,' he has distanced himself from the Democratic powers that be in Los Angeles (though he has been a prominent donor and commissioner appointed by the mayor, not to mention a friend of the California governor).
Bass bested Caruso by 7 percentage points (43.1 to 36.0) in the June primary. The recent UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies/ Los Angeles Times poll shows Bass leading among white and Black voters and liberals, while Caruso leads among Republicans, conservatives, Latinos, and residents of the San Fernando Valley. Her diminishing lead (45% to 41% among likely voters) is within the margin of error. Turnout will be critical. Undecided voters -- mostly Latino at this late stage -- will determine the outcome.
