Quantcast

Why Rich Guys Don’t Win Top Offices in California

May4

poiznerAs the 2010 field for governor takes shape, the top Republican contenders are a pair of successful former Silicon Valley businesspeople, each armed for the campaign with a self-made fortune.

megcropBoth Meg Whitman, who scored big at eBay, and Steve Poizner, who made his pile as a high-tech innovator, begin the race with the wherewithal to spend whatever it takes to win. If past is prologue, however, Whitman and Poizner will both end up political losers.

Pity the poor billionaire seeking high office in California : Not once in modern political history has a self-financed candidate captured a top-of-ticket party nomination and gone on to be elected governor or U.S. senator in the state.

This historic trend again marks California as a great exception, in contrast to states like New Jersey and Texas , where multimillionaires routinely prevail.
Add Image
Industrialist Norton Simon set the bar low for wealthy candidates in California when he tried and failed to oust Senator George Murphy in the 1970 GOP primary. Liberal shipping magnate William Matson Roth kept the losing streak intact when he lost the 1974 Democratic gubernatorial primary to a guy named Jerry Brown.

Since then, three wealthy businessmen who would be governor – Al Checchi (1998) Bill Simon (2002) and Steve Westly (2006) spent big but finished out of the money. So did Michael Huffington, who spent $100 million in losing to Sen. Dianne Feinstein in 1994, and Darrell Issa, who forked out millions of his car alarm fortune to stumble in the 1998 GOP Senate primary.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is the only self-funded candidate who’s made it to a top slot. However, he short-circuited the odds by avoiding a primary, where the Republican right wing would have battered him, to capture the governorship in the anomalous 2003 recall (funded largely by Issa) of Gray Davis.

“The problem is that there’s an innate suspicion about people running without a history in politics,” said Bill Carrick, a California-based political strategist who crafted Feinstein’s 1994 campaign defense against Huffington’s millions.

It is instructive that Feinstein prevailed with a bit of political ju-jitsu, transforming Huffington’s limitless resources from an asset into a liability, with TV attack ads that labeled him “a Texas oilman Californians just can’t trust.”

“There’s a group of voters who find the outsider, business candidate attractive,” Carrick said. “They’re white men over 50, with anti-establishment political views, who don’t like the status quo. But it never gets beyond that universe.”

Garry South, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s chief strategist — who helped Davis defeat former Northwest Airlines CEO Checchi in the 1998 primary, and Republican financier Simon in the 2002 general election — cited several reasons for the failure of Golden State silver spoon candidates.

“They have too much money,” South said, noting that without normal budget constraints, rich candidates often fail to develop a coherent message or target it to voters. Checchi’s consultants, for example, produced a staggering 102 TV spots in 1998, airing 42 of them. Said South: “They think they can say everything about themselves to everybody.”

Unlike professional politicians, wealthy rookies lack a group of seasoned advisers, “so they go out and hire everybody in the Western Hemisphere and wind up with a big bloated campaign team with no real chain of command,” South said, adding that successful executives often underestimate the difficulty of running for office.

“They think because they’re successful in business, they’re smarter, better and more clever than anybody in politics,” he said. “They honestly don’t get that the things that they’re most proud of in their business life don’t compute in the political world.”

But Republican consultant Rob Stutzman, who works for Whitman, the richest of the current candidate crop, argued that as political reforms have squeezed contribution limits, individual wealth is almost a prerequisite for running in California .

“You have to have self-funding in order to run credibly statewide,” he said. “You can’t raise enough money at a fast enough clip to compete.”

Whitman strategists emphasize that she (like her rival, Insurance Commissioner Poizner) is aggressively raising money to supplement self-donations.

“Meg believes there have to be investors in the message and the mission,” said spokesman Mitch Zak, predicting that she will raise $5 million in outside contributions to go with $4 million she’s kicked in herself, by summer.

Although a third wealthy candidate – Guess Jeans co-founder Georges Marciano – plans to run as an independent, polltaker Mervin Field foresees that the economic meltdown will create a daunting political climate for rich candidates of every stripe.

“The state is in one hell of a mess,” Field said. “I believe voters will be looking for someone with a different resume.”

This article is also scheduled for publication in the San Francisco Chronicle on Monday, May 4.


subscribe to comments RSS

There are 10 comments for this post

  1. avatar Anonymous says:

    Thanks for the ‘early warning’ from Merv, guys. Now, if you’ll excuse me — I’m gonna levitate over the ‘sfgate.com’ and visit with some NoCal friends of distinction. See ya in a few. By-the-bye, is ED ZSCHAU considered rich or what?

  2. avatar Loveto says:

    “You have to have self-funding in order to run credibly statewide. You can’t raise enough money at a fast enough clip to compete.”

    Seriously? A major contender for California Governor is defending her use of her obscene wealth by listing it as a precondition of the office?

    This statement says it all! That Whitless and her cronies would have the audacity to tell us (in an on-the-record interview) that wealth is a precondition to running for Governor is outrageous, offensive, and arrogant beyond description. This is exactly the kind of upper-class elitism (and CEO-turned-politician naivete) that regular voters just can’t wait to give the royal smack-down.

    And the fact that this “expert consultant” said it on Whitman’s behalf is proof enough that Whitman has already joined the Zschau/Unz/Checci/Huffington/Issa idiot club — buying high priced consultants who specialize in landing high priced contracts, but don’t know the fist thing about running campaigns.

    Kudos to CalBuzz for capturing this Kodak moment. I only hope the other candidates (wealthy or not) are quick to pounce on the absurdity of this revealing moment.

  3. avatar Anonymous says:

    Loveto,
    Stutzman’s comment makes sense when you think of it this way:
    A. You can’t become Governor without hiring Rob Stutzman, and
    B. Rob Stutzman is very, very expensive, therefore,
    C. You can’t become Governor unless you’re rich.
    Hope this helps.

  4. avatar Anonymous says:

    I agree with Garry South – these rich business guys/gals just think they can buy CA by using their over-priced consultants they way they shop at Nieman Marcus and then use their CEO “skills” to command the legislature to behave. They always demonstrate, by the way they run their campaigns, that they don’t get it. Does Whitman think she can throw a tantrum and get John Burton to obey her? Not in the real world.
    Stutzman’s comment is so unconsciously elitist it’s sickening. He’s essentially saying you have to be rich to be governor of CA. Let’s elect a real person who’s actually had experience running a city and working for government instead of a spoiled billionaire.
    BTW: Poizner’s from Houston so that tells me all I need to know about him.

  5. avatar Craig DeLuz says:

    What about our current governor? He was a millionare and got elected.

    But then again he was able to convince other folks to spend their money on his election.

  6. avatar Bill Bradley says:

    Schwarzenegger actually was not primarily self-funded when he won the governorship in that dramatic California recall way back in October 2003. Most of his campaign money was raised from outside his own bank accounts.

    He turned himself into a fundraising machine. I remember him saying: "I have just held the biggest fundraiser in the history of Lancaster."

    Okay then.

    He was perturbed that he ended up spending more of his own money than the $5 million he initially intended to spend.

    Issa financed the signature gathering that qualified the recall after the various characters claiming credit couldn't do it, but most of the money that drove home the recall came from Schwarzenegger.

    >Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is the only self-funded candidate who’s made it to a top slot. However, he short-circuited the odds by avoiding a primary, where the Republican right wing would have battered him, to capture the governorship in the anomalous 2003 recall (funded largely by Issa) of Gray Davis.

  7. avatar Anonymous says:

    ummmm….this was angelides’ problem too…..

    “Unlike professional politicians, wealthy rookies lack a group of seasoned advisers, “so they go out and hire everybody in the Western Hemisphere and wind up with a big bloated campaign team with no real chain of command,” South said, adding that successful executives often underestimate the difficulty of running for office.”

  8. avatar Anonymous says:

    And as we can see from Schwarzenegger, underestimate the difficulty of governing too!

  9. avatar Anonymous says:

    Stutzman is absolutely right that it's the campaign finance laws that sift out poor Republican candidates (Dems have built in union infrastructure to lean on). Let's scrap them and let free people spend their money as they please.

  10. [...] who can forget Michael Huffington, who spent $28 million of his own money and $100 million overall in losing to Sen. Dianne Feinstein in [...]

Please, feel free to post your own comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.