Big oil backers and bobblehead ads? Sacramento’s Senate race heats up as PACs weigh in

Sacramento drivers who’ve recently stopped near a busy Curtis Park intersection may have spotted a billboard featuring a suit-wearing bobblehead.

The political advertisement at Sutterville Road and Franklin Boulevard depicts 8th State Senate District candidate Dave Jones and urges voters, “Don’t give Dave Jones the nod for State Senate.”

Although Sacramento residents have already begun to fill out their ballots ahead of the June 7 primary, a political action committee, or PAC, has injected some late-breaking controversy into the 8th Senate District race by coming out against Jones so strongly.

Jones, a former Insurance Commissioner, is competing against City Councilwoman Angelique Ashby and union representative Rafael Garcia to replace term-limited Sen. Richard Pan as Sacramento’s representative in the Legislature.

Ashby and Jones — the most well-known figures — will probably earn enough votes in the primary to face each other in the November general election.

But that likely outcome is not stopping the PACs, Future PAC and Californians for Jobs and a Strong Economy, from weighing in on the race. Nor is it preventing the Jones campaign from painting Ashby as a candidate who’s backed by big oil and cares only about corporate interests.

“My guess is that the strategy is to position one of the candidates as being the de facto ‘winner’ in June and hoping that carries them through to November,” said Steven Maviglio, a Democratic strategist and Ashby supporter.

Who are Angelique Ashby and Dave Jones?

Sacramento voters are probably at least somewhat familiar with Ashby and Jones.

Ashby has represented Natomas on the City Council for about 12 years. She ran for mayor in 2016.

Jones has had a long political career. He was a member of the City Council from 1999 to 2004 and represented Sacramento as an assemblyman from 2004 to 2010. California voters also elected him state Insurance Commissioner from 2011 to 2019.

Both candidates are Democrats. However, they’ve drawn endorsements and support from different wings of the party, which sees Ashby as more of a moderate and Jones as more of a progressive.

Pan endorsed Ashby, and she has significant hometown support, especially from her council district. The Democratic Women’s Caucus also backed Ashby, who would be the first woman to hold the Senate district seat in decades.

In addition, she has endorsements from the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, California Professional Firefighters and the California Medical Association’s PAC.

The California Democratic Party endorsed Jones, who’s also backed by the California Democratic Progressive Caucus. Other Jones supporters include the Sierra Club, NARAL Pro-Choice California and and the California Teachers Association.

PAC money weighs in

Even though Jones and Ashby will likely both move on to the next round, the 8th Senate District election has attracted significant dollars in the form of independent expenditures.

In the world of dark political money, PACs can spend to oppose or support candidates independent of campaigns.

PACs can also combine under a new name — Future PAC, in this case — to shield voters from the interests backing or attacking candidates. However, the PACs must file forms disclosing their donors and expenditures and whether they’re spending to support or oppose candidates.

Future PAC has spent more than $400,000 on anti-Jones attack ads, including the billboard, materials and videos depicting him as a bobblehead, California Secretary of State records show.

That PAC is backed by Californians for Jobs and a Strong Economy, another PAC that has long supported moderate Democratic candidates in California. It has come together with agriculture, law enforcement, real estate, rental housing, charter schools, hospitals and the pharmaceutical industry to produce the ads.

The state has different contribution rules for PACs that allow money to flow far more freely. For example, Charter Public Schools PAC, California Correctional Police Officer’s Association PAC and the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America PAC each donated $49,500 to Future PAC to help pay for the anti-Jones ads, according to state records.

The California Apartment Association chipped in $125,000, on its own.

Big oil supporting Ashby?

Future PAC’s ads have complicated the landscape of the Jones-Ashby race.

Ashby is not involved in the ads and has not expressed a position on them.

During an interview with The Sacramento Bee’s editorial board, she argued the ads “have nothing to do with me.”

“There were at one time seven people in this race, and those folks that oppose Dave still oppose Dave,” she said. “It wouldn’t matter if there were 70 people on the ballot, it’s him they don’t want to see return to the state legislature.”

But oil companies have donated large sums to Californians for Jobs and a Strong Economy, along with other energy providers, law enforcement and medical interests.

This has left Ashby open to attacks from Jones claiming she’s supported by big oil. Although Future PAC’s ads are explicitly anti-Jones and not pro-Ashby, Californians for Jobs and a Strong Economy did contribute $4,900 to her campaign.

But it’s not entirely accurate to say oil companies are propping up Californians for Jobs and a Strong Economy. The PAC has taken in more than $2.6 million in 2021 and 2022. Oil companies have provided $375,000, or about 15%.

Other interests — including telecommunications, real estate, insurance and food and beverage distributors — provide about half of the PAC’s funding. Fox Cable Networks, Google, 1-800 Contacts and In-N-Out Burgers are among its donors.

However, this hasn’t stopped the Jones campaign from sending out mailers depicting Ashby as a shadowy figure funded by large, rusty barrels of oil.

“These are public records,” Jones said during the editorial board interview. “You don’t have to coordinate with an independent expenditure campaign to know who’s spending what, and PG&E and Chevron are major donors to this campaign to try to take me out.”

Jones, Ashby campaign spending

Although Ashby is not involved in the PAC ads, they do allow her to stay out of the fray and slam Jones for attacking her while reaping the free benefits of media meant to hurt her opponent.

Jones, unlike Ashby, did not accept the state’s voluntary campaign expenditure limit, which is capped at $973,000 for Senate candidates. Declining the limit means Jones won’t have a candidate statement in the sample ballot.

However, it also means he’s able to raise more money. Jones’ campaign has collected more than $1.2 million during the 2021-2022 cycle as of Monday.

By contrast, Ashby’s campaign has raised only $652,253 during the same cycle. She also took in more than $149,000 during the 2019-2020 cycle, giving her a campaign total of more than $800,000.

Jones did not raise any money during the 2019-2020 cycle, according to state records.

When asked why Jones chose not to accept the expenditure limit, spokesman Michael Soneff said the campaign “suspected that big oil and its allies would try to elect Ashby and beat Dave by spending mountains of money against him.”

“We could not afford to be limited in the amount of direct communications from our campaign to voters to fight back,” Soneff said.

He pointed out that Ashby has also benefited from PACs independently backing her campaign.

Separate from the bobblehead campaign, other PACs have spent nearly $600,000 to support Ashby with mailers, digital ads, and voter data purchases, state data shows.

DaVita, a healthcare company that runs outpatient dialysis centers, and the California Correctional Peace Officers Association PAC have been the biggest spenders.

By contrast, PACs backing Jones have spent just more than $61,000 to support him.

Why are PACs spending so much now?

Since Ashby has raised far less money than Jones, PAC money tightens the race financially and even gives her an advantage.

PACs have spent close to $1 million attacking Jones and backing Ashby, in addition to her $600,000 in campaign contributions.

Jones has institutional support from the Democratic Party, while Ashby does not.

That’s likely why PACs are weighing in on the race at this point, even though Ashby and Jones will probably be duking it out through November, said Maviglio, the Democratic strategist and Ashby supporter.

In addition, liberal voters tend to turn out in higher numbers over moderates in primary elections, he said.

However, Jones’ campaign says support from institutions gives him clout, but not money.

“The Democratic Party endorsement sends a message about who has and will stand up for Democratic values, but that does not come with a financial contribution,” Soneff said. “The spending by corporate special interests is not leveling the playing field — instead it’s tilting the playing field heavily for Ashby and against Dave.”

This story was originally published May 19, 2022 at 5:00 AM with the headline "Big oil backers and bobblehead ads? Sacramento’s Senate race heats up as PACs weigh in."