I have been watching the website of the California Secretary of State to follow the close contest between Tony Thurmond and Marshall Tuck. The polls and pundits predicted that Tuck would win.
When the polls first closed, Tuck had an early lead, but millions of votes had not been counted. In California, mail-in ballots postmarked on the day of the election must be counted, and they are still being counted.
After election day, Thurmond went into the lead, then Tuck came back, then Thurmond opened up a lead of 65,000-85,000 votes. That lead has held steady over the past couple of days as the vote total grows.
The vote is not final, and the numbers obviously could change in the days ahead.
Thurmond is winning heavily in Los Angeles (the city that should be Marshall Tuck’s base, where the most charters are located) and in San Francisco, which is Thurmond’s base.
On October 28, EdSource in California reported that at least $50 million had been raised for the race, and that Tuck had outraised Thurmond by 2-1.
When all the reports are in, the total amount of spending will surely be even more.
Thurmond was backed by the California Teachers Association and labor unions, meaning that his campaign was paid for by the dues of working people.
Here is a partial list of Tuck donors, a veritable Who’s Who of the school choice movement:
Bill Bloomfield: $6.761 million
Bloomfield is a billionaire Republican mega-donor who has become a charter school advocate.
The Walton Family: $5.138 million
Walmart billionaires
Eli Broad: $3.2 million
The Los Angeles billionaire who believes in closing public schools and privatizing them into charters.
Arthur Rock: $3.2 million
A California venture capitalist and billionaire who gives millions to Teach for America
Doris Fisher: $3.1 million
A billionaire, thanks to The Gap and Old Navy; the family gives heavily to KIPP
Richard Riordan: $2 million
The former Mayor of Los Angeles
These were the totals as of October 28. We will have to wait a few weeks for a complete accounting.
Undoubtedly these donors could have given twice or three times as much, but must have decided that it might embarrass Tuck to have three times as much money as Thurmond. Twice as much should have been enough.
One thing is certain. This is the most expensive contest in history for the job of State Superintendent of Public Instruction, a job that pays $175,000 and has limited authority.
The symbolic importance of this race, however, cannot be overstated. If the charter lobby prevails in a deep blue state, it can prevail in every state. It already owns Governor Cuomo in New York (but lost control of the State Legislature, when progressive candidates ousted fake Democrats in the State Senate). It tried and failed to lift the charter cap in Massachusetts in 2016, routed in a public referendum, even though the Governor and the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education is in the hands of the charter industry.
So, we will continue to keep a close watch on California, where the teachers and the charter billionaires are in a face-off.
Looking good today!
Leftie…email me for lunch and yakking soon. elubic@aol.com
Done. Have missed you. See you soon.
The money spent on campaigns is obscene. Very much hope that this one works out for us.
Yes! It is an obscene amount of money. It is a war over symbols and images.
A person living in California, which I have done almost my entire long life, must have a steel rod implanted up the back end to withstand murders, fires, earthquakes, traffic, and also the phony Dem legislators sparked by billionaires cash, who engage in filthy politics. I will never forgive three legislators whom I used to respect, almost consider friends, but now look at with disgust. Henry Stern who represents my district, Bob Hertzberg who I had invited as a speaker at my university some years back and who has an obnoxious ego, and Ben Allen who was on the Santa Monica BoE. All are slimy in my view since they came out for Tuck. Can never trust them on other issues for they are under the sway of the billionaires. All three are so driven for their own political benefit that they do not deserve Dem support.
Bill Bloomfield sent out an oversized election flyer with a large picture of [my] State Senator Ben Allen endorsing Tuck. Allen is Chair of the State Education Committee. Bloomfield is also a big donor of Allen’s, a Democrat (in name only). I cast no vote for State Senator (the other guy was a Republican). A small protest vote. I, of course, voted for Thurmond.
As I pointed out, Bloomfield is a major Republican donor. Why is he supporting the Democrat who chairs the Senate Education Committee?
The two page ad in the LA Times, a wrap around the front section so as it could not be missed, cost Bloomfield a fortune. Why, for what is a rather low level office,would he spend this cash? And why would the out of state, and in state, billionaires spend $50 million on this election for State Supt? What is their payback? Hastings, Broad, Bloomberg, Bloomfield, et al, plot their greed in hiding. They did not get this rich without dirty dealing no matter if they are Dem (DFERs) or Repubs.Would that they would spend this King’s ransom to improve real public education. Wonder how much they will all donate to help fire victims…oh wait, there is no profit in that.
Imagine the race with no union campaign funding.
It would be 5 billionaires and that’s it. That’s all anyone would hear. The billionaires could spend a lot less money with no opposition, so it would probably be 10 to 1 billionaires or 20 to 1 billionaires. Every campaign would be utterly dominated by about 25 people, nationally.
Scott Walker would still be running Wisconsin and Betsy DeVos would be entering her 25th year running Michigan public education.
Every time you look at one of these education elections take out labor unions and see who is left – billionaires with no competition. Now that’s scary thought. They would utterly and completely dominate all political speech. Voters would hear Eli Broads and the Walton heirs opinions on education and nothing else.
The same billionaires are buying local and state school board elections
“The same billionaires are buying local and state school board elections”
Billionaires are mostly targeting larger school districts (like L.A. Unified). What I fear is that they will start to take an interest in smaller school districts.
If you look at the NPE report, “Hijacked by Billionaires,” you will see that the billionaires also target small districts.
You make an important point, Chiara. Beside unions, what other powerful entities go to bat for the commoners?
Welcome to Tennessee.
Thanks to chief Justice Roberts, offices like state superintendent are now effectively sold to the highest bidder.
Roberts’ legacy will be citizens United.
“Money Unlimited
How Chief Justice John Roberts orchestrated the Citizens United decision.”
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/05/21/money-unlimited
Fingers crossed that Citizens United is beaten in this Race in California.
SCOTUS gave our democracy to the highest bidder, except when we raise public consciousness to the theft.
Extending the current county voting percentages to the number of absentee and provisional ballots reported, I get the following eventual results through Excel:
Thurmond – 5,609,376
Tuck – 5,478,812
Still too close for comfort…
Glad to know the end point is in view
“Still too close for comfort…”
But much better than the situation at the end of election day, Nov. 6.
The latest count of the election at 2:44 pm PST showed a Thurmond leading Tuck by 100,000 votes, the largest lead yet.
https://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/superintendent-of-public-instruction
There must be some very annoyed billionaires.
Now near 160,000 lead 🙂