Four-hundred million dollars.
That’s one estimate for how much the election to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom could cost taxpayers this fall.
Could the hefty price tag become the focus of voter backlash against the Republican-led effort to oust the Democratic governor just a year before he would otherwise face re-election?
“I’d say that framing it as a waste of money and waste of time probably is going to be pretty effective with swing voters who aren’t sure what they’re going to do about the recall,” said Darry Sragow, a longtime Democratic strategist in the Golden State.
While California’s finance department won’t have an official cost estimate for the election until this summer, the California Association of Clerks and Election Officials — the county officials who run the election — says they expect extra COVID-related precautions will push the costs of a special statewide election to roughly $400 million.
Their estimate is based on fiscal surveys of counties across the state. The 2020 presidential primary, which took place before the pandemic prompted lockdowns and changes to the election process, cost about $12 per voter, said Donna Johnston, president of the association and Sutter County’s registrar of voters. But the November 2020 election, which took place during the pandemic and required mailed ballots, protective gear for workers and larger voting facilities to allow for social distancing, cost about $18 per voter.
Mail voting is set to continue, Johnston said, and even if COVID-19 is less of a threat, counties are still likely to need some protective gear and other supplies. Counties also now must pay for return postage where they didn’t need to in the past.
“Most definitely it will be difficult to pay for the election without any reimbursement,” said Johnston, who is registered with no party preference.
While the federal government helped cover the cost of the November 2020 election, county officials are worried they’ll be left footing the bill this time around. A California law passed several years ago does require the state to pick up “necessary” costs associated with the recall, but it’s not clear exactly what the state will cover.
When the voters went to the polls in 2003 to recall Gov. Gray Davis, the state did not cover the costs, Johnston said. If that happens again, “some hard decisions will have to be made by boards of supervisors.”
Newsom’s office and his anti-recall campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment about state funding.
“It makes sense not to hold this re-election on the backs of cash-strapped counties,” said Jessica Levinson, an expert on money in politics and a professor at Loyola Law School. “But it also makes sense not to use taxpayer funds on this anyway.”
Instead, Levinson thinks the state should explore making it more difficult to put a recall on the ballot in the first place, pointing out that with time and money, an organized team with paid signature gatherers can force the issue by getting signatures equal to 12% of all ballots cast in the last election for governor, not an especially high threshold.
“Think of all of the good you could do with this money,” she said of the $400 million figure, naming hot meals for students and homeless shelters as options. “We’re going to have to spend a lot of public and private funds for something that is very unlikely to succeed.”
The sum is the same amount Newsom earmarked for school-based mental health services in his 2021-22 state budget proposal, and more than the $353 million he proposed for workforce development.
How does the party of fiscal responsibility plan to defend the costs of the recall? By blaming the state Legislature for forcing an election by mail.
“We’re not responsible for the cost of this,” said Randy Economy, a spokesman for the recall campaign. “The Legislature changed the rules in the middle of the game.”
Why not just wait a year and try to boot Newsom from office in 2022?
“God knows what California would be looking like,” Economy said, accusing the governor of implementing tyrannical policies. “You cannot put a price on democracy and the will of the people.”
Speaking of money, both sides are already busy raising it.
Unlike in a regular election, Newsom is allowed to raise unlimited funds to fight the recall effort and already the well-connected Democrat’s anti-recall committee has pulled in more than $1.9 million, according to figures from the California Secretary of State’s office. That includes more than $600,000 from the California Democratic Party, $100,000 from San Francisco 49ers CEO Jed York and affiliates, $100,000 from the Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians, and a combined $250,000 from Lynda and Stewart Resnick, the pair behind Fiji Water and other brands.
The California Patriot Coalition, one of the main groups backing the recall campaign, has raised more than $3.4 million, including more than $950,000 from another recall group, Rescue California, which received more than $185,000 from the California Republican Party. The group Prov. 3:9 LLC, backed by John Kruger, an Orange County man upset about pandemic worship service restrictions, kicked in roughly $500,000, and the tech venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya, who used to work for Facebook, contributed $100,000.
For context, Newsom’s 2018 committee during his initial run for governor raised more than $37 million, so expect these numbers to climb as the election approaches.
If Newsom survives the recall, which polling suggests is likely, he’ll have yet another fundraising task in front of him in 2022.
According to the Fair Political Practices Commission, Newsom cannot transfer money left in his own anti-recall committee to his 2022 candidate committee. But other anti-recall ballot measure committees can transfer money to Newsom’s re-election committee through contributions, as long as they abide by contribution limits for regular elections.
Republicans in support of the recall have their own set of concerns: walking the line between receiving GOP support on the national level without alienating swing voters, Levinson said. “They have to get moderates and no party preference voters if they have a prayer for a chance.”