Loya spends the least amount per vote at $.71
By PAM WIGHT Special to the Daily Press
Money doesn’t buy everything, as some City Council candidates learned this past election.
It took $7.98 a vote for Bobby Shriver to win a seat on the City Council, and that’s without indirect support from outside groups. And incumbent Mike Feinstein spent $9.72 per vote but failed to win a seat.
The three incumbents who were re-elected spent substantially less — Richard Bloom spent $1.50 per vote, Herb Katz paid $5.04 per vote and Ken Genser spent $2.27 per vote.
Considering only direct money contributions through the last campaign statement of Oct. 16, the cost of each vote was an average of $3.55, which was determined by dividing the money raised by the number of votes 11 of the viable candidates received. However, if all the contributions from special interest groups were considered, the cost per vote would be dramatically higher.
With $162,090 in campaign contributions, Shriver raised the most direct money, translating into $7.98 for each of his 20,309 votes — the highest received by a candidate. But Shriver also received indirect support from a slate of big money political groups, such as Santa Monicans for Change and Santa Monica Citizens for Sensible Priorities, which threw hundreds of thousand dollars into this year’s campaign.
Feinstein, who raised $67,251 on his own, paid a whopping $9.72 for each of his 6,922 votes. Despite spending the most per vote, Feinstein came in at ninth place. Feinstein lost the backing of Santa Monicans for Renters’ Rights (SMRR) and had few endorsements.
“My opposition spent between $60,000 to $70,000 on materials to defeat me and that effecively cancels out the cost of my vote.”
Backing from political parties, like SMRR, often determine a candidate’s success because they raise tens of thousands of dollars for their candidates’ campaigns, as well as volunteer to the effort.
With the backing of SMRR, Bloom raised $21,812, therefore spending a mere $1.50 of direct funds for his 14,575 votes. Bloom was the second highest vote getter but raised the least amount of money.
“SMRR spent about $125,000 on four candidates for this election which is small potatoes compared to what some of the other special interest groups paid to oppose my candidacy,” Bloom said.
Katz, who raised $64,140, came in third with 12,722 votes, spending $5.04 per vote. Katz was endorsed by the chamber of commerce, and appeared on campaign literature paid for by special interest groups.
Genser, the fourth vote getter and backed by SMRR, directly raised $26,639 for his 11,748 votes.
Bloom’s direct campaign contributions were lower than his opponents, which concerned him during the campaign. He pointed out that the typical cost for a direct mail flier is at least $10,000.
“I don’t break it down by vote,” he said. “Money spent on oppositional literature to my candidacy is more revealing. If you total up the money spent by Edward Thomas who owns the Shutters Hotel and the Casa Del Mar, and the money from the so-called sensible people, and the chamber and others — you’re looking at close to $1 million to advocate against what was the current city government. Imagine how expensive those votes were.”
Genser agreed.
“Money is a major influence but it is not the determinant necessarily,” he said. “Sometimes too much money spent on a campaign has backfired. And what about the current hotel money (hotel owner Edward Thomas) for Herb (Katz) and Shriver?”
He added that in recent elections related to the living wage, like Prop KK a few years ago, advocates spent 10 times more than their opposition, only to see their efforts fail.
Even though Shriver received help from the outside big donors and raised the most money, Bloom commended Shriver for reaching out to the community for support.
“He did have a message,” Bloom said. “With his name recognition, too, he could have stumped all by himself and raised money, but he reached out to the community.”
Because Feinstein didn’t receive the backing of SMRR as he did in the 2000 elections, he was forced to raise more money in direct campaign contributions, a daunting task to candidates who don’t have access to large amounts of cash. Feinstein loaned himself a majority of what was used in his campaign.
Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, told the Daily Press earlier this year that the costs of a campaign have increased because voters are paying less attention, adding that SMRR does most of the campaigning.
Bloom finds that fact undemocratic.
“I’m very concerned about having a political system that bases political candidacy on how much money someone has,” he said. “If people knew it took $70,000 to run a local campaign they’d fall off their chairs. This is an extremely important discussion to have because if people see that it takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to run for office in a town of this size... they will be less involved. Local government is the closest thing we have to real democracy and when they get taken over by heavily funded interests, we’re in trouble.”
Pico neighborhood activist Maria Loya was one of the SMRR-supported candidates but raised the least amount of direct money out of the top seven competitors. As a result, the cost of each of her votes was only $.71.
Other candidates’ cost per vote were Patricia Hoffman’s $1.98, Matt Dinolfo’s $4.89, Kathryn Morea’s $1.38, David Cole’s $1.28, and Bill Bauer’s $2.34. Hoffman also was backed by SMRR but didn’t win a seat on the City council. Dinolfo and Morea were endorsed by the chamber of commerce. Cole and Bauer ran as independents.
PULLQUOTE: “I’m very concerned about having a political system that bases political candidacy on how much money someone has.” — Richard Bloom, Santa Monica Mayor
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on November 5, 2004. Read the original PDF.