Proponents Charge Fraud Defeated Living Wage

By Oliver Lukacs

Feb. 22 -- Testifying before an independent commission on election reform, prominent politicians, clergy, academics and activists charged that opponents of the Living Wage initiative that failed in November violated State election laws with three fraudulent mailers.

The allegations -- which were accompanied by a call for election reform at the local and state levels -- were made before an eight-member blue-ribbon commission at the public hearing Saturday attended by more than 100 living wage supporters who packed the Santa Monica Alternative High School Auditorium.

The meeting was co-sponsored by Santa Monicans Allied for Responsible Tourism (SMART) and Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice (CLUE), the two driving forces behind the Living Wage, who had made the same allegations during the campaign. But Saturday's public hearing brought out some of the prominent politicians who testified that they were used to defeat a measure they strongly supported.

California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who testified before the commission, took personal issue with one of the slate mailers depicting him with other prominent Democrats endorsing a No on JJ position without his permission and contrary to his support for the initiative.

"This mailer is the very reason voters are cynical about politics," Bustamante said. "And this is why voters stay away from polls on Election Day."

U.S. Congressman Henry Waxman and Democratic Party chair Art Torres both issued letters denouncing the "phony" Democratic mailer when they found out they had been included along with Bustamante.

Bustamante said the mailers exemplify a widespread practice of deceptive politics that constitutes "an assault on democracy" and stand as a shinning example that "we clearly need reform."

"It's about time a community stands up to the issue," he said referring to the commission comprised of academic experts and elected officials, including former California State Supreme Court Justice Cruz Reynoso, who administered the oath of honesty to the more than a dozen people testifying.

The three "misleading" mailers at the center of the controversy were released the weekend before the election by three committees -- the Democratic Voters Ballot Guide, the Quality Schools Coalition and the Pro-Choice Voters Committee. Living Wage supporters blame the mailers -- which were allegedly funded entirely by Living Wage opponents -- for the defeat of the initiative by 1,000 votes.

All three fliers included an asterisk next to the "No on JJ" slogan and included a "Yes on EE" slogan -- also accompanied by an asterisk -- indicating that the opponents of the Living Wage measure also backed the school parcel tax.

The fliers, which mislead voters into thinking that education advocates endorsed the anti-living wage position, was inaccurate and therefore illegal said Paul Ryan, from the Center for Governmental Studies.

Ryan said this misleading tactic is an old trick. "Slate mailer organizations are regularly fined for wrongfully using asterisks," because that constitutes a violation of California Government Codes.

School Board President Maria Leon-Vazquez testified that she was appalled by one of the fliers put out by the "Quality Schools Coalition" picturing a student hard at work. They flier urged a "Yes on EE," but a no "No on JJ," with an adjacent message reading: "No on reducing funding for schools and youth programs."

"I and my fellow educators deplore such tactics," said Leon-Vazquez, adding that all education advocates supported the living wage because they know that "achievement gaps are linked to income," and the boost in wages would have resulted in better futures for the children of the hotel employees.

Representing State Senator Sheila Kuehl, who canceled at the last-minute to attend a funeral, Laurie Newman said Kuehl -- who was pictured on the "Pro-Choice Voters Committee" mailer opposing JJ -- "condemns the deliberate attempt to fool voters on an issue of vital importance."

"I am not aware of a single pro-choice leader opposed to Measure JJ," said Newman reading a statement by the California senator. Newman added that contrary to the claim on the mailer, the living wage "would not have hurt a woman's access to healthcare services," and that in fact the boost in wages "would have helped poor women get access to healthcare."

The mailers were part of an two-year campaign waged by Santa Monica hotels and restaurants, who spent more than $2 million to keep the Living Wage ordinance from going into law. The campaign included opposition to Prop JJ in November, as well as a failed effort to pass a "phony" Living Wage initiative two years earlier.

The campaigns were spearheaded by two republican law firms, organizers said. One of the firms, Bell, McAndrews, Hiltachk, & Davidian, was founded by Charles H. Bill Jr. whose clients have included Republican Governors Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian, Attorney General Dan Lungren, and Secretary of State Bill Jones, according to letter by Steven K. Ury handed out to the press at the meeting.

Allegedly behind the three controversial mailers were James Lacy, who was listed as the treasurer for the three committees created weeks before the election, and William Lord Butcher, a political consultant who authored the mailers and is the founder of Independent Campaign Strategies.

Butcher has been allegedly linked to a number of campaigns involving voter deception, including one targeting failed Los Angeles mayoral hopeful Antonio Villaraigosa, and Lacy is credited with successfully overturning state Slate mailer disclosure regulations, and is said to be generally opposed to all finance reform.

Organizers of the meeting also handed out a breakdown of contributions based on campaign disclosure statement filed between 2000 and 2002. The bottom line showed that Living Wage opponents outspent proponents by more than 3 to 1 -- roughly $2.8 million to $744,000.

"The question is whether the democratic process can function properly in such a lopsided contest," said Nancy Cohen, a policy analyst for Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, one of the key backers of the Living Wage.

"When you have overwhelming spending on a No campaign against a Yes campaign, 3 to 1, in most cases you can predict the results, that the No campaign will win," said Roy Ulrich, from Common Cause, a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving the election process.

At the behest of the committee, Ulrich recommend the following reforms to safeguard future elections:

• Provide public financing for under-funded campaigns.
  
  
• Identify at the top of the ballot donors giving more than 10 percent of total contributions to a campaign.
  
  
• Give free airtime on local cable stations to candidates and initiatives on the ballot.
  
  
• Create ethics committees to review complaints during and after elections.

Ulrich added that Santa Monica's municipal codes on printed material are flawed because they only mention candidate committees but do no include committees for ballot measures.