###

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

Voters in Sacramento got a mailer in recent weeks declaring that “California’s landmark election reform — under attack by Sacramento politicians.” Orinda residents have received flyers that shout “Fight back against Trump — Vote Yes.” The narrator on a video ad shared on X intones, “Two wrongs don’t make a right — Vote No.” These are among a barrage of advertisements, yard signs and billboards bombarding Californians with direction to support or oppose redrawing the state’s congressional districts four years ahead of schedule.

But none of it was paid for by the major campaigns advocating for and against Proposition 50, the ballot measure put forth by Gov. Gavin Newsom to counter Republican redistricting efforts in Texas. Instead, nonprofits, political parties and a billionaire have financed an independent effort as election day approaches Tuesday.

Groups not directly affiliated with any Prop. 50 campaign have reported spending nearly $26 million to influence voters as of October 30, more than any ballot measure in California history, according to a CalMatters analysis of secretary of state campaign finance data. The spending does not include the $118 million reportedly spent by the three major campaign committees.

Anybody can buy ads, pay canvassers, or otherwise promote their position on a California ballot measure as long as they register a state committee, disclose major funders in the ads themselves and don’t coordinate with the primary campaigns. Once they’ve spent at least $1,000, they must report their spending to the secretary of state as independent expenditures.

Independent spending for the redistricting measure is significantly more than the previous record-setting Prop. 32 in 2012, which drew $10.8 million in similar spending and would have restricted campaign contributions from labor unions if it passed.

The largest spenders outside of the major campaigns this time are billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer, who reported more than $12.8 million in expenditures and the California Republican Party, which poured more than $10.2 million into ads and messaging opposing the measure. As a result, Steyer and the state GOP have become the second- and third-largest independent ad buyers in state history. The only group to have spent more was run by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “California Dream Team,” which reported spending a combined $27.8 million on multiple ballot measures in 2004 and 2005.

In yet another example of how the campaign has drawn national attention, Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC, gave $8 million to the state GOP in October, which they used to buy nearly $2.9 million worth of digital ads two weeks ago; the super PAC also gave $5 million directly to one of the major campaigns against Prop. 50 — “Stop the Sacramento Power Grab.”

Some large nonprofit organizations are spending money on Prop. 50, too. The largest expenditures come from the California Community Foundation, which reported spending $800,000 to support the proposition, although that doesn’t capture all of the money the nonprofit is putting into the election.

Miguel Santana, president and CEO, said that the foundation is additionally spending more than a million dollars to convince voters to participate in the election without telling them specifically how to vote, though efforts to increase turnout without taking a position are not reported to the secretary of state.

“California representation at the federal level matters,” Santana said. “Our power is being diluted by the gerrymandering that is taking place in other parts of the country.”

Not just Democrats and Republicans

Other political parties and groups in the state have also reported independent expenditures for Prop. 50. The left-leaning California Working Families Party reported spending more than $36,500 on digital ads and outreach to reach voters who might be less receptive to Newsom as a messenger.

“This isn’t the fight we wanted, but I think it’s important that California, the most populous state in the country, fights back,” said Jane Kim, California Director of the Working Families Party. “We really want to hit younger voters who are less party loyalists.”

The Libertarian Party of California spent more than $6,400 for postcard mailers opposing the proposition. Loren Dean, chairman of the state party, said the outreach was an opportunity to raise the party’s profile. “It is important to us to take every opportunity to remind people that the ‘two-party’ choice is a fiction built by would-be monopolists who yearn for authority over their neighbors,” Dean said. “Third-party voices matter.”

Though not a registered political party, the California Democratic Socialists of America reported spending more than $3,500 to try to persuade voters to vote yes while maintaining distance from Gov. Newsom.

“We are not doing this to support him,” said William Prince, co-chair of the organization. “We must ally with him in the struggle against fascism.”

Similarly to the Libertarian Party, the DSA also sees value in putting out campaign materials stamped with “Democratic Socialists of America.”

“When voters think about who encouraged them to vote against a permanent MAGA majority in Congress, more are going to think of [California] DSA than they would have if we sat this out,” Prince said.

Elected officials and local parties hit their districts

More than two dozen county parties, along with current and former elected officials, have reported more than $1 million in independent expenditures for and against Prop. 50.

The Sonoma County Democratic Party reported spending nearly $90,000 on postcards, phonebanking and radio ads to support the initiative, while the Yuba County Republican Party reported almost $55,000 to spread opposition signs around Northern California.

Pat Sebo, chairperson of the Sonoma County Democratic Party, said the county party spent money on its own mailers and canvassing because it wanted to move faster than its state counterpart. “We wanted to act, we had volunteers, we had them basically beating down the doors at headquarters here,” she said.

“Ballot measure campaigns usually do not distribute signs to local Republican groups,” said Johanna Lassaga, chair of the Yuba County Republican Party. She credited her group’s expenditures for raising visibility of the party’s unified position: “If you drive through the North State, you will see [our signs] everywhere.”

Along with a $5,000 contribution to the main Yes campaign, former Democratic state Sen. Steve Glazer from Orinda used his ballot measure committee to spend more than $160,000 in support of Prop. 50, because he said he could reach voters in his district in a way a statewide campaign could not.

“When you’re running a statewide campaign, you don’t always have that luxury of microtargeting,” Glazer said. “I felt that I had a good handle on the pulse of the voters in my area, where I believe I have a heightened level of credibility.”

“We decided we want to do it quicker, better, faster,” said Assemblymember Juan Alanis, Republican from Modesto, whose ballot measure committee reported spending more than $12,500 on signs to oppose Prop. 50. He said the short election cycle meant the statewide campaigns could not ensure enough signs would reach his district in time, so he decided to “make sure my area is taken care of.”

Assemblymember Maggy Krell, a Democrat who represents Sacramento, said that the most valuable way she could have spent $8,000 was to organize door-knocking in her district. “My best contribution to the campaign is my network of volunteers — people who are going door-to-door and engaging voters one conversation at a time,” she wrote in an email.

Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio from San Diego spent more than $430,000 from his Reform California committee, because he didn’t think the official No campaign was up to the task. He released a final ad last week that urged voters statewide to reject Prop. 50.

“I don’t trust the failed consultants of these mega-committees,” he said. “My intuition was correct. The ads were horseshit, off-message.”