Jerry Brown and the media love to talk about the money that Meg Whitman has spent in her bid for governor. There’s no doubt that she’s spent a hefty amount. But there are a couple of points that her critics leave out.

 

First, California is a large state and it takes a lot of money to introduce a candidate to the voters. A political newcomer cannot simply hold coffee klatches and expect to connect with the nearly 37 million people who live here. Despite the popularity of the Internet, television and radio are still the most reliable way to reach people and they are also the most expensive form of advertising. Of the roughly $100 million Whitman has spent on her campaign (primary and general) thus far, $60 million has been spent on direct communication with the voters (paid advertising).

 

Her critics also fail to mention that Whitman had to win a contested primary before she earned the right to take on Brown, who had no primary fight. With no clear leading GOP candidate going into the primary, it was a heavily fought race. Meg Whitman spent $85 million during the primary (to Steve Poizner’s $23 million). 

 

I don’t think I’ve ever heard a news report that mentions Whitman’s spending that has ever clarified primary spending versus general election spending. I’ve had friends tell me that they like Meg but are concerned about the spending—because it is mentioned in nearly every report. Yet when they are reminded that Brown did not have a primary fight and hear that she’s only spent $15 million on the general election to date, spending becomes a non-issue.

 

We can’t forget the outside help Brown receives from labor and other moneyed, organized Democratic Party groupies. Left-leaning groups like the California Nurses Association and the California Teachers Association are spending time and money to beat up Whitman on Brown’s behalf. I recently received a slick Whitman attack piece mailed to registered nurses throughout the state by the Oakland-based union.

 

The media is also completely missing the story on how much Jerry Brown has spent to build his name identification over the years. Since 1976, Jerry Brown has run for elected office 11 times (12 if you count 1991 when he started to bid for U.S. Senate and then pulled out of the race to run for president).  Getting campaign spending information beyond about 1992 is difficult, but I tracked down some numbers. 

 

For just his 1980 and 1992 presidential campaigns, Brown spent a combined $20 million (adjusted for 2010 dollars). He spent $7.7 million in 2006 on his campaign to be the state’s top lawyer. He raised $23 million to date for this race…so far, I’m up to $50 million for just three of his 12 races. Granted it’s not for one race, but that money did buy him long-term name ID, something Whitman cannot match without paid advertising.

 

Again, to be fair, I think you also have to factor name ID in her primary spending. She spent $85 million in her primary fight against Poizner, the incumbent Insurance Commissioner. Poizner spend $23 million in that race and had previously spent more than $15 million in his campaign for Insurance Commissioner. On top of that, he spent four years traveling the state and benefitting from earned (free) media associated with his position as Insurance Commissioner. Whitman, a political newcomer, likely came into this race with strong name ID only with people who regularly read the Wall Street Journal or FastCompany.   And they alone are not going to get you elected governor.

 

Jerry Brown too benefits from his position as the current attorney general. For the last four years, he has enjoyed the ability to use taxpayer dollars to communicate his message to the voters. As an incumbent, he travels the state, gives speeches and benefits from earned media while his opponent is required to pay for her exposure to the voters. 

 

What is particularly funny is that although Whitman has personal assets that she can bring to the table, she’s also out fundraising Brown on outside donations. In fact, since July 1, Whitman campaign has outraised Brown by about 2-to-1. As an unnamed Demo consultant recently told the San Francisco Chronicle, “Everyone knew that Meg Whitman had over $100 million of her own money to spend, but none of us were prepared for her outraising us on the outside as well. It’s caught us all totally off-guard.”

 

I have to add that we just didn’t hear the howling about campaign fundraising and spending in 2008 when Barack Obama was out spending John McCain 3-to-1 on television advertising. Funny that the media wasn’t constantly talking about Obama’s spending as they do Whitman’s, when he so dramatically outspent McCain to win the White House. According to the New York Times, between Oct. 16^th and November 24^th, the Obama campaign spent $136 million to McCain’s $26.5 million. I guess that’s the difference between when the Democratic candidate is leading in the polls rather than trailing in the polls.

 

At the end of the day, campaign spending issue is a moot point. Voters will make their own assessment of the candidate’s ability to govern the state. Because Jerry Brown doesn’t want the voters focusing on how he would govern, focusing on campaign spending is a great way to avoid that discussion.