California Watch

Larry Aceves

Tony Quinn, co-editor of California Target and one of the most knowledgeable analysts of politics in the state, has an explanation for how a virtual unknown – Larry Aceves – came out as the top vote getter in the first round of the race for state Superintendent of Public Instruction.

A decisive factor, he says, were privately funded, and unofficial, slate cards many voters received in the mail, produced by well-established firms like Larry Levine & Associates (for Democratic candidates) and Landslide Communications (for GOP ones).

In an article published in the Capitol Morning Report, Quinn, argued the following:

Picking through the results of California's historically low-turnout election last week, one conclusion jumps out – candidates and measures that put their money into slate cards made a good investment. In this election, mail was an effective way to reach voters, who were turned off by negative television ads, and slate cards seem to have been particularly effective.

This is especially the case, Quinn says, in an "invisible race" such as superintendent of public instruction where slate cards "are almost the only communication voters receive."

What makes the schools chief race unusual is that it is the only nonpartisan statewide office.

That means Democrats and Republicans can vote for whichever candidate they choose. The party affiliations of the candidates aren't even listed on the ballot. Typically, numerous candidates, most of them completely unknown, run for the post. (This year there were 12.) 

Aceves, a former superintendent of a two relatively small school districts, was up against two far better known candidates: State Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, the current chair of the Senate Education Committee, and Assemblyman Tom Torlakson, D-Martinez, who has been in the state Legislature for 14 years, including two previous terms as a state senator. Torlakson received the considerable backing of the California Teachers Association, while Romero was endorsed by EdVoice, another influential education advocacy group.

Aceves, whose main financial support came from the Association of California School Administrators, was considerably outspent by Torlakson and to a lesser extent by Romero. 

What really helped Aceves, said Quinn, who has deep Republican roots, was that he was probably the least offensive of all the candidates to the GOP. 

"He was the only Democrat who made a real pitch to Republican voters," Quinn said in a follow-up telephone conversation. 

Aceves was also the clear leader in endorsements on slate cards – some of which he paid for, and some of which he didn't. 

Quinn says Aceves was listed as the candidate of choice on the most influential Democrat slate card, the "Voter Information Guide for Democrats."  Of four other Democratic slate cards, two endorsed Torlakson, and one each endorsed Aceves and Romero.

More significant was that eight out of 10 Republican slate cards reviewed by Quinn endorsed Aceves. One endorsement, for example, was in the "Save Prop. 13" newsletter.  Another was produced by the "Small Business Action Committee."

Aceves ended up earning 19.2 percent of the vote, against Torlakson's 18.6 percent, and Romero's 17 percent. The remaining votes were divided among the other nine candidates. Only the two top vote getters will appear on the November ballot, so Romero is now out of the race.

It was hardly a blow-out victory for Aceves, but it was a remarkable one nonetheless. "Aceves did not come from the Legislature, he did not have a base among the strongest education interest groups, he was outspent by the other leading candidates, and he ends up running first," Quinn said. 

Aceves may have won the first round, but his chances are far less certain in November when he will go mano a mano against Torlakson. Will he or Torlakson pick up Romero's supporters?  What about the 40 percent of the vote that went to minor candidates?  Wait for the battle of the dueling slate cards to begin.