Insiders and establishment interests and Prop 16

Very interesting information.  From A Tale of Two Campaigns by Gail Heriot.  

In 1996, Californian voters passed Proposition 209 which banned state government from discriminating on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin.  Voters strongly affirming that they do not want institutionalized racism by their government.  Strong Enlightenment era thinking and, one would think, a pretty good thing.  

As I have mentioned in other posts, it is a very good thing and most Americans think so as well in election after election.  And usually by wide margins.  No one is a fan of racism, even when practiced for ostensibly good reasons.  Just No.  Strongly and consistently.

Which is nice except that there are small groups of well funded racists out there who are very vocal and also very persistent.  They just do not understand why Americans dislike racism and they keep trying to reintroduce it.

In 2020, a coalition of those racists managed to get Proposition 16 on the ballot in California.  Proposition 16 proposed to overturn 1996's Proposition 209 and once again allow the government to discriminate among citizens based on race.  All the usual support from the usual suspects - academia, the Democratic Party, establishment politicians of either party, mainstream media, etc.

Proposition 16 raised $27 million to further its pro-racism agenda.  Opponents of racism in government raised only $1.72 million.  The results?

A pretty resounding defeat for the forces of racism.  57.2% 9,559,030 Californians voted no on Proposition, 57.2%.  A 14 point defeat of the racism in government voters.

Great.  All is as it should be.  But still . . .   $27 million for racism to $1.72 million against?  Where did all that money come from.  In advance of the election there were concerns that with such massive funding, Proposition 16 might pass.  And if it passed in our largest state, it would have provided a massive fillip to pro-racism donors in other states with similar prohibitions.  We could see a tide of moral darkness rise across the nation, seeking to divide one American from another base on racism in government.

Heriot provides data on the source of funding for the bring racism back to government movement.  Quinn Delaney is wife of real estate magnate Wayne Jordan, tightly involved as a donor and policy recipient, with the Democratic party, both national and local.  Both Delany and Jordan are officers of a major foundation which claims to support "support the development of powerful social change movements to eliminate structural racism and create a racially just society."

What is striking is how incestuous and concentrated is the money, how backroom establishment, and how profoundly unlike America.  Heriot's list is only of those 27 individuals and entities who donated $200,000 or more.  As an aside, the top donation against Proposition 16 was $50,000.  Chump change for the proponents.

Those 27 donors hoping to reinstitute governmental racism donated 86% of the $27 million dollars raised.  Grass roots this was not.  Face of America this was not.

Seven wealthy activist donors donated 47% of the money raised.  

A single NGO, the ACLU, donated 14% of the money raised.

Three entities deeply regulated by the State (two health and one energy) donated 8% of the money raised.

Government related unions  donated 7% of the money raised.

Tech and Fin Services companies donated 4%

And so on.  You get the picture.  

When you add up the Unions, Regulated Interests, and Tech/Fin Services companies, all of whose financial well-being is dependent on close and good relations with the government you end up with a scenario where nearly 20% of the money raised ($5.2 million and three times the total of the anti-Prop 16 total donations) is money raised by the government for a proposition the government wants.

And it isn't like the wealthy donors are independent.  

You had an extremely well financially supported Prop 16 campaign with money substantially and overwhelmingly from government client entities or rich individuals and a single foundation against 9 million ordinary California voters who refused to accept government racism as an organizing principle.

On the one hand, Prop 16's resounding defeat by the voters is a wonderful inspiration about the strength of democracy.  On the other hand, it is alarming just how much money can be mobilized by so few people and entities, with so little oversight and accountability, and so at odds with the voting public.

And it also gets at the tangled question of corruption.  Is it corrupt that so small a number of individuals and institutions can have such a heavy hand in democracy.  Even more importantly, is it corruption when the government ends up pressuring client corporations and entities to donate to the government's agenda?

Its complicated but the second question should seemingly be a pretty clear affirmative.  It is corrupt for the government to force client entities to donate to government supported campaigns.  It is particularly notable in the case of PG&E.  They donated $250,000 to support Prop. 16 which has absolutely nothing to do with their business of generating power.  And perhaps everything to do with the fact that the State forced them into bankruptcy in 2019 and their future financial health is entirely in the hands of the state public utility commission.  Nice Chapter 11 reorg you've got going on there.  Shame if anything were to happen to it.