Unions Working a New Tactic Against Governor

Escalating its efforts to kill Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s ballot measures, organized labor has begun pressuring California corporations to withhold donations to his campaign.

The move to cramp Schwarzenegger’s fundraising for the Nov. 8 election comes as union leaders shift the focus of their aggressive television advertising. After six months of running spots that pound Schwarzenegger himself, labor has turned to ads that knock specific ballot measures pushed by the Republican governor.

The ad onslaught, aided by Schwarzenegger missteps, succeeded months ago in dragging down the governor’s popularity. Yet with the start of absentee voting just a week away, it remains unclear whether labor can transform his political decline into defeat of his entire election agenda.

Labor’s attack on the ballot measures reflects the challenge that unions still face in fighting Schwarzenegger’s proposals.

Early polls have found three of his four initiatives falling short of a majority vote. But many voters have just begun to focus on his case against the unions. His ads have been running for just 12 days. With the campaign now fully engaged on both sides, public opinion could shift unpredictably as voters ponder each ballot proposal.

“The people opposing these initiatives are still going to have a major fight on their hands,” said Jeffrey Lustig, a professor of government at Cal State Sacramento.

A key advantage for labor is money. Unions have collected more than $70 million to fight Schwarzenegger’s ballot measures -- more than double the $28 million raised by the governor.

To maintain that edge, labor is trying to make it more difficult for Schwarzenegger to raise money for what he once vowed would be a $50-million campaign.

In a Sept. 21 letter to executives at Chevron, Bank of America, Safeway, Hewlett-Packard and several dozen other companies, four union presidents warned that their members, as well as voters, would soon be told which corporations back Proposition 75.

Labor leaders view the initiative as a severe threat. Backed by Schwarzenegger, it would bar public employee unions from using member dues for political donations without prior consent. Unions fear it would diminish their clout in Sacramento and enhance the power of big business.

Allan Zaremberg, president of the California Chamber of Commerce, said those who received the letter took it to mean unions “would somehow blacklist” the companies.

“The letter was clearly intended to intimidate businesses and threaten them,” he said.

Rob Stutzman, communications director of Schwarzenegger’s campaign, called the letter “complete thuggery” and predicted it would backfire. “It’s the modern version of 1930s coal-strike tactics,” he said.

Lou Paulson, president of California Professional Firefighters, who signed the letter, denied threatening to blacklist the companies. But he suggested that unions and their members still might shun Schwarzenegger donors and decline to buy stock in their companies.

“If somebody is doing something against you, would you want to go ahead and patronize that establishment?” he said.

In retaliation for Proposition 75, unions are working to qualify an initiative that would bar corporations from making political donations without prior shareholder approval. As major corporate shareholders, union pension funds could use that power to blunt the political influence of big business in California.

In the letter, the union presidents said they would inform members and voters of “the sources of funding behind Proposition 75.” They also asked the executives whether their companies agreed with the chamber’s endorsement of the measure.

The other union presidents who signed the letter were Barbara Kerr of the California Teachers Assn., Kathy Sackman of the United Nurses Assn. of California and Ron Cottingham of the Peace Officers Research Assn. of California.

So far, polls suggest that Proposition 75 is the only Schwarzenegger initiative voters support. “There’s a lot of vote to pull back,” and that requires the most work for labor, said union strategist Steve Smith.

With that in mind, unions began airing three ads attacking Proposition 75 last week. The spots feature a teacher, a nurse and a firefighter, respectively. Each accuses the governor of trying to stifle unions that have fought Schwarzenegger proposals, which they depict as a threat to schoolchildren, hospital patients and survivors of firefighters and police officers killed on the job.

“He’s trying to weaken the voice of the men and women who protect the people of California,” Long Beach firefighter Dean Tomasick says to the camera.

Unions have also begun advertising against Schwarzenegger’s showcase proposal, Proposition 76, which would restrain state spending, enhance the governor’s budget power and change minimum school funding rules. Next week, unions plan to air TV ads against Proposition 74, his proposal to extend from two years to five the time it takes teachers to receive tenure.

The labor coalition, Alliance for a Better California, has left the job of fighting Schwarzenegger’s fourth initiative, Proposition 77, to Democrats who lead the Legislature. The measure would strip state lawmakers of their power to draw political boundaries.

For unions, the task of defeating Schwarzenegger’s proposals is eased substantially by the harm they have already caused him with the ads they began airing in March. His job approval rating among likely voters has sunk to a dangerously low 40% in the Field Poll and 38% in the latest Public Policy Institute of California survey.

“The unions bet their rent money at the beginning of the year, and it’s paid off,” said Republican strategist Dan Schnur.

Democratic strategist Garry South said union ads showing nurses, teachers and firefighters hammering Schwarzenegger have managed to “destroy his public standing so he can’t sell these initiatives.”

Gale Kaufman and Larry Grisolano, chief strategists of the union campaign, acknowledged the ads’ impact, but said Schwarzenegger’s policy choices have also hurt him.

“He brought it upon himself,” Grisolano said.

But Schwarzenegger is not on the ballot in November, and advisors say his drop in popularity should not harm his initiative campaign. Stutzman said the union ads had simply “created an uncertainty in the minds of some voters about the job that the governor is doing.”

“They have not successfully demonized him,” Stutzman said. “Californians are not mad at Arnold Schwarzenegger. They are rooting for him. They want him to succeed. And all that goodwill that buoyed us at absurdly high approval ratings a year ago still exists as a reservoir of goodwill.”

For any politician facing a well-funded rival, a sustained ad assault launched months before an election can inflict serious long-term damage.

In the 1996 presidential race, incumbent Bill Clinton began airing TV ads against presumed GOP challenger Bob Dole in June 1995 -- 17 months before the election. Once Dole was “branded in a negative manner” in swing states, “it was very difficult to recover,” said Dole campaign manager Scott Reed. Clinton defeated Dole, 49% to 41%.

Schwarzenegger’s low standing has already forced a shift in his campaign. In previous political ads, the governor typically featured himself as chief spokesman, capitalizing on his celebrity and popularity. Now, he is running one ad starring himself and one ad featuring ordinary people -- and airing the latter far more often than the former.