Incumbents Paying the Price to Fend Off Assembly Challengers

Under normal circumstances, Assemblyman Steve Peace and Assemblywoman Tricia Hunter would be breezing through this spring’s primary, using it as a tuneup for an only scarcely more testing general election this fall.

Instead, at a time when incumbents in San Diego County usually have to do little other than show up at the polls to win, both Hunter (R-Bonita) and Peace (D-Chula Vista) have been waging aggressive, costly primary campaigns to fend off challengers from within their own parties in the 76th and 80th Districts, respectively.

Although the consensus within political circles is that both incumbents will survive next Tuesday’s race, the existence of any doubt about the outcome underlines the changed political realities of what has been San Diego’s most competitive primary season in recent history.

“Usually, you know these guys are going to win,” said political consultant Jim Johnston. “This year, you’re pretty sure they’ll win. This is one time when incumbents aren’t getting an automatic pass.”

Peace faces two Chula Vista lawyers--Darrel Vandeveld and Robert Garcia--in his bid for a fifth two-year term, while Hunter, who won a nationally prominent special election last fall, has been challenged by anti-abortion activist Connie Youngkin in her first reelection campaign.

Markedly different factors prompted the challengers in the two races to mount their admittedly uphill campaigns against the better-known, better-financed incumbents. In Hunter’s case, her support of abortion rights--the issue in last year’s special election--combined with the brevity of her tenure in Sacramento, all but guaranteed opposition from anti-abortion forces in the staunchly conservative 76th District.

In the 80th District contest, meanwhile, Peace’s abrasive style was cited by both of his primary opponents as the genesis of their candidacies, which they have used to also question his effectiveness and integrity. In addition, because he has been in office for 7 1/2 years, both of Peace’s opponents hope to capitalize on the anti-incumbent backlash that many political strategists predict will result from voters’ disdain for recent scandals in Sacramento and Washington.

Neither incumbent, however, professes to be seriously concerned about Tuesday’s outcome, characterizing their unusually active campaigns as simply the necessary response to any credible challenge. In large part, their confidence stems from the relatively modest amounts of money raised by their challengers, compounding the difficulty of trying to overcome the daunting advantages of incumbency.

Peace, for example, is outspending his two opponents by a more than 2-to-1 margin, having raised $76,541, compared to Vandeveld’s $34,034 total and Garcia’s $17,074 treasury as of two weeks ago. Hunter’s financial edge over Youngkin is even larger, with the incumbent raising $135,296--four times Youngkin’s $33,530 total.

The three challengers hope that their grass-roots organizations and door-to-door politicking will help offset their financial disadvantages--a scenario that seldom occurs. Moreover, each argues that public dissatisfaction with the incumbent will send votes streaming their way.

“I think the opinion of Steve Peace is so low that anyone running against him would get plenty of votes just by being on the ballot,” Vandeveld, 29, said. “His money can’t change that.”

Peace, 37, a former legislative aide, has an equally low opinion of Vandeveld, creating a mutual animosity that has dominated the 80th District campaign via a flurry of caustic charges and countercharges. Each has asked law-enforcement authorities or regulatory agencies to investigate the other, accused the other of lying and breaking the law, and then blamed each other for the negative tone of the campaign.

“With his courtroom mentality, Darrel has this ethic that says do what you want to do, then worry about the consequences later,” said Peace, who lives in Rancho San Diego. “Well, he’s not going to get away with that in this campaign.”

After being bombarded by the candidates’ rhetorical salvos, however, voters could be excused for being confused over who’s trying to do what or get away with what else--a process that, for anyone paying close attention, has had heads moving back and forth like spectators at a tennis match.

To briefly summarize the charges: Vandeveld has suggested that there is a link between a $30,000 fee that a video firm partly owned by Peace received from Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) for production of a fund-raising tape and Peace’s vote against a low-cost insurance bill opposed by Brown; that Peace accepted consulting fees from Pardee Construction while pushing for legislation that saved the firm millions of dollars; and that Peace strong-armed county officials into building a park near his former home that substantially raised its value.

Peace has denied that there is anything improper or even ethically questionable about any of those episodes, arguing that Vandeveld has “fabricated a lot of rubbish” about incidents that, in most cases, have already been cleared by official investigations.

“Darrel has gone beyond the time-honored practice of political distortion and actually manufactured charges,” Peace said. “If even 5% of what he’s saying were true, I’d have been in jail a long time ago.”

In his counterattack, Peace has charged that Vandeveld “forged” a legal document by altering the numbers on the assemblyman’s campaign finance statements, and alleged that a retail clerk’s union led by Vandeveld’s father sent out an illegal mailer on his son’s behalf. Early in the race, Vandeveld also was thrown on the defensive by revelations that optometrists who wanted to do business with the 15,000-member union were allegedly asked to donate $500 each to his campaign.

“All he’s trying to do is deflect attention from his own problems,” said Vandeveld, who, like Peace, denies any improprieties.

Garcia, meanwhile, has been virtually ignored by his two opponents, reinforcing the long-shot image that he has struggled, with little apparent success, to shed throughout the campaign in the 80th District, which includes the southwestern portion of San Diego County, including Chula Vista, National City and San Ysidro, extending east through Imperial County to the Arizona border.

“They’re out pointing fingers at each other and I’m out meeting voters,” said Garcia, 36. “What I’m finding is that most people don’t even know Peace is their assemblyman, and many of those who do know don’t like his record.”

Like most incumbents, however, Peace has a ready, lengthy list of accomplishments, including “bringing more park money into the district than anyone in history,” pushing for funds to help solve the border sewage problem and blocking a proposed nuclear waste site in Imperial County.

Calling Peace’s record “pathetic,” Vandeveld argues that the problems of the 80th District have grown “worse and more numerous” during Peace’s tenure.

“He’s neglected the district because he’s been too preoccupied with trying to personally profit from his public service,” said Vandeveld, who practices business law. “The major issue in this race is integrity and whether voters want to perpetuate the caste of career politicians who have taken over the state, putting their own interests above their districts’ interests--the kind of politician Steve Peace exemplifies.”

Although they have received little attention amid the mutual sniping, considerable philosophical differences exist between the two front-runners. Peace is a strong supporter of the death penalty, while Vandeveld says he is personally opposed but would support executions. Both advocate abortion rights, but Vandeveld tells campaign audiences that Peace’s support for a parental consent law “shows that he’s willing to infringe on a woman’s right to choose in the name of protecting minors.”

Peace’s relationship with Assembly Speaker Brown also has emerged as an issue in the campaign, as it has in most of his past races. A leader of the so-called Gang of Five, a group of dissident Democrats that tried to depose Brown as speaker during the last legislative session, Peace has since mended his relationship with Brown--thereby regaining the prized committee assignments that he had been stripped of during their battle.

“When Peace took on Brown, he said he was going to reform the Legislature,” Vandeveld said. “No one believes that’s happened, but they’re pals again. By climbing back in the fold, Peace obliterated whatever political integrity he had.”

Peace, though, argues that the Gang of Five’s effort--while falling short of some goals--produced tangible results, highlighted by Proposition 112, an ethics reform package on next week’s statewide ballot.

“Plus, I can count--I know who’s got the votes,” Peace said. “If I hadn’t begun to work within the leadership structure, the charge would be that I’m ineffective.”

The largely obscured third candidate in the race, Garcia, is a longtime activist in Latino professional and business organizations. A volunteer with the Chula Vista Literacy Team, a program aimed at teaching adults to read, Garcia also helped form San Diego’s first Spanish-speaking lawyer-referral service.

His emphasis in Sacramento, Garcia says, would be on the issues of education, health care, social services for the elderly and recycling--goals that he has addressed only in general terms.

“Let’s work together to keep gangs and drugs out of our schools and neighborhoods,” Garcis says. “Let’s work together so that every adult has the ability to read and write. Let’s work together to provide affordable health care. . . Let’s work together to teach our children about the importance of recycling.”

The 76th District contest between Hunter and Youngkin, meanwhile, initially was seen as another electoral showdown over the volatile issue of abortion, likely to follow the story line seen in two special elections here last year that attracted national headlines: Hunter’s victory in the 76th District race to elect a successor to the late Bill Bradley (R-Escondido) and Democrat Lucy Killea’s upset win in last December’s 39th state Senate District contest.

While Youngkin and Hunter, both of whom are nurses, agree that the abortion issue will figure prominently in Tuesday’s election, the topic failed to become as pivotal as it was in last year’s special races--in large measure because both candidates have consciously striven to downplay it.

The circumstances of Hunter’s special-election victory--which came in one of the first legislative races in the nation after last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing states to curtail abortion rights--crafted an image as an abortion-rights leader for her even before she arrived in Sacramento. During the past eight months, she has deliberately sought to broaden that image.

“It’s been very easy for me to demonstrate knowledge on a lot of other issues as they come up in the Assembly,” said Hunter, 37. “Abortion and the issue of choice remain important to me, and I believe that my pro-choice position is the right one for my district and for California. But I’m not a one-issue legislator, and I’m determined not to be seen that way.”

Motivated by the same strategic goal, Youngkin, a 42-year-old Poway resident, also has distanced herself from the issue, hoping to soften the image that she has attained as a leader of Operation Rescue, the anti-abortion group that stages regular protests in front of abortion clinics nationwide.

For her role in one such protest at a La Mesa medical clinic last year, Youngkin in April was sentenced to 60 days in jail--an incident that produced what is arguably the most memorable line of the 76th District race or any other in San Diego this spring.

“First I go to jail, then I go to Sacramento,” said Youngkin. “Some of them go to Sacramento and then go to jail.” Free pending appeal, Youngkin says that, if she is elected, she plans to serve her time this fall in order to have the matter resolved before taking office.

Among Hunter’s advisers, Youngkin’s legal problems eased any initial apprehension about the campaign, based on their belief that voters will be put off by the thought of supporting a candidate who has been--and likely will be again--behind bars. Youngkin’s jail terms, they argue, undermine her credibility as a candidate even among some abortion opponents in the 76th District, which stretches from the South Bay to northeastern San Diego County and into the desert communities of Riverside County.

Offering a diametrically opposed interpretation, Youngkin contends that many voters “respect someone who is willing to go to jail to stand up for their principles.”

“I’ve had people tell me they’re voting for me for just that reason,” Youngkin said. “They’re tired of not knowing where their representative stands.”

Even so, Youngkin has tried to expand her image through numerous “Where I Stand” press releases and brochures on a wide range of issues, from growth and malathion spraying to taxes and education.

“I want voters to know that I care about a lot of other issues, and that I’ll bring the same commitment to them as I’ve shown on abortion,” Youngkin said.

Hunter responds: “People respect it when you stand behind your beliefs, not when you break the law. There’s a lawful way to protest.”

As in last year’s special 76th District campaign, Hunter once again has had to defend herself against the liberalism label that her opponents have sought to hang on her. Her fiscal conservatism, opposition to a 15-day waiting period for handgun purchases and myriad other positions, Hunter says, refute that charge.

“When people say I’m liberal, I ask, ‘On what issues?”’ Hunter said. “I disagree that my position on abortion is liberal. But even conceding that point, what else is there in my record they can point to? When I ask that question, they can’t think of anything.”