CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS: THE AD CAMPAIGN

The race: Governor. Whose ads: Democrat Dianne Feinstein. Cost: The campaign declines to disclose. Producers: Hank Morris and Bill Carrick.

Democrat Dianne Feinstein on Wednesday began airing two commercials that attempt to portray Pete Wilson, her Republican opponent in the governor’s race, as a man fond of raising taxes and intent on changing jobs rather than changing California. Both ads also attempt to defray criticism Wilson has heaped on Feinstein for raising taxes while mayor of San Francisco.

Elements of the ad, with analysis by Times political writer Cathleen Decker.

The first ad is entitled “Sacramento.”

Ad: When Pete Wilson was in Sacramento, he voted for the largest tax increase in California history.

Analysis: The ad refers to a 1967 vote on taxes by then-Assemblyman Wilson during Ronald Reagan’s tenure as governor. The bill increased taxes by $1 billion, by raising income, sales, bank and sin taxes. It was the largest at the time, but has since been surpassed. The ad does not mention that Wilson also has repeatedly opposed tax hikes while in the U.S. Senate, most recently last month when he bucked President Bush and the Republican leadership by voting against the budget compromise that raised taxes.

Ad: When he was mayor, he made a $2.3-billion fiscal mistake.

Analysis: The wording, which is misleading, refers to Wilson’s decision not to build a secondary treatment system for the city’s wastes. During Wilson’s time as mayor, the plant would have cost $500 million. If constructed now, the system would cost nearly $3 billion.

Ad: Under Pete Wilson, San Diego’s violent crime rates doubled.

Analysis: According to FBI statistics, crime in San Diego did rise while Wilson was mayor. Violent crime went up more than 115%, murders up 56% and rapes more than doubled. Wilson has not argued the numbers. But he has noted that San Diego, even with the crime increase, was still a safer city than San Francisco.

Ad: “He’s been in Washington eight years, and now Pete Wilson has the worst attendance record in the U.S. Senate. Pete Wilson--he doesn’t want change--he just wants to change jobs.

Analysis: The lines are an attempt to take advantage of voter antipathy toward incumbents and a desire among Californians to have “change” in the state. The accusation that Wilson has the worst attendance record is a generalization of Wilson’s recent record.

As of late October, he had voted only 76% of the time this year, according to Congressional Quarterly--the worst in the Senate. His voting record has been much better in past years, but he has not been among the best in the Senate in attendance.

The second ad is entitled “Break.”

Ad: Who’s on your side in taxes? Not career politician Pete Wilson. As an assemblyman, Wilson voted for the largest California tax increase ever--raising income taxes and sales taxes.

Analysis: As noted above, the line refers to Wilson’s vote in support of a 1967 tax bill.

Ad: As mayor, Wilson pushed for taxes, and city spending more than doubled.

Analysis: The line is misleading. While Wilson did push for hikes in the hotel tax and once suggested he might have to turn to a city income tax, property taxes fell 25% during his tenure. City spending more than doubled, but that was at a time when the population was increasing and inflation was booming. When inflation and population growth were taken into account, city spending dropped while Wilson was mayor.

Ad: But Wilson isn’t always for taxes, like when he votes for tax breaks for millionaires or lobbies for a $50-million tax break for Unocal Oil Co.

Analysis: The ad refers to tax benefits Wilson has tried to secure for the movie industry, his vote against a windfall profits tax for oil companies and his vote for a reduction in capital gains taxes. In the first incident, Wilson has said he was trying to help out the movie industry, which employs Californians. In the other cases, Wilson was voting along the Republican line. The Unocal reference is to a 1986 Wilson measure that tried to give the company a tax break.

Ad: Don’t read his lips.

Analysis: The last line is a reference to President Bush’s “read my lips--no new taxes” line. The ad implies that Wilson would abandon his stand on taxes, as Bush did in supporting the recent federal budget compromise. The ad does not say that Wilson voted against that compromise, on the grounds that it raised taxes more than necessary.