Deals lead to endorsements

Groups use secret questionnaires to remind candidates for governor what they committed to

What kinds of agreements has the next governor of California made with interest groups that sway decisions in the state Capitol? Voters will never know.

The answers lie in a raft of secret questionnaires that candidates complete as they seek endorsements from a range of groups that will lobby them after they’re elected — and remind them of what they committed to before they won.

Labor unions, environmentalists and associations that advocate for gay rights, police and charter schools are among the dozens of groups that have endorsed candidates in the governor’s race. Such seals of approval can come with infusions of campaign cash and help politicians raise their profiles as they seek votes across an enormous state.

Public endorsements can serve as a helpful signal to voters, giving a sense of the candidates’ alliances and priorities. But what many voters don’t realize is that the endorsements are more than a sign of affection. They are the result of private concurrence between groups that represent narrow interests and candidates competing to represent the public.

Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School and president of the Los Angeles Ethics Commission, compared the secret questionnaires to private conversations with lobbyists, “or any closed-door meeting where you try to extract a promise from a lawmaker in exchange for x.”

“In its worst framing, it feels like extortion: ‘You say this, and therefore you get our (endorsement). If you don’t say this, you don’t.’ ”

CALmatters asked the six major candidates for governor — Democrats Gavin Newsom, Antonio Villaraigosa, John Chiang and Delaine Eastin, and Republicans John Cox and Travis Allen — to share the questionnaires

they’ve completed in seeking endorsements for the June 5 primary election. None did.

We also asked several interest groups to share the candidates’ answers. They wouldn’t.

Both sides generally agree to keep the records confidential. Some organizations even emblazon their documents with the words “Do not copy.”

The style of the questionnaires varies, with some requesting thoughtful explorations of policy issues and others listing pages of yes/ no questions. Some include a “pledge” section — for example, asking candidates to sign their names and promising to “actively and publicly support” workers organizing a union.

In some cases, the result is private covenants on such questions as: Will you ban fracking? Limit the growth of charter schools? Support tougher punishments for repeat criminals? Maintain the pension system for government employees?

Getting the answers in writing helps interest groups get what they want after politicians are elected.

“If we are lucky enough to endorse the candidate that wins the office, it’s a good place to point back to and a level of accountability for what they said when they were running,” said Jim Araby, executive director of the state’s United Food and Commercial Workers union, which endorsed Newsom.

Its members include grocery-store clerks confronting technological advances that threaten to wipe out jobs, as well as competition from online vendors that are not unionized. If Newsom is elected and then makes decisions that contradict what he told the union during the endorsing process, Araby said, he wouldn’t hesitate to pull out the questionnaire.

“We would have that as a point of reference in any conversation we had with him and his staff. Our union is not afraid to hold people accountable, Democrats or Republicans.” Two years ago it funded a campaign to oust a Democratic assemblywoman after she voted against the union on two bills.

In declining to make any of his completed endorsement questionnaires public, Newsom said the forms don’t allow for the nuances that answers deserve.

“I’d rather give you the raw, unvarnished, actual answers that do more than just three sentences that can be taken out of context in a questionnaire,” Newsom said during an interview with CALmatters.

He and the other five major candidates each sat for lengthy interviews with CALmatters journalists, going into depth on numerous public policy questions. But none would disclose the forms they’ve completed, saying they’re doing plenty to communicate their positions to voters publicly.

“I’ve participated in… 10 forums already,” said Cox, a Republican endorsed by the California Pro-Life Council. “I don’t believe there is any instance when I put something down in a questionnaire… that I wouldn’t say in public.”

Many lobbying groups say keeping the answers out of the public eye allows candidates to be more candid.

“We think that if they have to worry about us taking it to the press, sharing it around with people, using it in ways that they wouldn’t feel comfortable with, it may have a chilling effect on the amount they would be willing to share,” said Gary Borden, executive director of the political advocacy arm of the California Charter Schools Association.

Charters — public schools that do not have to follow all of the same regulations as traditional campuses — have become a big player in the gubernatorial race. The charter association has endorsed Villaraigosa, who clashed with teacher unions and took control of several low-performing schools when he was mayor of Los Angeles. Charter supporters have already poured $10.2 million into a fund paying for ads supporting Villaraigosa.

The questionnaire may not be the only factor in an endorsement decision. Like most influential groups, the charter schools association also interviews candidates to discuss issues in greater depth. But its questions indicate some key priorities, asking whether candidates support changing the formula for funding schools, limiting charter-school expansion or applying a conflict-of-interest law that school boards must follow to charters, which are now exempt.

Villaraigosa said he’s answered dozens of questionnaires in the course of the campaign and doesn’t see the need to make them public.