Why Can’t “No on 26” Run a Professional Campaign?

Today’s Los Angeles Times acknowledges what Sean flagged the other day:

Fundraising for a ballot initiative to suspend California’s global warming law has flagged, but oil companies and other business interests are pouring millions of dollars into a separate ballot measure that could dry up funds to implement the law.

The Times article reveals that Chevron, Philip Morris, and California Chamber of Commerce (which regularly undermines its members’ interests in pursuit of its ideological agenda) have contributed more than half of the Yes” forces $11.7 million warchest.  The “No” forces only have $2.7 million.

In typical fashion, the progressive forces don’t have their act together.  Despite recent polling that shows Prop 23 way behind, the No on 23 campaign will not release any of its money to fight Proposition 26, according to its spokesperson.

Even more tellingly, this is what you get if you try to contribute to No on 26 online:

If you’d like to make a donation, please send a check to the below address.

Uh, guys?  There’s a better raise way to raise money for campaigns.  It’s called Internet contributions.  You know that Obama guy?  He did pretty well raising money over the web, don’t you think?  There’s also no store to raise money through products, as there is with the even more lightly-funded Proposition 21.

Step up your game, people.  There are only 15 days until the election.

, ,

Reader Comments

About Jonathan

Jonathan Zasloff teaches Torts, Land Use, Environmental Law, Comparative Urban Planning Law, Legal History, and Public Policy Clinic – Land Use, the Environment and Loc…

READ more

POSTS BY Jonathan