Republish
California pay-to-play law could empower wealthy candidates and special interests
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
California pay-to-play law could empower wealthy candidates and special interests
Share this:
Guest Commentary written by
Garrett Gatewood
Garrett Gatewood is a member of the Rancho Cordova City Council.
When I became the first Black person elected to the Rancho Cordova City Council in 2018, I wasn’t the scion of a powerful political family or the beneficiary of wealthy special interests. I made history because of my track record fighting for my community, and was able to mobilize a lot of fellow citizens who shared my passion and were willing to invest in my campaign.
Senate Bill 1439, authored by Sen. Steve Glazer, would make that impossible for future candidates facing the same challenges, and make it harder for political newcomers and members of minority groups to get elected.
The law took effect this year. I joined a lawsuit to try and stop it.
The policy is described as a tool to “ban pay-to-play,” which is a good soundbite, but such unethical activity has been and remains illegal. Rather than improving ethical campaign activity and good government policy, in practice, SB 1439 is a well-intentioned disaster that will disproportionately hurt minorities trying to win a seat at the table.
I understand the challenges that underrepresented communities must overcome to compete for public office. Let’s be honest, politics favors the rich and powerful, not people who look like me. SB 1439 will make it even harder.
Proponents of the bill claim it decreases the influence of money in politics by drastically reducing how much candidates can receive from donors who have an interest in the future of their communities. But in truth, it forces campaign money underground and empowers wealthy candidates and special interests.
History has shown that restrictions on publicly-disclosed contributions to candidates actually increase how much money is spent on campaigns. Even worse, it hides that spending from public and media scrutiny by shifting it into dark-money PACs and independent expenditure campaigns funded by special interests with no spending limits and little motivation to tell the truth.
I certainly would rather know who is really funding the candidates running in my community.
Politics today is toxic enough – we should not surrender control of public debate to unaccountable special interests who will flood our mailboxes and airwaves with negative hit pieces. Meanwhile, this law would limit new and minority candidates’ access to the funds needed to share their vision and their words with their constituents.
SB 1439 takes power from local elected officials – and the voters who elected them – by prohibiting officials from voting for 12 months after a contribution of just $250 is made. That would stall efforts to build roads, revitalize schools, create affordable housing or tackle homelessness.
California faces a host of crises from education and infrastructure, to crime, homelessness and housing. This law doesn’t solve any of them. And, it will make it harder for us to elect more diverse, representative candidates who are ready to fight for real solutions.