The California Legislature last week considered putting an election reform proposal before voters — and no, this one is not about redistricting.
Instead, it was public campaign financing that brought a group of Democratic lawmakers together in front of the Capitol last week. They were advocating for a bill spearheaded by Sen. Tom Umberg, D-Santa Ana, that seeks to overturn California’s statewide prohibition on counties and most cities setting up a public fund for campaign financing.
The bill would allow voters to decide, in November 2026, whether to overturn or retain the ban on public campaign financing.
If voters did so, it would be up to local governments and the state whether to enact public financing programs, along with requirements to ensure accountability and fairness.
But in the meantime, supporters of the effort are hoping to see Umberg’s bill approved in the legislature, so that the option can be posed to voters. Those supporters heralded the effort last week as a way to give candidates an alternative to relying on wealthy donors.
“This is bigger than any one of us or any single community — this is about changing the democratic dynamic in California,” Umberg said. “It’s unfortunate that many cities and counties currently cannot pursue public financing if they want to, but we can change that by working across party lines to restore local control and give voters the power to decide.”
Only charter cities — Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco — are allowed to implement public financing programs, according to Umberg’s office. A bill analysis noted that the legislature passed legislation overturning the ban in 2016, and even though it was signed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown, a court ruled that the question must be put before voters.
The bill “will restore control to local governments and the state by giving counties, districts, general law cities and the state the same option that charter cities currently have to enact public financing of campaigns,” the bill’s analysis said.
A National Conference of State Legislatures report found that several states already offer some form of public financing option for certain candidates, but these options come with requirements regarding the amount candidates can spend on the election and the amount they can receive in donations from other groups and individuals.
“The financial advantages of private fundraising frequently prompt candidates to opt out of public financing programs, which often include campaign to spending limits,” NCSL, which advocates on behalf of state legislatures, said in that report.
Umberg’s bill is supported by dozens of groups and people, including the League of Women Voters, ACLU California Action, End Citizens United and Orange County Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento.
The California Taxpayers Association is opposed to the bill. The group argued, in the bill analysis, that the effort is “ripe for abuse and corruption” and raises First Amendment issues “by creating a scenario in which taxpayers would be forced to financepolitical speech they do not wish to support.”
Umberg’s bill would require that no public money earmarked for education, public safety or transportation could be used for financing campaigns.
It also says that those who voluntarily participate in public campaign financing programs would be held to expenditure limits and prohibit the money from being used to pay for fines, personal loans or legal defense.
The bill made it through what’s called the suspense file process on Friday, where bills with a fiscal impact are quickly moved along in appropriations committees to either advance or be killed.
In other news
• A “Soju Festival” brought some spirited fun, as well as an opportunity to celebrate and learn about Korean culture, to the statehouse last week. The event was put on by Sen. Steven Choi, R-Irvine, who also declared Sept. 20 to be “Soju Day” in recognition of the Korean alcoholic beverage.
“Soju is about Korean heritage, culture and community bonds,” Choi said. “It has become an emblem of unity, celebration and tradition for Korean Americans, serving as a bridge of cultural exchange and enhancing cross-cultural understanding in our diverse society.”
• Assemblymember Kate Sanchez last week vowed to support a bill backed by actress and activist Paris Hilton when it was up for consideration as part of the suspense file process; it was approved by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Friday.
Sanchez, R-Rancho Santa Margarita, said she would support legislation that expands certification requirements for non-public schools that serve students with disabilities. The idea, according to Sen. Shannon Grove, a Bakersfield Republican who authored the bill, is to ensure greater protections, care and oversight for vulnerable students.
The bill is backed by Hilton, who has become an advocate for greater oversight of residential treatment facilities for youth — drawing on her own experience of abuse she endured while at a boarding facility in Utah in her teens.
“Grateful for your advocacy,” Sanchez said in an X post about SB 373, tagging Hilton. “Thank you for standing up for our kids. As Vice Chair of Assembly Appropriations, I look forward to supporting SB 373.”
