Leaders in the state party are concerned about local elections, particularly in one important Orange County state Senate race.

But President-elect Donald Trump fanned the flames by tweeting California was one of three states with “serious” voter fraud. His Sunday tweet followed another sent hours earlier claiming that he’d “won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” 

Serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California – so why isn't the media reporting on this? Serious bias – big problem!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 28, 2016

So far, Trump has offered no proof to his claims, which were dismissed in great detail by PolitiFact California. Secretary of State Alex Padilla immediately sent a press release disavowing the claim: “It appears that Mr. Trump is troubled by the fact that a growing majority of Americans did not vote for him. His unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud in California and elsewhere are absurd.”

SD29

California Republican Party Chairman Jim Brulte told party officials in an internal email obtained by CalWatchdog that the state has a history of “anomalies” that “deserve further scrutiny.” Brulte added that he believed “most of the government officials charged with ensuring voter and ballot integrity are good people who want to do the right thing.”

Brulte cited several incidents throughout the years, but came back to a recent election in Orange County — which ultimately gave Democrats a legislative supermajority — where voter turnout “increased in some cases up to 30 percent over the 2012 election.”

The Orange County Registrar of Voters attributed the spike in turnout percentage to a cleanup of the voter roll. 

Orange County’s history

California Republicans point back to a 1996 congressional race in Orange County, were 624 non-citizens voted after having registered illegally, according to a congressional investigation. In that race, the Democratic challenger, Loretta Sanchez, defeated the Republican incumbent, Bob Dornan, by less than 1,000 votes.

“That was before online registration, late registration, a boom in illegal residency, driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, and other trends,” said Harmeet K. Dhillon, a member of the Republican National Committee from California. “Logically, the numbers are much higher today and the state seems deliberately to make it difficult to verify eligibility to vote and also takes little to no interest in preventing fraudulent voting.”

Ways to improve?

Dhillon said Republicans are concerned that the current online voter registration system doesn’t track the computer’s ISP address, which helps detect fraud, and that users can self-verify citizenship with a driver license number, which are issued to non-citizens.

Dhillon said Republicans believe new voters should verify citizenship, not just check off a box. 

Nothing to see here

But the Secretary of State’s office holds that there’s no problem. A spokesman told CalWatchdog that the SOS “already conducts routine security assessments of our systems,” but declined to give specifics.

Many election law experts say there is no evidence of widespread problem voter fraud. Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, said Trump’s claims did not happen and “lack any evidence or grounding in reality.” 

An investigation into what happened in Orange County may be worthwhile, Levinson said, but added that increased turnout itself isn’t enough to allege voter fraud.

“There are plenty of reasons this election cycle as to why people in Orange County would be motivated to go to the polls.” 

In fact, Playboy’s editor in chief is one of the Orange County Democrat’s top donors this cycle, having given $10,400 through the primary, as Sanchez tries to jump from one side of the Capitol rotunda to the other — from the House of Representatives, where she’s been for almost 20 years, to the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Barbara Boxer. 

By now, everyone in Orange County and Washington knows the story: Hefner gives to Sanchez and occasionally it gets her in trouble. In 2000, Sanchez almost held a fundraiser at the Playboy Mansion, angering Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, which got Sanchez booted from a prime speaking slot at the upcoming nominating convention. 

But Hefner doesn’t appear to have a connection with Sanchez’s congressional district, and she’s known mostly for her policy expertise in military and national security issues, so answering “why” is challenging.

What’s the deal?

Sanchez’s campaign wasn’t sure why. Other in-the-know Southern California Democrats were in the dark as well. And Playboy’s spokesperson didn’t provide many specifics.

“Throughout the years, Mr. Hefner has enthusiastically contributed to many political candidates and causes that share his progressive views,” said Teri Thomerson, publicity director for Playboy Enterprises, Inc.

If that’s true then Sanchez is the only individual member of Congress who shares his progressive views, which would be strange since Sanchez — one of the few remaining members of the fiscally conservative and slightly center-left Blue Dog Caucus — is rarely, if ever, accused of being a progressive. 

Since 1996, when Sanchez first won a seat in Congress, Hefner has contributed $111,800 in total, $50,600 of which went to Sanchez, according to FEC records.

Except for a few stray losing Congressional challengers, Sanchez’s re-elections were the only congressional races Hefner contributed to. The rest of his contributions went to the Democratic party and some went to the presidential campaigns of Democrats Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore.

What about Bob?

Why is most likely answered with who Sanchez unseated to get to Washington: “B-1” Bob Dornan.

By most accounts, B-1 Bob had a less-than-stellar reputation. Assigned the “firebrand” cliché, some of his highlights include: Outing a fellow Republican congressman for being gay, referring to a Soviet propagandist as “a betraying little Jew,” and claiming “every lesbian spear-chucker in this country is hoping I get defeated” in reference to a former female opponent.

Playboy

In 1982, while running for Senate, Dornan accused two of his opponents of attending an event at the Playboy mansion in Los Angeles, where, he claimed, weekly orgies were held that included bestiality. 

His source was reportedly famed porn actress Linda Lovelace, star of the movie “Deep Throat,” who (again, reportedly) did not implicate Dornan’s challengers. However, the incident surely irritated Hefner.  

No one is clean, right?

Luis Vizcaino, a Sanchez spokesman, said Hefner is a “long-time” supporter, and noted that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, the reality T.V. star and real estate tycoon, has been a “long-time” supporter of Sanchez’s Senate opponent, Democratic Attorney General Kamala Harris.

Long-time is a stretch, but Trump did contribute $6,000 to Harris over two prior attorney general campaigns.  

Hefner’s daughter, Christie, who lives in Chicago and was at one time the chairwoman and CEO of Playboy Enterprises, has given $140,673.25 over the years, but to a much more diverse group of candidates — one that more accurately reflects your average active Democratic donor. Only $500 was given to Sanchez. 

Is taking Playboy money wrong? It’s up to voters to decide, but so far it hasn’t seemed to slow her down in the House, and it’s unlikely to make or break her Senate campaign. 

“I don’t think taking a contribution from Playboy is any worse than taking one from the Koch Brothers,” Mark Petracca, chair of the Department of Political Science at UC Irvine, said in general sense of the mega Republican donors. 

Thursday’s announcement, one day before the California Democratic Party’s spring convention, sets up a Democratic women showdown between Sanchez and Attorney General Kamala Harris. Under California’s Top 2 Primary, both Democrats could make it past the June primary and into a November 2016 general election run-off.

“I’m running to give a voice to every Californian,” said Sanchez, a moderate Democrat from Orange County. “I’m running for Senate because I bring national security and military experience in these critical times.”

Sanchez’s record in Congress

Sanchez brings to the race an impressive campaign resume that began with an improbable upset of six-term GOP Rep. Bob Dornan in 1996, an election she won by fewer than 1,000 votes. During her 10 terms in Washington, D.C., Sanchez has served on the House Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee as well as been an influential member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

“There are two kinds of candidates,” Sanchez said at her campaign kick-off. “Those who want to be something and those who want to do something. I am running for Senate because I am a doer.”

If Sanchez prevails in her first statewide campaign, she’ll become the the first Latina ever elected to the U.S. Senate. Before she can make history, she’ll need to overcome demographic challenges with her key voting blocs: Southern Californians and Latinos. Both groups represent a large number of raw voters, who traditionally turn out in lower numbers than the statewide average. 

No coronation for Kamala Harris

In January, Boxer announced that she would retire after four terms in the U.S. Senate. Although Harris quickly entered the race, other big-name Democrats seemed uninterested in challenging the state’s top law enforcement officer.

For months, it looked like Harris might simply take over the seat without a challenge from any of the next generation of Democratic leaders. In quick succession, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, Treasurer John Chiang, billionaire climate-change activist Tom Steyer and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa each announced that they would forgo the race.

Earlier this week, Sanchez appeared to be latest Democrat to pass on the race. Sanchez’s team released a draft email announcing her campaign kick-off, but then quickly retracted the announcement, saying that she was still undecided.

That indecision caused the Los Angeles Times to complain that Harris’ coronation was bad for the democratic process.

“An unopposed candidacy is great for political parties, not for voters or democracy,” the Times wrote in its May 14 editorial. “A strong field of Democratic candidates is more likely to ensure that campaign debates cover topics Democrats care about, and elicit authentic answers instead of canned responses. Without such a vigorous vetting, Harris would be able to script her communication so carefully as to be meaningless.”

Harris campaign jabs “culture of dysfunction”

Harris’ campaign wasted no time in welcoming Sanchez to the race with a subtle jab at Washington’s “culture of dysfunction.”

“The attorney general looks forward to a lively discussion about who is best equipped to help change the culture of dysfunction in Washington, D.C. and make a difference in the lives of Californians,” said Nathan Click, spokesman for the Harris campaign.

In addition to hailing from opposite ends of the state, the two Democratic women bring remarkably different styles, backgrounds and personalities to the campaign. The differences were evidenced in their campaign kick-offs: Sanchez with a traditional campaign rally, Harris an email announcement.

They’ve also risen through the political ranks in different ways. Sanchez fought her way into elected office after losing a 1994 campaign for Anaheim City Council. Harris benefited from an early political appointment by her longtime benefactor, former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown.

Sanchez’s greatest asset might be her blunt, straight-talking demeanor, which could further expose Harris as a controlled and calculating politician. With a more direct style and off-the-cuff remarks that occasionally get her into trouble, Sanchez has managed to create a cult following with her annual Christmas card. In contrast, even Harris’ backers have described her as “too cautious,” a trait that could hamper her in a contested statewide primary.

Possibility of all Democrat run-off

Some political analysts say that there’s a strong chance that both Harris and Sanchez could both make the November run-off. On the Republican side, Assemblyman Rocky Chavez of Carlsbad has raised just $12,030 – a fundraising haul more befitting of a city council race. The only other announced Republican candidate, former California Republican Party chairman Tom Del Beccaro, has never won elected office.

“Lots of Republicans will end up on the ballot which means that we could see two Dems if it is just the two of them,” said Matt Rexroad, one of the state’s top Republican political consultants and a Yolo County Supervisor.

Rexroad, who does not have a client in the U.S. Senate race, gives the edge to Harris.

“In the end I think Harris has an impressive team that has shown a tremendous amount of discipline while Sanchez has been a side show,” said Rexroad, a partner at Meridian Pacific, a Sacramento-based consulting firm. “Advantage Harris on name ID, resume, and institutional support. The one thing Sanchez has going for her is the Latino surname.”

Other Democratic candidates are still considering the race, including Rep. Xavier Becerra of Los Angeles and former Secretary of the Army Louis Caldera.

When I was at the Orange County Register, we met with her numerous times. We disagreed on many issues. But she is a delightful, even fun person.

Sanchez first was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1996 in a disputed election against boisterous conservative Republican Bob Dornan, the incumbent. But the real reason Dornan lost was that he spent much of the early election season tramping through the snow in New Hampshire in a Quixotic bid to become president. Meanwhile, Loretta — as everybody calls her — was knocking on doors and going to Kiwanis meetings in the California sun.

The district in central Orange County was trending Democratic anyway because of immigration. But Dornan could have held on for one or two more election cycles if he had taken care of business at home.

Loretta would bring some benefits to the race that Harris doesn’t have. She would be the first U.S. senator in more than two decades from Southern California, which has 2/3 of the state’s population. The two current senators from the Golden State, Barbara Boxer, who is retiring, and Dianne Feinstein, both hail from tony Marin County. And Harris is the former district attorney for mega-expensive San Francisco.

Indeed, Boxer’s predecessor in that seat, wily old Alan Cranston, also was a Northern Californian. You have to go all the way back to 1969 and Thomas Kuchel to find a Southern Californian in that seat.

Working class

By contrast, Loretta knows well the working-class folks of Southern California who struggle in her own district. She is somewhat more moderate than most Democrats in the House, although she supported Obamacare and other parts of the president’s liberal agenda. In any case, Loretta almost certainly would be less liberal than Boxer has been, or Harris would be.

Loretta also would be highly attractive to the state’s increasingly important Latino voters, who currently are not represented in the state’s three top offices: governor and two senators. The odds-on favorite to be the next governor is Gavin Newsom, the former San Francisco mayor.

California also now has the Top Two system, which was designed to help more moderate candidates like Loretta because any voter can vote for any candidate. In the primary in 2016, Harris might appeal to the more liberal elements in the Democratic Party. But Loretta could appeal to moderate Democrats, independents and even some incumbents.

At a minimum, a Sanchez-Harris race would give voters a choice and prevent a coronation.