New Assembly GOP Leader Brian Dahle.

Chad Mayes of Yucca Valley is out as Assembly Republican leader, replaced last week by Assemblyman Brian Dahle of Bieber. But the fallout may continue over the decision of Mayes and six other GOP Assembly members to provide Gov. Jerry Brown and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood, with the votes necessary to save the state’s cap-and-trade program on July 17.

Mayes touted the GOP support as helpful in rebranding the party with young voters worried about climate change and emphasized the concession he won from Brown and Rendon, which could make it possible for the Legislature to effectively scrap the state’s troubled high-speed rail project in 2024. But the votes infuriated many Republicans for betraying the party’s core anti-tax, anti-regulation beliefs and for allowing a handful of Assembly Democrats in swing seats to avoid having to vote to extend cap and trade until 2030.

Under the program, businesses buy permits for emission rights. Because of fears that courts would find the permit fees were tantamount to taxes, Brown wanted two-thirds votes in the Legislature to ensure cap and trade’s extension would be on solid legal ground under Proposition 13. Thanks to the votes of Assembly Republicans Mayes, Catharine Baker of San Ramon, Rocky Chavez of Oceanside, Jordan Cunningham of San Luis Obispo, Heath Flora of Ripon, Devin Mathis of Visalia and Marc Steinorth of Rancho Cucamonga, Brown got 55 votes for the extension, one more than he needed.

Harmeet K. Dhillon, a San Francisco lawyer who is one of the state’s members on the Republican National Committee, told the Los Angeles Times that Mayes shouldn’t be the only one held accountable for preserving cap and trade.

“Now, given the fact that six of these [Republican lawmakers] did vote for a massive tax increase, Republicans are going to be very vigilant about these issues,” she said. The state GOP voted earlier this month to ask Mayes to step down at Dhillon’s behest.

Another RNC state delegate – former state GOP chair Shawn Steel – also blasted Republicans who sided with Brown on cap-and-trade.

Mayes, Baker, Chavez, Cunningham, Flora, Mathis, Steinorth and state Sen. Tom Berryhill, R-Modesto – the only GOP Senate vote to extend cap and trade – are likely to face heat from conservatives in their re-election bids or in seeking other elective posts. Conversely, they could also attract support from moderate and independent voters, given the popularity of environmental causes among state voters.

New GOP leader wants no more cap-and-trade recriminations

But new Assembly GOP leader Dahle – a 51-year-old seed business owner and farmer and former Lassen County supervisor – wants to the put the cap-and-trade flap behind.

“There are 24 other members of this caucus and they all have different views,” he told reporters Thursday after Mayes stepped down. “There are people in our caucus who voted their conscience for their district, and I support those who did that. In my case it didn’t work in my district, so I was opposed to that.”

Mayes, 40, was first elected to the Assembly in 2014 and began as GOP leader in January 2016. While now under fire from conservatives, he could someday be remembered as the man who killed the bullet train – the state project that’s as unpopular among California Republicans as cap and trade.

As part of the cap-and-trade deal, Mayes got Democrats to agree to put a constitutional amendment he wrote before state voters in June 2018. Under the unusual measure, if voters gave the go-ahead, there would be a vote in 2024 by the Legislature on whether to continue to allow cap-and-trade revenue to fund the $68 billion project – with two-thirds support necessary to continue funding.

Brown and bullet-train backers are counting on cap-and-trade fees to increase in coming years and to keep the project viable. So far, the California High-Speed Rail Agency has been unable to attract outside investors to help pay for a statewide system, and federal funding dried up after Republicans took control of the House in 2010.

“Lower-income students … are able to many times, through our great programs in California, get help to pay for tuition. But they’re still graduating with a tremendous amount of debt,” said Assemblyman Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento.

The plan, unveiled earlier this month, would cover not just tuition but living expenses as well, making it different from other similar proposals in states like New York.

“California is taking the boldest step in the nation for making college debt-free,” Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Paramount, said in a recent press conference.

The cost for the program would come at a price tag of $1.6 billion per year, phased in over five years, and would be paid for using money from the state’s General Fund, lawmakers say.

Proponents say existing tax revenues will cover the cost, but other projections to provide universal college came in at a much higher cost of $3.3 billion annually.

Some lawmakers are skeptical of the effectiveness of the plan, especially as California confronts a wide range of other issues like infrastructure and entitlement spending.

“I think it’s well intentioned,” Republican Assemblyman Rocky Chavez said of the plan. “But I don’t think it recognizes the economic reality or really addresses the challenges we have to address.”

Additionally, the plan comes at a time when the effectiveness of Cal State schools is being called into question due to poor graduation rates.

For example, under 20 percent of full-time CSU freshmen graduate in four years, much less than the 34 percent national average for public universities.

The “Degrees Not Debt” program would affect around 400,000 students at UC and Cal State institutions.

It’s just one of over a dozen student-aid related bills already proposed in Sacramento this year alone to offset the cost of college, as the average student loan debt per graduate in the Golden State is $22,191.

For example, Assembly Democrats last month pushed forward a plan that would grant in-state tuition for individuals in the state as refugees.

Currently, around 60 percent of Cal State students and about half of University of California and community college students already have their tuition fully covered by existing grants and aid programs.

Student aid and college reform has come into increasing focus, partly spurred by former Democratic Bernie Sanders’ push to make all at public universities tuition-free.

About 1,200 California Republicans are held their annual spring convention at the Sacramento Hyatt Regency this weekend and the star Saturday wasn’t featured speakers like Congressmen Darrell Issa of Vista or Devin Nunes of the San Joaquin Valley or high-profile media types like radio host Hugh Hewitt. It was state Sen. Janet Nguyen of Garden Grove, who wasn’t even planning to come to the event until asked at the last moment by state GOP leaders.

The invite was triggered by what happened Thursday. Nguyen, a Vietnamese refugee, took to the state Senate floor to criticize former California politician Tom Hayden, who died recently. It led to her being forcibly removed for being out of order.

Many Vietnamese-Americans see U.S. anti-Vietnam War activists like Hayden and his former wife, Jane Hayden, as sympathetic with the ruthless communist government in North Vietnam that took over South Vietnam in 1975 after a long civil war, triggering a mass exodus that brought hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese refugees to the United States and Orange County in particular.

The symbolism of having Nguyen being forced off the Senate floor resonated with convention goers, who loudly applauded her delivery of the Pledge of Allegiance, the Sacramento Bee reported. She said she was trying to convey the sentiments of her constituents about Hayden, and noted that, “In the country I came from, that’s not allowed.”

“I stand with Janet” jacket lapels were everywhere at the Hyatt, the San Jose Mercury News reported. The paper said the lapels were the idea of Shawn Steel, an Orange County Republican who is the former chairman of the California GOP.

GOP delegates hope for best with Trump

Beyond the cheers for Nguyen, the main takeaway from Saturday’s speeches and events was the evidence of a general readiness to accept and root for President Donald Trump despite his series of controversies – but also quite a bit of ambivalence.

“It’s too early to tell,” Assemblyman Rocky Chavez, R-Oceanside, told the Sacramento Bee said. “I think his Supreme Court pick is outstanding. I think his picks of Kelly, Mattis, Tillerson … and DeVos are very good.

“One thing I’d say I have a question with is his [opposition] to the Trans-Pacific Partnership [trade agreement]. When I listen to Trump talk about it he puts it strictly along the lines of a business negotiation. [It’s] much more than a business negotiation. It was an alliance to recognize the influence of China in the next 50 … years from now.”

Former Assembly member and gubernatorial candidate Tim Donnelly of Twin Peaks told the San Francisco Chronicle that the California GOP should follow Trump’s lead and go unconventional, using social media instead of traditional media.

“The way that we win a state like California is to blow up the narrative and smash the paradigm,” he said. “We have to bring people in — not on being Republican or Democrat but on being proud Californians.”

Sunday may be quieter than Saturday as the state GOP holds its formal general session to hear and vote on committee reports. There are fewer scheduled events than day one and two before the convention concludes.

“I think the best role I can fill for the Republican Party and moving the agenda forward … is to run for my Assembly seat,” the Oceanside Republican said during the debate’s opening comments. “I’m not going to be running for the United States Senate, and I’ll leave the field right now.”

And like that, he was gone.

Money Problems

Chavez had struggled to keep up financially. As of the end of 2015, Attorney General Kamala Harris, the Democratic frontrunner, had nearly $4 million in the bank. Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Garden Grove, was relatively close with $2.1 million.

Two former CAGOP chairmen, Duf Sundheim of Los Altos and Tom Del Beccaro of Willows, had $70,000 and $40,000, respectively.

And Chavez had $369. Just for comparison, California’s other Democratic senator, Dianne Feinstein, spent $12.1 million to retain her seat in 2012 — and a million wasn’t even close to enough for her Republican challenger.

Democrats Are Leading

Although in Chavez’s speech he said he was falling on his sword for the good of the party and the seat, the other Republicans running for the seat still face long odds, with Democrats in the state outnumbering Republicans 43.2 percent to 28 percent (23.6 percent have indicated no party preference).

According to a Field Poll last month, Harris led with 27 percent with Sanchez trailing at 15 percent. The three Republicans had a combined 13 percent (with Chavez ahead at 7 percent) and 44 percent still undecided.

And the Republicans’ chances are even murkier now in the heavily Democratic seat as California in recent years moved to a jungle primary where the top two advance to the November general election regardless of party.

Throughout the 2014 primary, voters saw minority party candidates squeak through to the general when enough candidates from the majority party split the vote, which will be Sundheim and Del Beccarro’s best chance (although either’s prospects are hurt with the other in the race as well because they’re also splitting votes).

Back In The Assembly

Chavez’s recommitting to his Assembly seat does add intrigue there, however. While the seat has a 6 percent tilt towards Republicans, Chavez won re-election in 2014 with 66.9 percent against another Republican.

The two Republicans already running have a sizable fundraising advantage over Chavez. Phil Graham, the stepson of former Gov. Pete Wilson has $221,000, while Oceanside City Councilman Jerry Kern has $138,000.

In his Assembly account, Chavez has $601.

Yet, Republican Assemblyman Rocky Chavez isn’t pessimistic about his chances of becoming the next U.S. Senator from California.

“Republicans need to have a positive message,” the former Marine colonel tells CalWatchdog.com, saying his campaign is focused on jobs and education. “You get a job through education… . Education is an investment society makes in people.”

In place of a big-budget campaign, Chavez has been meeting with editorial boards to share his message focused on opportunity, investment in infrastructure and making the world safer.

Sacramento: Challenging Assembly Republican Caucus

Chavez contends that his success as a state lawmaker, nearly three decades in the military and experience founding a charter school make him the strongest Republican candidate to challenge Attorney General Kamala Harris next fall.

“As far as Republicans, I’m the only one that’s been elected or run campaigns,” Chavez said. “People are concerned about jobs.”

In only his second term in the state Assembly, Chavez boasts that he’s had success passing legislation through the Democratic-controlled Legislature.

“I think I’m number three for getting the most bills passed (for a Republican),” he said. Among Chavez-authored bills that have become law is Assembly Bill 13, which requires state colleges to update their admission policies to guarantee GI benefits.

Chavez’s legislative victories have included defeating bills that would provide more rights to illegal immigrants. In 2013, Chavez departed with his Republican colleagues by acting as a vocal critic of Assembly Bill 1401, which would have allowed illegal immigrants to serve on juries.

“The (GOP) caucus recommended we not jump on it,” Chavez said, referring to AB1401. “I fought that issue and won it.”

Sided with Unions on Property Rights Fight

Although Chavez has an “A” rating from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, his record in Sacramento is far from conservative. Chavez differentiates himself from traditional neoconservative Republicans by describing President George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003 as a “bad decision and mistake.”

This year, Chavez also joined with a majority of lawmakers to defeat legislation that would have strengthened property rights in California.

Senate Bill 443, authored by Senator Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, would have blocked government agencies from confiscating private property in California – without a criminal conviction. The bill also would have banned law enforcement agencies in California from using federal agencies as a middleman for circumventing state law.

A bipartisan coalition of property rights groups and state lawmakers argued that the current system is nothing more than a government revenue grab that violates the fundamental principles of the American justice system.

“In California in the last 20 years, tens of thousands of people have had property taken and that property has not been returned – even though those individuals have neither been charged with a crime nor convicted of a crime,” said Assemblyman David Hadley, R-Torrance, who carried the bill in the lower house.

After an intense lobbying effort by public safety unions, a majority of lawmakers, including Chavez, defeated the bill on a 24-44 vote.

“In Sacramento, people make these emotional arguments with no basis in fact,” Chavez said, dismissing substantial evidence and independent studies that document the number of innocent victims of government property confiscation. “I don’t drive around with $100,000 in my car. Law enforcement agencies use this to hit them (drug cartels) where it hurts.”

Property rights advocates dispute Chavez’s claim that only the guilty suffer under California’s asset forfeiture system.

“When one’s government can forcibly seize private property without the benefit of proving guilt, most victims would be fearful or never consider appealing to the very politicians who champion a broken forfeiture system,” said Marko Mlikotin, the executive director of the California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights. “Sadly, California’s judicial system is no longer based on the notion that one is innocent until proven guilty.”

Chavez’s $12,552 Junket to Chile

Chavez’s legislative success has endeared him to Sacramento’s power brokers and lobbyists, who invited Chavez on an all-expense paid trip to Chile. The trip, which cost $12,552, according to Chavez’s annual disclosure report, was paid for by the California Foundation on the Environment and the Economy, a group that accepts contributions from unions and corporations that routinely lobby the Legislature.

Critics of such junkets argue that it gives lobbyists and special interest groups unfettered access to policymakers. Chavez says that criticism is “uninformed.” He stresses that the trips are essential for “Republicans to be informed.”

“The reality is there were no deals made,” Chavez tells CalWatchdog.com. “It’s important that policymakers raise their heads above the dust.” He says that he learned more about energy policy, immigration and city design as a result of the “educational” trip.

“I always start my campaigns early, and I run hard,” Harris told the New York Times. “Maybe it comes from the rough-and-tumble world of San Francisco politics, where it’s not even a contact sport — it’s a blood sport. This is how I am as a candidate. This is how I run campaigns.”

But that attitude has helped set up what could be a difficult dynamic for Harris in her quest for the Senate.

She has cleared away key potential competitors from Northern California, such as Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has opted to run for governor in 2018. But Harris has not dispatched credible Democratic contenders in the Southland, including Rep. Adam Schiff of Burbank, Rep. Xavier Becerra of Los Angeles and Rep. Loretta Sanchez of Garden Grove. Then there are potential Republican contenders, such as Assemblyman Rocky Chávez of Oceanside.

For years, Southern Californian Democrats have chafed at what many have seen as an excessive degree of dominance within the state party by San Francisco and Sacramento-area members, including Boxer and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, both from Marin County; and Gov. Jerry Brown, the former mayor of Oakland.

A wide-open field

Harris’ aggressive approach to political advancement has helped knock one nationally recognized L.A. Latino out of the Senate scramble. Former L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa bailed out of contention late in February.

“I know that my heart and my family are here in California, not Washington, D.C.,” he said in a statement posted to Facebook. “I have decided not to run for the U.S. Senate and instead continue my efforts to make California a better place to live, work and raise a family.” Villaraigosa’s decision was seen as signaling greater interest in pursuing a bid for governor.

Even though Villaraigosa himself was seen as one of Harris’ most formidable would-be rivals, his weaknesses as a candidate were far greater than other Southern California Latinos currently weighing serious Senate bids. Villaraigosa struggled with personal scandal and an embarrassingly rough landing after leaving office, when he had to scrounge for lucrative work through personal connections and the strength of his name recognition.

Ironically, that opened the field for others to challenge Harris. The kind of travails Villaraigosa faced haven’t been a problem for Harris’ most likely Latino challengers. Schiff, Becerra and Sanchez have “been waiting for colleagues to retire so they can move up, and they still face the constant threat that even after biding their time, rivals could outmaneuver them,” the Los Angeles Times reported.

“But with scant hope that Democrats could seize control of the House next year, they are also stuck in the relatively powerless minority. Democrats stand a better chance of retaking the Senate, so the potential leap may be that much more tempting.”

Meanwhile, noted the Times, Harris still hasn’t made an impression on more than half of California’s registered voters, according to a poll conducted with USC Dornsife.

Pressure on the right

Despite expressing strong interest, neither Becerra nor Sanchez officially has declared their candidacy. For now, that gives an advantage to Chávez, the only other candidate to declare after Harris.

And within the California GOP, as the Sacramento Bee observed, his “résumé and standing as a state legislator make him the most prominent Republican among those weighing bids. A former city councilman in Oceanside, he spent nearly three decades in the Marines and later served as acting secretary to the state Department of Veterans Affairs.”

Chávez’s political positioning also has raised hurdles for other Republicans considering a run. “He supports gay marriage and has chided members of his own party for blocking immigration reform,” noted the Bee. “He opposes abortion rights, however, a position he attributes to his Catholic upbringing.”

Running to the left or the right of Chávez could pose problems for GOP rivals. That could inspire the state party to rally around him relatively early. Although not an electoral cure-all, California Republicans could score a perceived coup by fielding a Latino candidate against Harris.

“A lot of things can happen on the way to a coronation,” Chávez recently told the New York Times.

Brown also called it “truly revolutionary. We are bringing government closer to the people, to the classroom where real decisions are made, and directing the money where the need and the challenge is greatest. This is a good day for California, it’s a good day for school kids and it’s a good day for our future.”

But nearly two years and $7 billion later (with another $4 billion in Brown’s proposed 2015-16 budget), state officials are not sure the intended targets of the Local Control Funding Formula – English learners, students in low-income families and foster-care youth – are actually benefiting.

School districts are required to file a Local Control and Accountability Plan with the state that specifies how they are using the extra LCFF funding to benefit those three categories of students. But many districts’ plans have failed to provide clarity.

That lack of clarity was confirmed in a recent study of the LCAPs from 50 school districts by the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Carolyn Chu, a senior fiscal and policy analyst at the LAO, testified on the study before the Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance. “It was difficult to determine how districts were increasing or improving services for English learners, low-income and foster youth students in accordance with the regulations,” she said. “Districts are required to increase or improve services in proportion to the funding that they receive. And it was difficult for us to determine how districts were doing that through reading their LCAP.”

General programs

The study itself concluded, “In most LCAPs, we found that districts are not distinguishing between actions that are a continuation of efforts from the prior year and those that are new for the upcoming school year. Without such differentiation, we could not determine whether districts were using the new funding generated under LCFF to pursue new actions to improve performance or to continue or expand prior activities.”

Instead of targeting the funds at English learners, low-income and foster-care students, many school districts are using the money for general programs with the understanding that those three subgroups are also benefiting, according to the LAO. “[F]ew districts provide clear or compelling rationales for using their … funds on a districtwide and schoolwide basis,” the study said.

Among the study’s findings, few districts provide specifics on how they are implementing the state’s Common Core and English language development standards, how they are increasing parental involvement and how they are ensuring student enrollment in all required areas of study.

No information

Some provide no information at all on supplemental services for English learner, low-income and foster care students.

“Often, districts’ justifications of districtwide and schoolwide services consist only of recapping the actions they will pursue on behalf of all students and indicating those actions also will benefit EL/LI students,” the study said.

“Though few districts provided clear or compelling rationales for using their supplemental and concentration funds on a districtwide and schoolwide basis, this lack of clarity seems most problematic for districts with relatively low proportions of EL/LI students — districts for whom targeted services generally would be more appropriate.”

Complexity

Part of the problem is the complexity of the new regulations.

“One of our most significant findings relates to the overarching design of the LCAP,” the LAO study said. “The statute governing the components of the LCAP requires districts to set goals in eight state priority areas, identify and describe actions to reach those goals, and track progress using 24 state-identified metrics (plus any local metrics). In addition, the statute instructs districts to set specific goals and identify actions for 12 student subgroups and each of the districts’ schools for all the priority areas.

“Fulfilling all of these requirements is a challenging undertaking for districts to accomplish and accomplish well. Though most of the LCAPs we reviewed attempted to comply with many of the statutory LCAP requirements, none complied with every statutory requirement.”

The complexity of the LCFF is ironic because the regulation was touted as a simplification of the state’s previous supplemental school funding program, which imposed myriad restrictions on how money could be spent in 40 state categorical programs.

“The legislation … replaces California’s overly complex, inefficient and inequitable finance system for K-12 schools,” Brown’s 2013 press release said. “By shifting funds from ‘categorical’ grants – money tied to complex state mandates that limit how schools can use the funds – to the new per-pupil base, supplemental and concentration grants, the legislation increases local control while enhancing transparency and accountability.”

Incentives

Another irony is that the LCFF may actually provide a perverse incentive for cash-hungry school districts to maintain, or perhaps even increase, their percentage of English-learner, low-income and foster-care students. The school funding formula is based on three categories:

• Every school gets a base rate that varies by grade level, ranging from a low of $7,116 per pupil in grades 4-6 to a high of $8,711 in grades 9-12.
• Supplemental funding is provided for every English-learner, low-income and foster-care student, ranging from a low of $1,423 for grades 4-6 to a high of $1,742 for grades 9-12.
• Concentration funding is provided to districts that have at least 55 percent of their students classified as English-learners or low-income. For every student above that threshold, the district receives (at the low end) an extra $3,558 for grades 4-6 and (at the high end) $4,356 for grades 9-12.

This has resulted in some districts receiving millions of dollars in extra funding, some of which they would lose as their English-learner students become English-proficient or income levels in the district increase.

Reductions?

Assemblyman Rocky Chavez, R-Oceanside, asked several officials when school districts might be expected to start achieving success and relinquish the extra funding.

“If we are going to approve this, what’s your anticipation of reduction in concentration funding?” Chavez said. “Systemically, if we’re going to be improving the performance of our schools, then is there anticipated that there will be a reduction in funding years from now since they’ll be getting better?”

Brooks Allen, deputy policy director for the California Department of Education, responded that it’s too early in the process to know. The evaluation rubrics to measure each district’s effectiveness in improving student performance are still being developed and are scheduled to be adopted this fall.

Chavez took that to mean, “No reduction in funding?” So he asked the question again to CDE representative Monique Ramos. “What is the anticipation that we will be able to reduce the funds in this program?” Chavez asked. “Because if we reduce it, it helps everybody because there will be money spread throughout all districts helping all children.”

Ramos echoed Allen, and indicated that, even if districts are successful in helping English-learners, low-income and foster-care students, the funding may still need to continue. “We agree that it’s early in the process, and we would actually need to see data that these populations have decreased the achievement gap,” she said.

“The question would be at that time: how did we get there? Part of the reason is we provided supplemental and concentration grants because we know these students are more expensive to educate. Once we start closing that achievement gap, we have to evaluate how we got there, why and re-evaluate at that time. But I have a feeling that’s quite a ways out.”

This surprise wasn’t just prompted by Chavez having an unexpectedly ambitious sense of what his electoral possibilities were. It was also the skepticism that a Republican could win statewide office against a glamorous Democratic figure like state Attorney General Kamala Harris. Over the last 16 years, the only GOP statewide candidates to win were mega-celebrity Arnold Schwarzenegger in the 2003 gubernatorial recall, Schwarzenegger in his 2006 re-election bid, and Steve Poizner in his 2006 run for insurance commissioner against widely disliked Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante.

But Chavez, 63, has an ace in hand that most politicians would die to have. He’s a former colonel in the Marine Corps — a much-decorated 28-year veteran. The hope is that this part of his resume peels away Latino, independent and moderate votes from Democrats. It’s why his press releases now routinely refer to him as “Col. Chavez.”

The last well-credentialed Latino Republican candidate for statewide office was Abel Maldonado, a Santa Maria rancher-turned-politician whom Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plucked from the state Senate to serve as lieutenant governor after Democrat John Garamendi was elected to the House of Representatives. In November 2010, seven months after the governor finally managed to face down a contentious Assembly and win Maldonado’s confirmation, the moderate GOPer lost his bid for a full four-year term as lieutenant governor to Gavin Newsom.

Newsom trounced Maldonado 50 percent to 39 percent — by 1.1 million votes — in balloting that saw libertarian candidate Pamela J. Brown gather nearly 6 percent support.

Maldonado had a difficult relationship with the state GOP establishment because of his votes for budget deals and his successful push for a “top-two” primary system that reduces the power of both parties. He also doesn’t have big-money backers, which led him to abandon a 2014 bid for governor.

Chavez will need deep-pockets backers

Chavez has much better party relations and a stronger image. It’s easy to see him wooing — or at least making a plausible case to — deep-pockets backers for a campaign against Harris. Without such backers, he will be a huge underdog.

That’s not just because of Democrats’ basic advantage in statewide elections. Harris also seems a much more formidable candidate then she did in her first run for attorney general as San Francisco DA in 2010, when she beat Los Angeles County DA Steve Cooley by 80,000 votes — less than 1 percent. She became a national figure, and not just because of President Obama’s unusual comments about her attractiveness. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, for one example, is a big fan. In 2014, Harris won re-election as attorney general by 1.1 million votes over little-known GOP challenger Ronald Gold.

And she is certain to draw huge funding from big-money interests, only starting with those in San Francisco, Silicon Valley and Hollywood/West Los Angeles. The half African-American, half Indian-American attorney is seen as a potential future vice-presidential nominee for Democrats, at the least.

Villaraigosa announced his decision Tuesday in a post on Facebook that foreshadowed a run for governor in 2018.

“I am humbled by the encouragement I’ve received from so many to serve in the United States Senate,” the former Democratic Speaker of the California Assembly wrote. “But as I think about how best to serve the people of this great state, I know that my heart and my family are here in California, not Washington, D.C.”

If Villaraigosa’s statement that his heart remains “here in California” wasn’t a clear enough indication of a future run for governor, he added he’ll continue his “efforts to make California a better place to live, work and raise a family.”

“We have come a long way, but our work is not done, and neither am I,” he concluded.

Kamala Harris

Villaraigosa’s decision to pass on an application for membership in “the world’s most exclusive club” follows similar announcements by Treasurer John Chiang, billionaire climate-change activist Tom Steyer and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom.

It didn’t take long for Harris, the only major announced Democratic candidate, to issue a statement praising the former Los Angeles mayor.

“The city of Los Angeles, and our state and nation, have benefitted [sic] greatly from his leadership,” Harris said in a prepared statement tweeted by her campaign. “I know he has much more to offer. I wish him and his family all the best.”

Although Harris welcomed Villaraigosa’s exit from the race, the biggest beneficiary could be Loretta Sanchez. A moderate Orange County Democrat, Sanchez would have appealed to similar voters — Latinos and Southern Californians — as Villaraigosa.

Sanchez may prove formidable challenger to Harris

She hasn’t received the same media hype as Villaraigosa, but in some respects Sanchez may prove to be a more formidable challenger to Harris. The 10-term Democrat has said she’ll make a decision later this year. Sanchez has a head start on fundraising with nearly $400,000 in federal cash on hand, according to the most recent campaign finance reports.

Her statewide name identification, albeit lower than Villaraigosa’s, comes without the personal baggage. Early in his tenure as mayor, Villaraigosa disclosed an affair with a Telemundo newswoman. That was followed by photos showing the mayor partying with Hollywood bad boy Charlie Sheen at a hotel opening in Mexico.

But as pointed out by CalWatchdog.com, the biggest weight on a Villaraigosa campaign could be his support for Esteban Nunez, the son of former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez. Esteban pled guilty to manslaughter for the fatal stabbing of a 22-year-old college student. Villaraigosa, on official mayoral letterhead, wrote a letter of support for “a young man of good and upright character.”

The case was riddled with political favoritism, as detailed in a lengthy profile by the Los Angeles Times, and ended with Nunez friend Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s commutation of Esteban’s sentence.

Latino Caucus: Senate contest bigger than any one candidate

Villaraigosa’s decision to pass on the race also does nothing to cool the burning frustrations of Latino political leaders, who are being pressured by some Democratic leaders to clear the field for Harris.

Earlier this year, former Speaker of the Assembly Willie Brown, who at one time dated Harris, said Villaraigosa should forgo a campaign out of respect for his friendship with the attorney general.

“His loyalty and his relationship with her should be so valuable, and he should, in my opinion, see it as an opportunity to demonstrate that,” Brown told the Sacramento Bee.

That comment inspired grumblings from members of the California Latino Caucus, who say the race is bigger than any one Latino candidate. Earlier this month, the group released a poll showing a Latino candidate could contend with Harris. The survey of 600 likely Latino voters, according to CalBuzz, showed Villaraigosa leading Harris, with Sanchez not far behind in third place.

“The U.S. Senate race has importance beyond the contestants themselves,” Assemblywoman Nora Campos, D-San Jose, said in a press release. “This is not about one candidate or another. An exciting race can generate enthusiasm among voters that have not been energized in years.”

Other Democratic candidates that are considering the race include Rep. Adam Schiff of Burbank, Rep. Xavier Becerra of Los Angeles and former Secretary of the Army Louis Caldera.

On the Republican side, Assemblyman Rocky Chavez of Carlsbad and former California Republican Party chairman Tom Del Beccaro are seriously exploring bids.