California Candidates Are Quietly Coaching Allies on How to Attack Their Opponents — Here’s How It Works

California campaign watchdogs and political strategists say a growing number of legislative candidates are using a controversial tactic that may skirt the state’s campaign finance rules — and almost no one is stopping them.

A CalMatters review of campaign websites found at least 14 legislative candidates posting detailed, carefully packaged messaging designed to make it easy for independent spending committees to lift directly into campaign ads. The practice, known as “red-boxing,” has become increasingly common even as state regulators have largely failed to enforce rules meant to prevent it.

Reporters identified at least three instances this year in which outside groups produced digital ads that closely mirrored pre-written talking points published on candidates’ own websites. Under regulations set by the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission, ads created “at the behest” of a campaign are presumed to be coordinated expenditures rather than independent ones — meaning they could illegally exceed legal contribution limits.

One example surfaced in the Santa Ana area, where Assembly candidate Jessie Lopez’s campaign website featured a red-outlined section titled “What Voters Should Know.” It accused her opponent, Santa Ana City Councilmember David Penaloza, of voting for a surveillance camera contract with the company Flock, funded by what the site called special interests, while stating that Lopez “will fight for working people.”

On Oct. 14, a 15-second ad appeared on Facebook and Instagram targeting Santa Ana residents, highlighting Penaloza’s vote on the Flock contract, criticizing “Big Tech billionaires” for funding his campaign, and touting nurse and teacher endorsements for Lopez. The ad was paid for by Working People United, a committee sponsored by the SEIU California State Council that has spent at least $1.4 million backing Lopez since April.

Lopez did not respond to a text message seeking comment, and her campaign did not answer email questions about whether the website language was intended for independent spenders. Working People United also did not respond to requests for comment.

Still, campaign strategists and watchdog groups agree the tactic is spreading rapidly across competitive California races.

“After Citizens United and all that, with money flooding into politics, things have become unmanageable,” said Jorge Contreras, California director for the Working Families Party, which has endorsed Lopez. “That’s why candidates are using red boxes to try to get their message out.”

What red-boxing looks like

Under California law, donors — including corporations, unions and wealthy individuals — face strict limits on direct contributions to candidates, capped at $5,900 per election under FPPC rules. But those same donors can give unlimited amounts to independent expenditure committees that run ads supporting or opposing candidates, as long as the spending isn’t coordinated with — or made at the request of — the campaign itself.

Similar rules apply to congressional races, where red-boxing has become commonplace over the past decade. Candidates post instructions, often highlighted in red text boxes, for independent ad-makers to follow. Some campaigns even specify which voter demographics to target.

Patrick Llewellyn, state campaign finance director for the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center, said red-boxing effectively allows candidates and allied groups to work around contribution limits — creating what he called the appearance of corruption even without an explicit agreement between a campaign and an outside committee.

“When a candidate posts a red box and then spending follows that red box, it defies any common-sense understanding of independence,” Llewellyn said, adding that the practice has spread to state and local races nationwide, prompting crackdowns in some jurisdictions in recent years.

FPPC spokesperson Shery Yang said in an email that “common forms of red-boxing would generally be presumed to be coordination” under current commission regulations. Those rules presume coordination when an expenditure relies on campaign information shared “directly or indirectly,” or when an ad substantially reproduces video or other material “designed, produced, paid for or distributed by the candidate or committee.”

Dozens of candidates maintain multiple minutes of ready-to-use footage on their campaign websites — footage independent committees routinely use in advertisements.

Yang did not answer questions about whether the commission, long criticized for sluggish investigations, has ever enforced its red-boxing rules or whether any cases are currently under review.

Democratic strategist Steven Maviglio said the tactic has “accelerated significantly” over the past two election cycles as campaigns have watched it succeed at the federal level — with little fear of consequences.

“Like it or not, the state watchdog doesn’t have the capacity to do its job,” Maviglio said.

Former FPPC chair Dan Schnur said the agency’s inaction likely stems from a lack of resources.

“The FPPC’s challenge is that it’s funded by the same lawmakers it’s supposed to oversee,” Schnur said. “Elected officials don’t have much incentive to give the commission the funding or staff it needs to do its job properly.”

Staying on message

In the border-area 36th Assembly District, where Democrats hold a 12-point voter registration advantage, Republican-turned-independent Marine veteran Jeff Gonzalez flipped the seat in 2024. Now he’s fighting to keep it against Democratic challenger Ida Obeso-Martinez, the mayor of Imperial.

Outside groups — including oil and gas companies and a political action committee tied to the California Chamber of Commerce — have spent roughly $3.4 million supporting Gonzalez and opposing Obeso-Martinez.

Until recently, Gonzalez’s campaign website included a memo apparently intended for outside “stakeholders,” tucked inside a Dropbox folder labeled “What Voters Want to Know” and accessible through a “PHOTOS” tab. The now-removed memo laid out potential attack lines against Obeso-Martinez under headers including “PAY RAISE,” “TAXES AND FEES” and “PROGRESSIVISM.”

“Ida Obeso-Martinez is just another politician looking out for herself,” the memo read. “On the City Council, Ida voted to double her own salary, funded by taxpayers, and voted to give herself a new taxpayer-funded benefits package.”

Google’s Ad Transparency Center shows that on Oct. 9, a group called Families for Affordable Living — funded largely by McDonald’s franchise owners, utility companies, and oil and gas interests — released an ad highlighting the councilmember’s pay raise. “As a councilmember, Obeso-Martinez voted to double her own salary,” a narrator says as dollar bills fall across images of the Democrat.

Maviglio said that in some races, independent spending essentially becomes the campaign’s entire strategy given how much money outside groups are willing to pour in. Campaign finance records show Gonzalez’s own campaign has spent $1.04 million since the primary — less than a third of the $3.4 million independent committees have spent on his behalf over the same period.

Democratic consultant Michael Trujillo said unlimited outside spending can be risky if a campaign’s message isn’t “in sync” with the independent groups backing it.

“You don’t want your message hijacked by any independent effort, good or bad,” Trujillo said, adding that red-boxing can be one way for outside groups to understand “the essence of the campaign.”

Obeso-Martinez’s campaign recently entered the fray as well. On Oct. 19, her website added a “Communications” tab stating that voters throughout the district “need to see and hear negative communications on TV, radio, digital platforms and other media about Jeff Gonzalez’s alliance with Donald Trump.”

Obeso-Martinez campaign adviser Orrin Evans declined to comment. Neither the treasurer for Families for Affordable Living nor its top funder, the California Family Business Alliance, responded to requests for comment.

A spending arms race

Few California races have drawn more outside money than the nearly $7 million pouring into the North Bay contest between moderate Democrat and Marin County Supervisor Eric Lucan and progressive Democrat Jackie Elward, a Rohnert Park city councilmember.

Lucan has benefited from the bulk of that spending — more than $4.5 million, largely from Grow California, a group backed by cryptocurrency billionaires. Labor unions have contributed roughly $2 million in support of Elward.

On Elward’s campaign website, a photo gallery of high-resolution images and video footage shows the candidate visiting a farmers market, a fire station, a downtown plaza and a college campus. Until this week, scrolling to the bottom revealed a messaging guide outlining campaign talking points.

One line referenced primary-season attack ads: “We also need to remind voters where the attack ads against Jackie and the support ads for Eric are coming from — out-of-district, MAGA-aligned billionaires, Big Pharma and for-profit utility companies.”

On Oct. 18, a group called Workers for Jackie Elward — funded primarily by Consumer Attorneys of California, the California Labor Federation and the SEIU California State Council — began running ads on Facebook and Instagram featuring photos of Grow California billionaire donors Chris Larsen and Timothy Draper. “Why are these Trump-aligned tech billionaires spending so much money to make (Lucan) their guy in the Assembly?” a narrator asks.

In a statement, Elward campaign adviser Doug Linney said, “Everything on a campaign’s website is public information that we believe voters deserve to know.” The campaign has since taken the messaging page down.

In September, Lucan posted messages on Instagram and Facebook asking independent spending committees to stop running ads in the race. “This dark money is misleading voters about me as well as my opponent, and it’s all distorting and corrupting our democracy — it’s everything people hate about politics,” the post read.

Even so, Lucan’s website still hosts footage freely available for anyone to use, material that has shown up in numerous campaign ads supporting him funded by Grow California.

“Footage from our social media, YouTube pages and website has been used by supporters and local media,” said Lucan campaign spokesperson four waters, who stylizes the name in lowercase. “We’ve never exercised any control over, or coordinated with, any outlet working for or against our campaign.”

Grow California did not respond to a request for comment.

Legislative races have transformed dramatically in recent years as independent spending has surged, said Mike Gatto, a former Los Angeles-area Assembly member and Democrat.

“Just 10 or 15 years ago, it was fairly common for legislative races to be decided solely by the resources candidates raised themselves,” Gatto said. “That’s becoming increasingly rare.”

Original source: CalMatters