Catch up fast: The reports are the first fundraising disclosures from Count the Vote, the political committee that financed the recount. The recount occurred over 13 days in parts of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, requiring election workers to rescan ballots. During the process, officials added ballots that were erroneously left out of the initial count and removed ballots that were counted twice by mistake. As a result of the recount, Low moved ahead of Simitian by five votes.
Driving the story: The recount was marked with intrigue and recriminations between the Low campaign and the backers of the recount. It was requested by Jonathan Padilla, a former Liccardo staffer, leading to accusations and ethics complaints that the campaign and recount group were illegally coordinating, which both have denied. Low, meanwhile, opposed the recount, and his lawyers pushed to stop it from taking place. California does not have a law triggering automatic recounts, but any voter in the district can request one – and must place a daily deposit to cover the costs of the work.
By the numbers: Count the Vote reported raising $271,500 through June 30 and spending $268,000 on recount costs and legal fees. A pro-Liccardo super PAC called Neighbors for Results gave $102,000 to the recount effort. Neighbors for Results received significant funding from former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whom Liccardo endorsed in his 2020 run for president. Chris Larsen, the former CEO of Ripple Labs who has endorsed Liccardo’s congressional run, contributed $100,000 to the recount. Other backers include Padilla, along with Nick Josefowitz, a former BART director, and Daniel J. Warmenhoven, the former CEO of NetApp. All three had previously donated to Liccardo’s campaign.
What they’re saying: The Low campaign blasted the recount on Tuesday as “nothing more than a dirty trick.”
“It’s now clear Liccardo’s billionaire donors funded it, which hamstrung our fundraising and gave Trump Republicans a playbook to continue to undermine our democracy,” the campaign said in a statement.
Asked about the recount committee’s goals and the donors being Liccardo supporters, Padilla said, “Counting votes matters, and Evan tried to stop it.”
“Evan’s a hypocrite because he wants immediate disclosure of donors to recount committees but not to special interest IE [independent expenditure] committees that spent $750K on him,” Padilla added. “We need people of substance and not glib showmen to ensure the promise of our democracy endures.”
What’s next: The race between Liccardo and Low will be one of the most closely watched elections in the Bay Area this November. The winner will hold a reliably blue seat with no term limits — and could instantly become a sought-after voice in Congress on issues related to Silicon Valley. Before Monday’s disclosure deadline, Liccardo reported bringing in more than $1.6 million in the second quarter, while Low raised $751,279.
“Sam’s strong support from the people of this district is a testament to his record as an effective independent leader and to our community’s demands for Congress to get moving,” said Gil Rubinstein, spokesperson for the Liccardo campaign, in a statement. “In contrast, Evan Low does what all establishment, insider-funded candidates do: fundraising in Washington D.C., Sacramento and L.A. because he cannot generate meaningful support from the people he’s represented for a decade.”
The latest round of fundraising left Liccardo with $1.9 million and Low with $846,497 on hand.
