Sam Liccardo and Evan Low trade blows in the weeks leading up to the election

With less than three weeks until Election Day, campaign ads in the high-profile congressional District 16 race have flooded the airways, and vitriolic allegations are escalating between Assemblymember Evan Low and former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo’s campaigns.

The rare opportunity to make a run at an open congressional seat and replace retiring U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo has fueled a multimillion-dollar spending blitz as the two candidates fight to get their message out to voters.

Collectively, they’ve spent nearly $5.7 million since the race kicked off last year with Liccardo spending $3.5 million and Low shelling out $2.1 million through September. The amount of money they’ve hauled in though is even higher — almost $8.9 million — with the former mayor leading the fundraising race with $5.4 million compared to Low’s $3.4 million.

The latest salvo coming from Liccardo’s camp has been continued pressure on Low to halt alleged illegal spending by his state Assembly campaign account, which was brought to light in a recent Federal Election Commission complaint filed by Defend the Vote, a pro-democracy and voting rights organization. Low has spent roughly $590,000 from his state account on ads where he touts his record over the last decade in the Legislature. While the ads don’t mention his congressional bid, Defend the Vote argues that it is “in substance, a campaign ad.”

Low’s campaign has called the allegations “meritless,” but this past week Liccardo held a news conference in front of the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters Office with several of his allies — including former FEC Chair Ann Ravel and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan — who called on Low to stop breaking the law.

Liccardo’s campaign also released a letter signed by nine congressmembers including Rep. Ann McLane Kuster, D-NH, who is the chair of the New Democrat Coalition, and Rep. Nanette Barragán, D-Long Beach, the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

“Continuing to use your state funds in this way demonstrates a disregard for campaign finance laws,” the letter said. “This issue is of utmost importance, and your continuation will demonstrate your unfitness for the office. Such actions threaten the very foundation of the Federal Election Campaign Act and jeopardize the integrity of our federal elections.”

Low’s campaign refused to answer specific questions about the ad, but in a statement, Lam Nguyen, Low’s deputy campaign manager, called the letter a “desperate stunt.”

“Every TV station’s lawyers have rejected these same claims,” he said, referring to cease-and-desist letters sent by Liccardo’s campaign to TV stations running the ads. “This is just last-minute desperation from a candidate who broke every rule in the recount and has been called a liar by San Jose police and firefighters.”

Low’s campaign has repeatedly accused Liccardo of “hiding behind” former mayoral campaign staffer Jonathan Padilla, who requested a recount after Low tied for second in the primary with Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian.

Ian Vandewalker, the senior counsel and manager for the Brennan Center’s Elections and Government Program, said that in 2002, the McCain–Feingold Act created a new definition for electioneering communications that included any mention of a candidate before an election — even if the office they’re running for isn’t mentioned in the ad.

The issue with using state funds for a federal race has to do with contribution limits, according to Vandewalker.

“We have contribution limits in the federal system, and those contribution limits are sort of meaningless if you could just use another entity that doesn’t have those limits to spend on federal elections,” he said. “There has to be rules keeping people from using other vehicles, other committees, with a wink and a nod to try to elect a federal candidate.”

When examining complaints like the one filed against Low, Vandewalker said that in the past, the FEC has looked at whether a state officeholder would normally air similar ads outside of an election period and whether the ads are directed at the constituents of the state office or of the federal office.

The most recent FEC complaint against Low is just one of four filed during the race — another was filed by Ravel against Low several months ago and two were filed against Liccardo earlier this year that alleged he was coordinating with the funders of the recount during the primary.

None of those complaints, however, are expected to be resolved before Nov. 5 — and when they are, they will be long out of the public’s mind, according to Larry Gerston, a professor emeritus of political science at San Jose State University.

“Accusations don’t put people in prison. Accusations don’t get civil fines,” Gerston said. “Accusations are just that, accusations.”

Local police and fire unions have held rallies denouncing the former mayor and accusing him of making the city less safe. Meanwhile, Low has touted his endorsements from organizations like the San Jose Police Officers’ Association and the San Jose Fire Fighters Local 230.

Public safety became a core talking point again in last week’s televised debate, which was hosted by NBC Bay Area, Telemundo 48 and KQED. During the hour-long debate, Low continually criticized the mayor, telling him that he still owed San Jose 300 police officers for “the devastation” that he caused. Liccardo has maintained that he was “smart on crime” when he served as mayor.

Gerston said that public safety is often one of the “calling cards in many campaigns” — even with crime rates trending down nationwide. “Even though there’s that general reduction of crime, it’s always something that tugs at someone’s sleeve because you never know when someone’s going to get mugged or their house is going to get burgled,” he said. “We all have some sense of that concern in life. A lot of campaigns like to seize on that.”