Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
DOUBLE YOUR DONATION!
We don’t run corporate ads. We don’t shake our readers down for money every month or every quarter like some other sites out there. We provide our site for free to all, but the bandwidth we pay to do so doesn’t come cheap. A generous donor is matching all donations of $100 or more! So please donate now to double your punch!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

A Last Hurrah in Richmond? The Mayoral Candidate With Major Funding From Chevron

Richmond, California’s next municipal voting is less than seven months away.  But memories of our last election—one of the most expensive in local history– remain fresh in the minds of many participants. For Richmond residents whose recollections are fading, we now have a fascinating 90-minute video history of that campaign. Entitled Nate Bates for Mayor, it provides a timely reminder of the stakes involved in a key Left Coast battle against big money in politics that resonated nationally.

To watch the trailer or the whole film, go to: www.natbatesformayormovie.com

Most political videography (like The War Room) is about winners, rather than losers. So how does the business-backed runner-up in Richmond’s 2014 mayoral race get top billing in this movie? Bay Area film-makers Eric Weiss and Bradley Berman were clearly drawn to 84-year old city councilor Nat Bates, because of his deep roots in the African-American community and their sense that his campaign represented a Richmond version of The Last Hurrah.

In Hollywood’s 1958 version of Edwin O’Connor’s novel, a rascally Irish-American pol (played by Spencer Tracy) tries to win a big city mayoral race by playing on old ethnic divisions. In that Last Hurrah, the local political landscape has changed making Tracy’s character, Frank Skeffington, a sad anachronism, and, ultimately, the election loser. Both the book and the film offer quite a tutorial in “retail politics,” as traditionally practiced, which Nate Bates for Mayor does too. But Weiss and Berman’s documentary also shows what a modern-day election campaign looks like, in our post-Citizens United era of unlimited political spending by major corporations and the wealthy.

Using extensive personal interviews and revealing local footage, Nat Bates for Mayor traces the rise and fall of a mayoral candidate backed by Richmond’s largest employer, Chevron, its local union allies, African-American ministers, and older black voters concerned about their loss of community clout, due to Richmond’s changing racial and ethnic demographics.

A Korean War veteran and former parole officer, Nat Bates’ mission, after 35 years on the city council, was to liberate his hometown from the anti-Chevron “socialists” in the Richmond Progressive Alliance. “I call them the Richmond Plantation Alliance, “ he explains in the film. “They operate from a framework and a philosophy pretty much like a slave-owner in the sense that they always know what’s best for you—and not just for the African-American community but for the total city.”

Bates’ actual opponent in Richmond’s three-way race for mayor in 2014 was Tom Butt, a local architect and liberal Democrat who does not belong to the RPA.  According to Bates, his longtime adversary on the city council—now our mayor– is just a “slime-ball,” whose “constituency is primarily elitist Caucasians in Point Richmond” (a neighborhood where Bates lives as well, although he fails to mention that on the campaign trail or in the movie).

Nat Bates for Mayor captures the defining moment of a campaign old-fashioned in many ways but hyper-modern because of its indirect business financing.  Surrounded by friends, family, labor and business supporters at his kick-off rally at Salute, an upscale restaurant in Marina Bay, Bates declares that “any candidate running for public office who would refuse Chevron’s support is a damn fool!”

Not coincidentally, no one was asked to make a personal donation at this gala event. Yet Moving Forward—Chevron’s political action committee—was already working, at great cost, on Bates’ behalf.  Intent on winning both the mayor’s office and a council majority, Moving Forward found three council candidates who were not “damn fools” either. Chevron’s high-powered political consulting firm, Whitehurst/Mosher in San Francisco, got busy marketing the Bates slate as saviors of the city.

In the film, we see graphic evidence of what “independent spending” totaling more than $3 million can buy.  Paid advertising for Bates & Co. pops up all over Richmond. The city’s 43,000 registered voters are deluged with radio and TV messages and glossy direct mailings to their homes. In addition to extolling the virtues of Bates, Moving Forward propaganda demonizes RPA candidates, including Richmond’s  nationally-known Green mayor, Gayle McLaughlin, who is termed out and running for city council. As the camera scans Richmond’s new urban forest of billboards–erected with “major funding from Chevron,” as their smaller print discloses–Bates explains in a voice-over how Big Oil kept its required election law distance from lucky folks like himself.

“I don’t have any contact with Chevron…I didn’t know what kind of billboards they were going to put up, when they were going up, the location…I didn’t know the amount of literature they’re putting out. I don’t know the content of the literature. That’s illegal.”

Even Bernie Sanders, now the nation’s foremost critic of big money in politics, seems taken aback by the scale of Chevron spending on Bates’ behalf. Bernie makes a cameo appearance in the film, shot during his October, 2014 visit to Richmond.  He endorses Butt for mayor, along with McLaughlin, Eduardo Martinez, and Jovanka Beckles for city council. Then he tells a crowd of their supporters: “You are at ground zero….You beat them here and people will say, ‘they did it in Richmond and we can do it all over America.’”

At Richmond events not far away, Bates assures his backers that “we’re running the strongest campaign I’ve run in my life” and there’s “no way in the world we can lose this election.” Thanks to Butt’s ability to mobilize his longtime base and the RPA’s exceptional organizational abilities, Bates is singing a different tune on election night. In the film’s final scene, the crowd is dwindling at his campaign headquarters and the mood is glum. Corky Booze, Bates’ council ally who just lost his own re-election bid, is particularly bitter. “We cannot save the African-American community if they don’t want to save themselves, “ Booze declares.

In his weary post-mortem, Bates acknowledges Butt’s victory and the RPA’s complete sweep. “We ran a clean campaign,” Bates insists. “We did not attack anyone. We kept to the issues…Unfortunately, there might have been some repercussions about too much literature. And that literature really turned off a lot of people and I think what they were saying is ‘We’re not going to vote for anybody that Chevron is supporting.’…Because everyone that Chevron supported wasn’t successful.”

For a forthcoming book about Richmond politics, I recently queried Chevron spokesperson Leah Casey about the company’s plans for this year’s city council races. (Three Richmond incumbents, including Bates, face likely challenges from RPA candidates and other opponents.)  Given Chevron’s lack of success in 2014, and the backlash against its “independent” spending then, will Big Oil behave differently now? According to Casey, her employer has not yet “defined how or if we will participate in the local Richmond elections.” She assured me that the company’s electoral participation would be “fully transparent,” whatever form it takes.

Bates has yet to announce his own plans but is expected to seek re-election to the Richmond city council. He did not respond to an email query about his willingness to risk further “repercussions” at the polls due to his Chevron sponsorship, which is decades old. If rent control in Richmond makes it onto the ballot in November, the California Apartment Association may be this year’s biggest non-Chevron spender, just as the American Beverage Association was four years ago (when a Richmond soda tax was defeated after total 2012 campaign expenditures of $3.7 million by Big Oil and Big Soda). So far, Bates and Butt have been on the same side on rent control—both are opposed to it.

One thing is certain. Without campaign finance reform of the sort advocated by Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein in their current presidential campaigns, there’ll be no last hurrah for big money in politics, in our city of 100,000 or anywhere else in America, anytime soon.

More articles by:

Steve Early has been active in the labor movement since 1972. He was an organizer and international representative for the Communications Workers of American between 1980 and 2007. He is the author of four books, most recently Refinery Town: Big Oil, Big Money and The Remaking of An American City from Beacon Press. He can be reached at Lsupport@aol.com

October 22, 2018
Henry Giroux
Neoliberalism in the Age of Pedagogical Terrorism
Melvin Goodman
Washington’s Latest Cold War Maneuver: Pulling Out of the INF
David Mattson
Basket of Deplorables Revisited: Grizzly Bears at the Mercy of Wyoming
Michelle Renee Matisons
Hurricane War Zone Further Immiserates Florida Panhandle, Panama City
Tom Gill
A Storm is Brewing in Europe: Italy and Its Public Finances Are at the Center of It
Suyapa Portillo Villeda
An Illegitimate, US-Backed Regime is Fueling the Honduran Refugee Crisis
Christopher Brauchli
The Liars’ Bench
Gary Leupp
Will Trump Split the World by Endorsing a Bold-Faced Lie?
Michael Howard
The New York Times’ Animal Cruelty Fetish
Alice Slater
Time Out for Nukes!
Geoff Dutton
Yes, Virginia, There are Conspiracies—I Think
Daniel Warner
Davos in the Desert: To Attend or Not, That is Not the Question
Priti Gulati Cox – Stan Cox
Mothers of Exiles: For Many, the Child-Separation Ordeal May Never End
Manuel E. Yepe
Pence v. China: Cold War 2.0 May Have Just Begun
Raouf Halaby
Of Pith Helmets and Sartorial Colonialism
Dan Carey
Aspirational Goals  
Wim Laven
Intentional or Incompetence—Voter Suppression Where We Live
Weekend Edition
October 19, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Jason Hirthler
The Pieties of the Liberal Class
Jeffrey St. Clair
A Day in My Life at CounterPunch
Paul Street
“Male Energy,” Authoritarian Whiteness and Creeping Fascism in the Age of Trump
Nick Pemberton
Reflections on Chomsky’s Voting Strategy: Why The Democratic Party Can’t Be Saved
John Davis
The Last History of the United States
Yigal Bronner
The Road to Khan al-Akhmar
Robert Hunziker
The Negan Syndrome
Andrew Levine
Democrats Ahead: Progressives Beware
Rannie Amiri
There is No “Proxy War” in Yemen
David Rosen
America’s Lost Souls: the 21st Century Lumpen-Proletariat?
Joseph Natoli
The Age of Misrepresentations
Ron Jacobs
History Is Not Kind
John Laforge
White House Radiation: Weakened Regulations Would Save Industry Billions
Ramzy Baroud
The UN ‘Sheriff’: Nikki Haley Elevated Israel, Damaged US Standing
Robert Fantina
Trump, Human Rights and the Middle East
Anthony Pahnke – Jim Goodman
NAFTA 2.0 Will Help Corporations More Than Farmers
Jill Richardson
Identity Crisis: Elizabeth Warren’s Claims Cherokee Heritage
Sam Husseini
The Most Strategic Midterm Race: Elder Challenges Hoyer
Maria Foscarinis – John Tharp
The Criminalization of Homelessness
Robert Fisk
The Story of the Armenian Legion: a Dark Tale of Anger and Revenge
Jacques R. Pauwels
Dinner With Marx in the House of the Swan
Dave Lindorff
US ‘Outrage’ over Slaying of US Residents Depends on the Nation Responsible
Ricardo Vaz
How Many Yemenis is a DC Pundit Worth?
Elliot Sperber
Build More Gardens, Phase out Cars
Chris Gilbert
In the Wake of Nepal’s Incomplete Revolution: Dispatch by a Far-Flung Bolivarian 
Muhammad Othman
Let Us Bray
Gerry Brown
Are Chinese Municipal $6 Trillion (40 Trillion Yuan) Hidden Debts Posing Titanic Risks?
Rev. William Alberts
Judge Kavanaugh’s Defenders Doth Protest Too Much
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail