Becerra Accuses USC of ‘Election Rigging’ Over Gubernatorial Debate Selection

Los Angeles – Former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, a leading Democratic candidate for California governor, has sharply criticized the University of Southern California (USC) and ABC7 Los Angeles for hosting a gubernatorial debate he alleges deliberately excludes candidates of color. Becerra contends the decision is unfair and “smells of election rigging” as the June primary approaches.

Debate Criteria Spark Controversy

The controversy centers on the criteria used to determine participation in the March 24 debate, cosponsored by ABC7 and Univision. Becerra, in a letter to USC President Beong-Soo Kim, drew a historical parallel, stating, “My father used to tell me of the days when he would encounter signs posted outside establishments that read ‘No Dogs, Negroes or Mexicans Allowed.’” He argued USC’s actions, while not overtly discriminatory, effectively filter the voters’ view in a competitive race.

USC Defends Selection Process

USC maintains that the selection process was impartial, stating that Dr. Christian Grose, a professor of political science and international relations, independently established the methodology for determining eligibility. “No one in the USC administration had any role in developing, reviewing or approving those criteria,” according to a statement from the Center for the Political Future at USC.

Discrepancies in Criteria Emerge

Yet, discrepancies in the stated criteria have fueled the controversy. The initial methodology reportedly considered opinion polling and campaign fundraising, based on semi-annual reports filed with the California Secretary of State. Later statements indicated the criteria too included large, immediately reported donations. This distinction is significant, as San José Mayor Matt Mahan, who entered the race in late January, had not yet filed a semi-annual report but has received substantial contributions.

Mahan Aligns with Becerra’s Criticism

San José Mayor Matt Mahan agreed with Becerra, stating he ought to be part of public forums about who will lead the state. “The former Secretary is absolutely correct, he should be included in the debate,” Mahan said in a statement. “His long record of service to California has earned him a place on every debate stage in this campaign for Governor.”

USC Clarifies Fundraising Criteria

USC officials said they are clarifying how they selected candidates to participate. “We are reissuing the criteria to make clear that they include current fundraising totals, including semi-annual and late reports, which were always part of the formula,” the Center for the Political Future said in a statement. “We are not changing the criteria. We have updated even as of today and the rank order includes the same top 6 candidates.”

Grose Addresses Methodology Concerns

Grose said that the selection of candidates was based upon polling and fundraising numbers, and that the sentence about semi-annual fundraising reports was a wording issue. “It was just a wording issue. It’s not a methodology issue,” he said.

Candidates Selected for Debate

Six candidates are scheduled to appear at the debate: Republicans Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton; and Democrats Northern California Rep. Eric Swalwell, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, billionaire hedge-fund founder Tom Steyer and Mahan.

Broader Concerns of Exclusion

The kerfuffle occurs after Democratic candidates of color accused state party leaders of trying to oust them from the race in favor of white candidates, who have more support in opinion polls. Other prominent Democratic candidates excluded from the debate include former state Controller Betty Yee, state Supt. Of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who also condemned the candidate-selection formula.

Villaraigosa Calls for Fair Process

“Californians deserve a fair process, and voters deserve to hear from all qualified voices,” Villaraigosa, who taught public policy at USC for three years after leaving office, said in a statement. “But this biased and bigoted action by USC to manipulate the data to exclude every qualified Black, Latino, and API candidate in favor of a less qualified white candidate is shameful.”

Becerra Highlights Disparity

Becerra said USC went to great lengths to justify the candidates that were excluded, but the bias was clear. “You can’t escape the detestable outcome: you disqualified all of the candidates of color from participating while you invited a white candidate who has NEVER polled higher than some of the candidates of color, including me,” he said. Becerra was referring to Mahan, who recently entered the race and has received millions of dollars of support from Silicon Valley leaders.

Murphy’s Involvement and Recusal

Veteran GOP strategist Mike Murphy, co-director of the USC Center for the Political Future, is assisting an independent expenditure committee backing Mahan. Murphy said he had recused himself from anything involved in the debate, and that he was a volunteer for the outside group backing Mahan. If he becomes a paid advisor to the independent expenditure committee, he said he has requested unpaid leave from the university through the June 2 primary. “I’ve been transparent that I’m personally a Mahan supporter,” Murphy said. “I’ve had zero to do with the debate.”