Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
By Julie Pitta
You found it among the stack of glossy catalogues in your mailbox. Disguised in a plain white envelope bearing a message promising important election information, this mailer, despite its somber appearance, was no less than the slick catalogues with the pretty pictures.
The catalogues want you to part with your money. The mailer wants something more precious – your vote. In return it promises a "better" San Francisco.
Better for whom, you might reasonably ask. Why, better for the cabal of big tech and real estate interests who produced the mailer.
The mailer is the handiwork of GrowSF, a political action committee that exploits a loophole in election law that allows them to evade the $500 million cap imposed on individual campaign contributors. Among its funders is Garry Tan, a billionaire venture capitalist. For him, and others like him, the expense can be considered an investment, one promising a handsome return.
The mailer is sleazy even by the deplorably low standards of today's political campaigns. In it, GrowSF touts the results of a recent public opinion poll. The idea is to persuade voters that its agenda is informed by the concerns of city residents. But where are the numbers? GrowSF fails to tell us who – or how many – responded. Without that critical piece of information, the poll's results are worthless, not worth the paper they were printed on.
That's not all. GrowSF attempts to make a specious connection to the real problems of homelessness, drug use and crime to District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan. Again, it doesn't let the facts get in the way of a good story. It accuses Chan of advocating for defunding the San Francisco Police Department. Nothing could be further from the truth. Chan has been a staunch supporter of our local police. As head of the Board of Supervisor's budget committee, she recommended a handsome 8.5% raise to the police budget. She did so in a year when most city departments were forced to take cuts, the result of a large and debilitating budget deficit.
Even so, as a tenacious fighter for working San Franciscans, Chan has found herself in the cross hairs. Not known for its subtlety, GrowSF launched "Clear Out Connie" campaign last spring and has given full-throated support to Chan's opponent Marjan Philhour. A two-time loser for the D1 seat, Philhour is a candidate friendly to the interests of the City's billionaires who will spend big to bankroll her into office.
Stirring up discontent about crime is nothing more than a cynical attempt at grabbing voter attention. GrowSF and groups like them are spending millions to influence city elections and they haven't been shy about their intentions. The San Francisco Standard, an online news site started by Michael Moritz who, like Tan, is a billionaire venture capitalist, recently published an article laying out their plan: "San Francisco 'Tech Families' Plot to Spend Millions Influencing Policy."
Moritz, not surprisingly, also bankrolls a political action committee, TogetherSF. In the last three years, he has spent a whopping $350 million on city elections, a figure that sounds impressive, but amounts to only $135 per San Franciscan. That's a small price if you look at the money as an investment that will reap handsome dividends.
What billionaires like Moritz and Tan want is more profit. It's their obsession. To that end, they're looking to up-zone San Francisco neighborhoods, particularly on the City's west side, a gift to real estate speculators. They want to starve the City's social service programs, the better to lower their taxes. They're attacking public schools, again to avoid paying their fair share. Make no mistake, this agenda will harm the most vulnerable among us as well as working San Franciscans.
Their agenda is a breathtaking example of selfishness from a class of people who have become obscenely rich doing business in our City.
In the coming months, the billionaires behind GrowSF and TogetherSF will try to convince you that they care deeply about the problems plaguing our City. Nothing could be further from the truth. Their obsession, as it has always been, is making money and they propose to do it on the back of working San Franciscans. The City, already inhospitable to so many of us, will become only more so should they succeed in buying your vote.
The election season is upon us. In this era of disinformation, it's increasingly important that San Francisco voters become discriminating consumers of information. The future of our City depends on it.
Julie Pitta is a former staff writer for the Los Angeles Times and senior editor at Forbes Magazine. She is a neighborhood activist and an officer of the Richmond District Democratic Club. You may reach her at julie.pitta@gmail.com. Follow her on Twitter/X: @juliepitta.
No comments:
Post a Comment