A Congressional Race That (Almost) Sums Up Northern California

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Californians, and especially San Franciscans, have a knack for embracing politicians who are larger than life. We’ve elected Jerry Brown (“Governor Moonbeam”), veteran state Senator John Burton (the flamboyant foul-mouth), and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown (“Slick Willie”), to name a few. Now we’ve got the Governator in Sacramento and Gavin the Playboy in City Hall. And there are always mayoral also-rans such as Cindy Sheehan, the peace mom, and Josh Wolf, the jailed vlogger. These politicos are as much policy wonks as cultural figures who embody the fears, dreams and excesses of their times–a reflection of the fact that politics and culture are unusually conjoined in the Golden State.

Even in light of this history, voters should brace themselves for the upcoming election to replace the recently deceased Congressman Tom Lantos. It’s a race that simultaneously evokes San Francisco’s pre-hippie past, touches upon the rise and decay of the counterculture, and speaks to an uncertain future in which technology, political idealism, and ego form a volatile mix. It could be a wild ride. I’ll explain after the jump.

Let’s start with Lantos, an anti-Nazi resistance fighter in Hungary, a Holocaust survivor, and a 14-term Congressman from San Francisco and San Mateo County–a great man and, to be sure, a larger-than-life figure. Culturally, Lantos bridged the Greatest Generation and the Hippie Generation; he was progressive on gay rights and the environment but a staunch anti-fascist and (somewhat understandably) an early supporter of the Iraq war.

The politician endorsed by Lantos to fill his congressional seat embodies a different sort of cultural transition and the legacy of a different sort of war. State Sen. Jackie Speier was a member of the fact-finding delegation that traveled to Guyana in 1978 to investigate Jonestown, the quasi-socialist creation of San Francisco cult leader Jim Jones. The cult’s security guards fired on the group, killing a U.S. Congressman and four others. Speier was shot five times, waited nearly a day for help to arrive, and survived. Elected to county-level office two years later, she has served as a high-profile reminder of (and antidote to) the culture wars of ’70s.

As the culture wars in the Bay Area gave way to gentrification wars, artists and activists watched the rich and fratty sap San Francisco of charm, snatch up the affordable flats, and, though it went mostly unsaid, steal their girlfriends. They opposed Mayor Gavin Newsom as suspiciously pomaded and wealthy. When it was revealed that Newsom had been sleeping with the wife of his deputy mayor, Alex Tourk, they weren’t bothered so much by Newsom’s infidelity as the power dynamics of the whole thing: even though Tourk had been a major fundraiser and a key architect of Newsom’s big policy ideas, he was earning a meager $50,000 salary. You don’t cuckold a wage slave. Men saw themselves in Turk. And now he’s Speier’s campaign director.

Today, in the Wall Street Journal, open-source guru Lawrence Lessig announced that he’s weighing a run against Speier. For most of the past decade the Stanford law professor and Internet maven has toured the globe to speak out against the stifling effects of copyright, but, a few months ago, gave up the fight to focus on corruption in politics. He could use Lantos’ old seat to advocate for freedom online and more restraints on campaign finance and political gifts in Washington.

So there you have it: the broad strokes of Northern California politics. The Greatest Generation gives way to the Progressive Generation. The Culture War gives way to the Gentrification War. Throw in some sex. Throw in the Internet. Throw in a crusade against corruption. Top it off with some egos. Not bad for a single race for Congress.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate