Reporters like sifting through campaign finance reports, in part, because of the old adage "put your money where your mouth is."

If you use that measuring stick at this juncture... only six weeks before election day... it seems unlikely that there will be much "mouth" in support of two of the eight ballot measures: Proposition 79 (prescription drug costs) and Proposition 80 (energy regulation).

Both initiatives qualified for the ballot through the efforts of the Alliance For A Better California, the political consortium of unions and others opposing the initiatives of Governor Schwarzenegger.

Their strategy a few months ago was two-pronged: fight against Schwarzenegger's efforts, while also moving forward on their own measures-- hence, Prop 79's efforts to lower the cost of prescription drugs by threatening drug companies with exclusion from the state MediCal program... and Prop 80's efforts to reregulate the state energy market in the wake of the 2001 energy crisis. Legislation similar to both initiatives has fizzled at the Capitol.

But the most recent campaign finance reports make you wonder whether the two measures were really efforts to change policy, or merely attempts to divert the attention of Team Arnold and its financial backers.

The "yes" on Prop 79 efforts have so far only attracted about $125,000-- which is an almost invisible sum in comparison to the pharmaceutical industry's "no" on Prop 79 effort that totals about $37.7 million.

Prop 80's backers have only earmarked $25,000 for their campaign, while some of the state's largest energy companies have ponyed up a combined $1.8 million to fight the measure.