Physician Ami Bera (D) won a hotly contested House seat over incumbent Dan Lungren (R). (Randy Payne/Flickr)

The election blog is coming to an end soon <sniff!> so this is the last update I’ll be posting on those stubbornly close races. Most of them were decided yesterday. There are still 1.7 million votes [PDF] to count statewide.

Jump for joy or read ‘em and weep. Counties have until December 7 to send final counts to the state. The secretary of state must certify the election by December 14.

Many of the close races we have kept an eye on are in Alameda County which finished counting votes yesterday. Here is an update on all the races we’ve been following:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): Physician Ami Bera (D) defeated incumbent Dan Lungren (R). This was Bera’s second attempt to defeat Lungren; he received 51.5 percent of the vote. This race was considered one of the most critical across the country, and SuperPAC money flowed in.

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): In this San Diego race, Democrat Scott Peters (D) flipped another Republican seat to the Democrat House tally. Peters beat incumbent Brian Bilbray with 50.7 percent of the vote.

Assembly Races

• Ong v. Quirk (District 20): In this Alameda County Dem-on-Dem race, Bill Quirk squeaked out victory over Filipina-American Jennifer Ong with 50.3 percent of the vote. That’s a 93 vote margin of victory out of more than 133,000 cast.
• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In another Dem-on-Dem race where LA Weekly says all the rich, white, liberal people in Los Angeles live, Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom leads incumbent Betsy Butler with 50.1 percent of the votes. Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters is still counting ballots.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (newly drawn District 65): Republican Chris Norby conceded yesterday. Sharon Quirk-Silva (D) won with 51.6 percent of the vote in this Orange County race.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1: This race may have been the tightest of all. The transportation tax needed a two-thirds majority to win — that’s 66.67 percent. “Yes on B1″ earned 66.53 percent of the vote. That’s right — the “yes” vote lost by .14 percent of the vote. There you have it — every vote counts. If you’re wondering about recounts — the Alameda County Registrar of Voters says a party must wait until the vote is certified, request the recount within five days…  and pay for it themselves.

• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” was known as “sit/lie,” and “T” changed zoning in West Berkeley. Measure S was defeated by 52.3 to 47.7 percent. Measure T was turned back by 50.51 percent of the voters.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Norman Yee defeated F.X. Crowley by 131 votes.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Steve Danon conceded the race to Dave Roberts on Thursday.

Ami Bera (D) is holding onto a tight, but growing, lead against Dan Lungren (R) in this Congressional race. (Photos: Republican Conference and Randy Bayne via Flickr)

The vote counting continues on. Latest from the secretary of state’s office is there are still a whopping 1.9 million votes [PDF] left to count. Counties have until December 7 to report their final results. The secretary of state will certify the election by December 14.

In particular, we’re tracking the likely Democratic supermajority in the state legislature.

In the current Congress, the 112th, Democrats hold 34 of 53 House seats. In the new Congress, the 113th, Democrats have definitively picked up two seats, a sure total of 36 seats. There are two other races too-close-to-call, but it’s looking like Democrats will win. That would bring California’s Democratic Congressional delegation to 38 seats out of 53.

Here is an update on the races we’re following:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): Bera’s (D) lead over Lungren (R) continues to grow. He is now up by 3,824 votes, from 1,779 earlier in the week. (119,726 to 115,902). 

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): In this San Diego race, Peters (D) also continues to extend his lead over Bilbray (R). On Friday, Peters led by 814 votes, early this week, it was 1,899. Now he leads by 2,660 votes.

Assembly Races

• Ong v. Quirk (District 20): In this Alameda County Dem-on-Dem race, Filipina American Ong trails Quirk by 1,215 votes.
• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In this Dem-on-Dem race where all the rich, white, liberal people in Los Angeles live, Bloom’s lead has been see-sawing. Last Friday, he led by 218 votes, then it was down to 103 votes, and now it is back up to — remarkably — 218 votes.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (newly drawn District 65): Democrat Quirk-Silva is leading Republican Norby by 2,222 votes in this Orange County race.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1: This race is perhaps the tightest of all. The transportation tax needs 2/3 majority to win — that’s 66.67 percent. Right now, “yes on B1″ has 66.34 of the vote. That’s right — the “yes” vote trails by one-third of one percentage point. The counting continues. The Contra Costa Times is reporting that about 8,000 provisional ballots remain to be counted, and it will likely take through Friday to finish.
• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” is “sit/lie” and “T” changes zoning in West Berkeley. “Yes on T” has been up and then down. It currently trails by 467 votes. “Yes on S” is trailing by 2.113 votes.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. Yee has extended his lead to 1,387 votes.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Roberts also extended his lead over Danon to 2,688 votes.

Dan Lungren and Ami Bera are locked in a tighter than tight race. (Photos: Republican Conference and Randy Bayne via Flickr)

The number of too-close-to-call races is shrinking. Many counties continued to count votes over the holiday weekend. They have until December 7 to report their final results.The secretary of state will certify the election by December 14.

Of special note in these races is the make up of the California Congressional delegation. You’ve heard all about the Democratic supermajority in the state legislature.

At the national level, California Democrats have also gained ground. In the current Congress, the 112th, Democrats hold 34 of 53 House seats. In the new Congress, the 113th, Democrats have definitively picked up two seats, a sure total of 36 seats. There are two other races too-close-to-call, but it’s looking like Democrats will win. That would bring California’s Democratic Congressional delegation to 38 seats out of 53.

Here is an update on the races we’ve been following:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): This race was not updated over the weekend. Bera (D) leads Lungren (R) by 1,779 votes. (105,245 to 103,466)

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): Peters (D) has extended his lead over Bilbray (R) in this San Diego race. On Friday, Peters led by 814 votes; now he’s up by 1,899.
• Ruiz v. Bono Mack (36th Congressional District): ICYMI: Bono Mack conceded this race last Friday.

Assembly Races

• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In this Dem-on-Dem race in Los Angeles County, Bloom has seen his narrow lead over Butler shrink from 218 votes on Friday to 103 votes early this morning.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (District 65): Democrat Quirk-Silva was leading Republican Norby by 607 votes on Friday. Official reports early this morning show Quirk-Silva now up by 2,222 votes.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1: The transportation tax is trailing by more than 4,000 votes. The Oakland Tribune reports the county counted 93,000 ballots — nearly all precinct and mail ballots — over the weekend. B1 has gained 65.79 percent of the vote; it needs two-thirds to pass. Thousands of provisional ballots have yet to be counted, but 4,200 votes is a lot of ground to make up.
• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” is “sit/lie” and “T” changes zoning in West Berkeley. “Yes on T” had been picking up votes until Friday. But official reports last night show it behind by 472 votes. “Yes on S” is trailing by 1,417 votes.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. Yee has extended his lead from 1,156 to 1,315 votes, as reported late yesterday afternoon.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Roberts also extended his lead over Danon from 1,898 votes to 2,641 votes.

San Francisco State University history lecturer Steve Leikin, left, talks with a student at a university election rally in October. Leikin was working with the campaign against Proposition 32. Photo by Ian Hill/KQED.

Leading California pollsters are raising questions about the accuracy of the Edison Research exit poll (viewable on the CNN website) in terms of how big a share young voters — and non-white voters — comprised of all those casting ballots in California in last Tuesday’s election.

What’s not in dispute: Young voters and “ethnic voters” (which is to say Latinos, Asian-Americans and African-Americans) played an influential role in California’s big Democratic turnout… helping to pass Proposition 30, Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax hike measure, and giving President Obama a 21 percentage point edge in the already-blue state.

As we reported last week, Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo cast doubt on the share of last Tuesday’s voters who were under 30. The Edison exit poll put 18-29 year olds at 27 percent of Californians who voted in this election. But 18-29 year olds make up just 16 percent of all registered voters in the state, said DiCamillo. And in 2008 exit polling showed this age group was 20 percent of California voters.

“I certainly believe that the story line of this elections the power of ethnic voters, and that younger voters turned out in high numbers,” DiCamillo said. “It has to do with the governor [specifically Gov. Brown's campaign for Prop. 30] and online registration [which went into effect in September and has so far been used mostly by young Californians]…. But I can’t believe the 27 percent. That’s a huge number. To move the needle one full percentage point is a big thing, to move it seven or eight points is beyond credibility.”

And the incredulity extends to the Edison exit poll’s reported share of voters who are not white.

• DiCamillo and others note that of all the registered voters in California, 5.5 percent are black, and they typically turn out roughly in their population proportion. But according to the exit poll, they are 8 percent of Tuesday’s voters.
• Asian Americans make up an estimated 10 percent of the state’s registered voters. The exit poll put their share of the turnout at 11 percent.
• And Latinos are 23 percent of registered voters in California. are Latino. The exit poll showed them making up 22 percent of Californians who voted this election. But Latinos are younger and are less likely to have gone to college, on average, than the overall population, while older, better educated people historically vote at higher rates. “So even with good turnout, I would expect they would be a couple of points below their total registration,” observed Di Camillo.

Other political observers concur that the exit poll may not have gotten a perfectly accurate picture of who voted in California. “Because of early voting, exit polls no longer quantify the electorate accurately,” said Democratic pollster Ben Tulchin. “I would use exit polling for how people voted, not quantifying what the electorate looks like.”

Sacramento blogger Scott Lay has come up with his own “blending” of pre-election Field Poll turnout predictions and Edison exit polling to estimate actual turnout as somewhere in between the two.

Over the next couple of months, pollsters, scholars and political analysts will be digging in deeper: looking at turnout information from the Census Bureau’s November Current Population Survey, as well as the number crunching of private campaign consulting firms such as Political Data Inc. — to get a more accurate sense of the shape of the electorate: who turned out and in what proportion.

In the absence of precise figures, plain old political common sense prevailed.

“It was a very good night for Democrats,” said Mark Baldassare, president and chief pollster at the Public Policy Institute of California. “It just suggests to me that you must have had this high turnout of Latinos and younger voters, and a very poor showing among Republicans.”

“How did California Democrats win a supermajority in the legislature?” Tulchin asked. “The Obama coalition of young voters, Latinos, Asian Americans, African Americans, and throw in some white liberals: It gave Obama a big margin. His win exceeded what polling showed would happen. It’s the same with Prop. 30…. And in California, a young voter is overwhelmingly Latino or Asian.”

UC Irvine Political Science Professor Louis DeSipio wondered why the turnout of young people in the state did appear to get a substantial boost, while in the country as a whole it did not.

“Was there something unique in California?” asked De Sipio. “There’s no particular reason that the presidential race would mobilize more young people in a noncompetitive state like California. Maybe people turned out for some tight Congressional races, but the unique issue in California was the mobilization around Prop. 30. One big effect [if the measure failed] was to diminish funding for community colleges, the UCs and the CSUs. There was a message coming from college administrations and unions organizing, and young people felt it.”

DiCamillo was startled to see that white voters in California dropped to just 55 percent of all who voted, according to the Edison exit poll. “I’ve never seen an election in California below 60 percent white,” he said. “It jumps out at me. Wow. I don’t think we’re that far down the road yet. I think it’s coming, but I don’t think we’re there yet.”

Whether young people and non-white voters exceeded turnout expectations in California this year, the Golden State is pointing the direction for where the rest of the country is headed, observers say.

And Di Camillo gets the last word: “The main message of this election is that the ethnic vote really powered the Obama victory in California, it really powered the Prop 30 vote on the yes side. And the same thing goes with the youth vote. It was the youth vote that turned out in force that probably made the difference on Prop. 30.”

Dan Lungren and Ami Bera are locked in a tighter than tight race. (Photos: Republican Conference and Randy Bayne via Flickr)

Sit down and take a deep breath. The updated Secretary of State’s numbers show more than three million votes left to count.

If you’ve been following the handful of too-close-to-call races across the state, you’ll likely be waiting for a few days.

Counties have until December 7 to report their final results.The secretary of state will certify the election by December 14.

Here are the races still too close to call:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): Bera’s (D) lead is slim, but keeps edging up. Yesterday, he led Lungren (R) by 182 votes. Today, with an additional 40,000 votes counted, he’s up by 1,779. (105,245 to 103,466)

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): Peters (D) leads Bilbray (R) by 814 votes in this San Diego race.
• Ruiz v. Bono Mack (36th Congressional District): Ruiz (D) leads by 4,679, and local media in the Inland Empire have called the race for him. But Bono Mack (R) has yet to concede. UPDATE: Bono Mack conceded the race on Friday.

Assembly Races

• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In this Dem-on-Dem race in Los Angeles County, Bloom leads Butler by 218 votes.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (District 65): Democrat Quirk-Silva is leading Republican Norby by 607 votes.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1 (Transportation): About one percentage point shy of the two-thirds needed for passage, with roughly 100,000 mail/provisional ballots still to count. Could be “several days” before we know the results, the Alameda County Registrar of Voters told the Chronicle.
• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” is “sit/lie” and “T” changes zoning in West Berkeley. “Yes on T” has slowly been gaining ground since election night and now leads by five votes (four more votes since yesterday). “Yes on S” is trailing by two percentage points, but has also been gaining since election night. The counting continues.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. Counting votes could take until next week. Yee leads Crowley 1,156.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Roberts leads Danon by 1,898 votes.

Other too-close-to-call races or measures we should know about? Tell us in the comments section!

The American Beverage Association spent $2.5 million fighting the soda tax initiatives in Richmond and El Monte. (Kristin Farr/KQED)

In Tuesday’s election, Richmond voters may have flatly rejected a move to make sodas more expensive, but it seems Richmond city councilman Jeff Ritterman isn’t ready to end his campaign to tax sugary drinks.

“I’m thinking we should do ‘14 in ’14’ — try 14 cities in 2014,” Ritterman said on election night, even as early returns foreshadowed the tax measure’s failure. “Let’s make [the soda industry] fight it in 14 cities.”

That didn’t sound like an idea completely off the top of his head, so I called California Center for Public Health Advocacy and talked to Harold Goldstein. He is a passionate advocate about the health risks of sugar sweetened beverages. His agency is advising cities interested in implementing sugar-sweetened beverage taxes and sponsored two attempts at a statewide tax.

Goldstein wouldn’t say how many cities he’s working with now — only that in the next few years, “we’ll see a lot more of them.” He said municipalities haven’t been spooked by crushing soda tax defeats in Richmond and El Monte. More than 66 percent of voters in both cities had rejected the penny-per-ounce tax on businesses selling sugary drinks, a cost businesses had been expected to pass on to consumers.

“The first time tobacco taxes were proposed, they lost by large margins, too,” Goldstein said. “The beverage industry is running scared for them to put this kind of money against local measures. They can tell the tide is turning.”

The Washington, D.C.-based American Beverage Association, which represents the likes of Coca Cola and Pepsi Co., poured more than $2.5 million into Richmond and more than $1.3 million into El Monte to defeat the measures. Storefronts and billboards were covered with anti-tax messages.

“They drowned out the voices of local residents who saw these initiatives as a strategy to address childhood obesity and diabetes rates,” Goldstein said.

But Chuck Finnie, spokesman for the beverage industry’s campaign against the Richmond tax, said the money had nothing to do with the measure’s defeat.

“Pointing to the money is really suggesting that people in Richmond can’t think for themselves,” Finnie said Tuesday amid a cheering group of ‘No on N’ supporters. “Voters knew this was going to raise their grocery bills and hurt small businesses while doing nothing to advance the cause of public health.”

Richmond’s soda tax was estimated to bring in more than $2 million. Ironically, a companion measure on the ballot advised city officials to spend that money on youth sports and nutrition programs, and it passed with nearly 64 percent of the vote.

In this 2008 photo, workers sort California mail in ballots. (Justin Sullivan: Getty Images)

With estimates that for the first time vote-by-mail will exceed in-person voting in California, county voting officials are presumably working hard to get all votes counted. Counties are required to report their final results by December 7, and the secretary of state will certify the election by December 14.

In the meantime well over a million mail and provisional ballots are still being counted statewide.

Here are the races still too close to call:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): The political newsletter The Nooner reports that Bera is ahead by 182 votes with 193,000 uncounted ballots. Next update is Friday, 3pm.
• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): Only a few hundred votes separate the San Diego candidates.
• Ruiz v. Bono Mack (36th Congressional District): Ruiz is ahead, and local media have called the race for him. But Bono Mack has yet to concede.

Assembly Races

• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In Los Angeles County, only a few hundred votes separate the two.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (District 65): Several hundred votes separate the candidates in Orange County.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1 (Transportation): About one percentage point shy of the two-thirds needed for passage, with roughly 100,000 mail/provisional ballots still to count. Could be “several days” before we know the results, the Alameda County Registrar of Voters told the Chronicle.
• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” is “sit/lie” and “T” changes zoning in West Berkeley. The most-recent numbers show yes on T trailing by only 26 votes. S is not quite as close. UPDATE, 7am, Friday, November 9: “Yes on T” has pulled ahead by one vote. The counting continues.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District Seven. Counting votes could take until next week.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors

Other too-close-to-call races or measures we should know about? Tell us in the comments section!

Dan Lungren and Ami Bera are locked in a tighter than tight race. (Photos: Republican Conference and Randy Bayne via Flickr)

Democrat Ami Bera is currently up by 184 votes over incumbent Republican Dan Lungren in the District 7 House Race. And while the outcome of that particular contest is not going to determine control of Congress or anything; and while you are, also, not exactly in the habit of ascribing actual human emotions to people running for office…

If you put yourself in the place of the two candidates beyond the remembrance of their depictions in campaign ads that interrupted “Here Comes Honey Boo,” you may eventually get to a place where you realize how, for the contestants, such a close race must really suck.

Here’s Scott Shafer’s interview with Steve Westly about what it was like emotionally to get snagged on this type of nailbiting vote count, and what the candidates who do face from a logistical standpoint.

“You’ve been running with every bit of energy you have for two years nonstop and you finally get to election day and your whole psyche is based on are you going to win or not, and then you realize you’re in a close race, and you watch into the wee hours of the morning. And in my case, they literally, county by county, dismissed the vote counters at midnight or one and they still had votes to count and it was still a tie. So you’re stuck… It dragged on for I believe 21 days, and it is a little nervewracking…”

Scott Shafer interviews Steve Westly:

Molly Munger donated $44.1 million to pass Proposition 38, a measure to raise taxes for public education. The initiative failed.

Multimillionaire activists, big labor unions and major corporations combined to pump more than $363 million into political fights over 11 propositions on Tuesday’s state ballot, a California Watch analysis shows.

Prop. 38 backer Molly Munger. (neontommy/flickr)

That’s about $20 in political spending for each of California’s 18.2 million registered voters.By law, state ballot initiatives are exempt from the tough donation limits that otherwise apply in California elections.

In contests over proposed tax increases, car insurance rates, criminal justice reforms and political spending by labor unions, donors with deep pockets took full advantage.

Forty-seven donors – individuals, companies and political committees – donated more than $1 million apiece on initiative campaigns, a review of campaign finance data provided by MapLight.org shows.

Seven donors each gave $11 million or more.

The unprecedented spending spree was a sign of just how far the 101-year-old California initiative process has strayed from its origins. In the beginning, initiatives were a Progressive-era reform devised to allow ordinary citizens to sidestep a legislative process controlled by monied special interests.

This year, combined spending over the two most hotly contested ballot measures – Gov. Jerry Brown’s Proposition 30, which sought a tax increase to fund public education, and Proposition 32, a conservative attempt to bar unions from making political donations – topped $195 million, with special interest donors paying much of the freight.

Here, from campaign finance data, are some winners and losers in California’s initiative battles:

The Winners

Big labor

The state’s unions went all in for their successful effort to stop Prop. 32, the anti-union measure pushed by the Lincoln Club of Orange County and other conservative groups. Unions spent more than $60 million to block it. Much of the union money went to committees also pushing Prop. 30, the successful Brown tax measure. In addition to the California Teachers Association ($32.5 million), big donations came from the Service Employees International Union ($21.6 million) and the California Labor Federation ($6 million).

A Facebook tycoon

Chris Kelly, former chief privacy officer of Facebook and an unsuccessful candidate for state attorney general in 2010, gave $2.3 million to Proposition 35, which would toughen prison sentences for human trafficking. Kelly’s donation was more than 60 percent of the measure’s total budget. It had no formal opposition and won easily.

Agroscience

Proposition 37 would have required special labels on genetically engineered food. The unsuccessful measure, pushed by the organic food industry, drew multimillion-dollar opposition from Monsanto Co. ($8.1 million) and DuPont ($5.4 million), in addition to Bayer CropScience, BASF Plant Science and Dow AgroSciences ($2 million apiece).

The police lobby

The Peace Officers Research Association of California was on the winning side of four measures Tuesday and had only one loss. The association spent $192,000 to oppose the repeal of the death penalty, Proposition 34. Proponents countered with about $8 million, but the measure failed. The group also put $1.5 million into opposing the anti-union Prop. 32, which lost; more than $150,000 to back Prop. 35, the human trafficking measure, which won; and $150,000 to support Prop. 30, Brown’s successful tax measure. The cops’ only bad bet: $100,000 to oppose Proposition 36, the measure to reform California’s three strikes law, which was enacted.

The Losers

The Mungers: The adult children of billionaire Charlie Munger, vice chairman of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, emerged as California’s biggest donors – and losers – of all.

Molly Munger, a Los Angeles lawyer and liberal crusader, donated $44.1 million to her Proposition 38, to raise taxes for public education. The measure lost, while Prop. 30, Brown’s competing tax measure, was enacted.

Meanwhile, Charles Munger Jr., a Stanford physics professor, donated about $36 million, most of it to defeat Brown’s Prop. 30 tax increase and to boost Prop. 32, which sought to bar labor unions from making political donations. Prop. 32 also lost.

By way of contrast, each of the Mungers outspent one of California’s best-funded political operations, the California Teachers Association. It donated $32.5 million to support Brown’s Prop. 30 and defeat Prop. 32.

Out-of-state corporations

Thomas F. Steyer, a liberal activist and managing partner of San Francisco’s Farallon Capital Management, was a big winner with his Proposition 39, the measure to collect more income taxes from multistate corporations that do business in California. Steyer donated $29.5 million of the measure’s $31.4 million budget. General Motors, Kimberly-Clark and International Paper put up $45,000 before opposition to the measure collapsed. The state will collect an estimated $1 billion more in taxes as a result.

An insurance billionaire

Mercury Insurance founder George Joseph spent more than $16 million on Proposition 33, his latest attempt to reframe the state’s auto insurance laws to allow discounts for motorists changing insurance carriers. Opponents, including the Consumer Watchdog Campaign, said the measure would weaken consumer protections in present insurance law. Opponents spent only about $276,000 on their successful campaign.

Americans for Responsible Leadership

The Arizona political committee donated $11 million to boost the failed anti-union Prop. 32 and to oppose the governor’s successful tax measure, but those might not be the only losses for the group amid allegations that it illegally laundered the money to conceal its source.

Now, investigators are probing how the campaign cash moved to California from a Virginia-based nonprofit, Americans for Job Security, via a third political committee, the Center to Protect Patient Rights. An official with that committee, Sean Noble, is a Republican strategist with reported ties to Charles and David Koch, Kansas-based GOP megadonors.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris has vowed to continue investigating the affair.

Lance Williams is a senior investigative reporter focusing on money and politics for California Watch and the Center for Investigative Reporting.

Getty Images

(AP and KQED) The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging California’s new voter-approved law to boost penalties for those convicted of human trafficking and increased monitoring of sex offenders.

Voters approved Proposition 35 on Tuesday with 81 percent of the vote.

In its lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, the ACLU and the EFF argue that a provision of the measure restricts the First Amendment rights of registered sex offenders.

The initiative requires all registered sex offenders in California to provide the police with their email addresses, user names and Internet service providers.

ACLU attorney Michael Risher says the measure violates free speech and due process rights of sex offenders.

For example, Risher said, “73,000 Californians [the number of registered sex offenders in California] would have to, before they create a screen name to comment on an article that they read in the paper… inform the police within 24 hours they’d created that new screen name or face arrest or possible prosecution.”

The groups also argue that provision sets a dangerous precedent.

Proposition 35′s author, former Facebook executive Chris Kelly, calls the lawsuit an attack on the very idea of sex offender registration,

A hearing on the lawsuit is set for later this month.