District Attorney Summer Stephan has put nearly $13,000 into television ads.
  • District Attorney Summer Stephan has put nearly $13,000 into television ads.
  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

As next month’s primary election grows near, it’s open season for political advertising at San Diego television stations. Early off the blocks has been Sheriff Bill Gore with a $9100 purchase of 47 spots from April 23 through May 6 on KGTV Channel 10, according to federal disclosure records. Fellow Republican Summer Stephan, the county’s appointed district attorney, has so far spent $12,875 for 62 KGTV spots over the same period. The pair is using the same media buyer, Chicago-based Kelly Scott & Madison, which comes as no surprise to insiders since Stephan and Gore also share the same local consultant, Jason Roe, a longtime confidant of Mayor Kevin Faulconer.

Grandpa’s got deep pockets. Irwin Jacobs has given a quarter million to a super-PAC backing his grandadaughter Sara Jacobs for Congress.

The single biggest splash has been made by 84-year-old billionaire Qualcomm co-founder Irwin Jacobs, who on February 7 gave $250,000 to Women Vote!, a super-PAC that is backing his granddaughter, Democrat Sara Jacobs, 29, to replace departing Republican congressman Darrell Issa. Women Vote’s pro-Jacobs spots, featuring a shot of her with Barack Obama, among other D.C. photo ops, are all over the dial, with $123,810 spent by the the political action committee at KGTV. At Channel 8 KFMB-TV, Jacobs is spending her own money, using her political committee to which she has so far given $1.07 million, to buy 237 spots for $112,800.

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Comments

Ponzi May 2, 2018 @ 11:09 a.m.

"...Jacobs is spending her own money, using her political committee to which she has so far given $1.07 million, to buy 237 spots for $112,800..."

Did she earn that million dollars working as an intern in the beltway? She is not spending her own money, she is spending grandpas money.

Do any Jacobs work or serve on the Qualcomm board anymore? No. I think they are all just shareholders now because the other shareholders discharged the poor management. There is a reason they were kicked out of their own company and there is a reason there won't be any Jacobs in politics either.

3

Visduh May 2, 2018 @ 4:17 p.m.

Ponz, we can only hope that you are right when you say she won't be in politics for long. With that kind of money to spend on a House primary race, she just might pull enough votes to make it into the general election. There are no certainties in this one, with all that money being spent on just one candidate.

2

swell May 2, 2018 @ 11:52 a.m.

Ah yes. Giving my television away ten years ago has been a blessing. No petty politics, no commercials, no bull. Now I select my news online and my web browser removes the ads, pop-ups and animated annoyances. The news I want, when I want it.

Have a look at http://www.lead-story.com/ . You can create a customized array of your favorite sources, including the Reader. My choices include ProPublica, BBC, PBS, NYT, LAT, Slashdot, Democracy Now, Ars Technica, and others. Most recent headlines at a glance, instant access to the full story.

0

monaghan May 2, 2018 @ 1:58 p.m.

While awaiting response of Jacobs-enamored DWBAT here, I am amazed and grateful to SWELL for sanity-saving tips on customized news gathering. Accuracy of that Jacobs granddaughter's ubiquitous TV ads should be fact-checked for truthiness, just as gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom's gun-control boasting was labeled false yesterday. Just because Trump plays fast and loose with the truth, it doesn't mean every wannabe politician should follow suit..

2

sdraoul May 2, 2018 @ 3:28 p.m.

Giving a TV away is as ridiculous as Grandpa spending millions to elect an unqualified intern to Congress. Selective TV watching along with a proper mix of Internet sources raise the level of knowledge that was so missing in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania in November 2016.

0

AlexClarke May 3, 2018 @ 6:52 a.m.

Follow the money and you will see who owns and operates the politician.

1

clash84 May 4, 2018 @ 6:44 a.m.

sdraoul, please be sure to forward this bombshell information to Robert Mueller so he can stop pissing away all of that taxpayer money investigating his conspiracy of the week. It seems nobody informed him that Hillary lost the election due to poor selection of television shows by voters in three states!

On another note, I sit here pondering how humans gained knowledge prior to the advent of television and the internet. Hmmm....

1

evanhoneywell May 4, 2018 @ 8:14 a.m.

This is a family that has made enormous contributions to the field of science and technology. They contributed buildings to the University of California, San Diego and have trained some of the most up-and-coming minds in the field of engineering. They didn't build an empire through the buying and selling of property - they have made our society better. Money plays a role in politics and I don't disagree with the people making the arguments - but what matters is how it was earned. Sara Jacobs is nothing like the billionaire heiresses we see on TV flaunting their money and wealth. She is genuine and wants to improve our society by inspiring youth and women.

1

dwbat May 4, 2018 @ 10:36 a.m.

Thank you for that comment. The people blasting the Jacobs family have probably not accomplished even 10% of their contributions to San Diego, science/technology, arts & culture, and our economy. And without knowing her personally at all, I'm confident that Sara Jacobs would make an outstanding member of Congress.

0

Visduh May 4, 2018 @ 2:25 p.m.

Up until eight or ten years ago, I'd have tended to agree with you about the Jacobs family. Back then the donated money went to cultural or educational institutions, and little seemed to be expected in return. Since then, the Jacobs family name has been plastered on many, many buildings, schools, and hospital facilities. A disinterested observer, such as I once was, would be obliged to conclude that ol' Irwin and wife and sons are on a huge ego trip. But it's worse in that they have moved into politics, attempting with not much success yet to get family favorites elected. There was the attempt, which is still ongoing, to have Balboa Park remodeled in ways that are not at all well-received by many local residents. Under the "leadership" of Irwin and later Paul, Qualcomm became a big user (translate: abuser) of the H-1B program that brings foreigners into the US as employees. It should never be forgotten that just about every one of those people is taking a job away from a qualified US citizen. Qualcomm has outsourced plenty of its work to other countries. In short, the Jacobs family and Qualcomm are not good citizens. Sara may be a fine young woman, but she's not qualified to be a House member. Granddad's money should not be allowed to buy her a congressional seat.

3

Cassander May 4, 2018 @ 2:30 p.m.

Unbelievable. Can't those in favor of Sara Jacobs realize their support is no different from the celebrity worship that brought us Trump? The belief that proximity to fame and fortune is an adequate substitute for political experience and prior performance is pernicious to representative government.

But by all means, let's let darling Sara vault into the U.S. Congress based solely on the accident of her birth. I'm sure the 29-year-old intern will eventually get all the on-the-job experience she needs after a couple of terms to finally be qualified for office by 2022. And really, don't the constituents of the 49th owe it to her?

2

monaghan May 4, 2018 @ 3:45 p.m.

Thanks for describing what's-wrong-with-this-picture, Cassander. Some here seem to believe in political quid pro quos. The electorate, grateful for a billionaire's civic philanthropy (along with re-naming every institution touched by his largesse,) should vote his heretofore unknown 29-year old granddaughter into the United States Congress. No! Wrong! Don't do it!

But why not? Because it could shred the success of highly-qualified Democratic candidate Col. Doug Applegate, a strong Democratic contender running in a crowded field for what is now an open seat. Applegate's courageous run and near-win in 2016 against powerful incumbent Rep. Darrell Issa actually caused the GOP Congressman to resign from office.

2

dwbat May 4, 2018 @ 3:48 p.m.

No, actually it is NOT. Sara Jacobs is NOT a celebrity, and her ability isn't based on having wealthy parents. She is bright, dedicated and willing to put in the work if she is elected. I've seen way too many members of Congress (from both parties) who had prior "experience" and turned out to be awful once they got into office. So your argument is spurious. Try again.

0

Cassander May 4, 2018 @ 4:22 p.m.

Your "arguments" are always a master class in fatuousness.

How we miss the days when you wrote your own articles, rather than clog the comments section of others' stories.

1

dwbat May 4, 2018 @ 5:34 p.m.

You are not required to read the comments that anyone makes here.

0

Cassander May 4, 2018 @ 5:53 p.m.

Nor are you required to failingly retort and gainsay what I write. Safe to say we'd both prefer if you didn't read mine.

1

dwbat May 5, 2018 @ 11:10 a.m.

I will challenge anyone here who substitutes angry, opinionated screed for facts.

0

Cassander May 5, 2018 @ 11:28 a.m.

...With all the bias and ignorance you can muster.

Interesting how anyone who disagrees with you is always illogical and benighted. Yet you never provide any objective facts or links to evidence to support your "opinions," simply your say-so; and just repeat what you've written over and over again in the belief that wearing others out makes you "right."

In a nutshell, you are incapable of engaging with others here without adolescent snark or personal attacks. It would be deserving of our pity, were it not marked by such monstrous self-regard.

1

dwbat May 5, 2018 @ 2:40 p.m.

OK, here's something the anti-Jacobs gadflies can understand, in the facts vs. opinions dept. Several have said Sara Jacobs is "unqualifed." That's a rude opinion, and nothing more. It is NOT factual. Here are the facts; you might check your copy of the Constitution. It's an interesting read. "No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen." There's nothing about "inexperienced," "is an intern," "didn't go to law school," "isn't ready," "too young," ad nauseam.

0

AlexClarke May 6, 2018 @ 6:58 a.m.

Amen. Maybe a fresh female face is just what the Congress needs. For too long we, the American public, has suffered under the leadership of the good ole' boys.

1

dwbat May 8, 2018 @ 5:59 p.m.

I don't live in that district, so can't vote for Jacobs. But I sent a contribution.

0

danfogel May 6, 2018 @ 9:08 a.m.

Even though I don't have a horse in this race, I will still interject a thought. I thinks it is a fair assessment to say that she meets the qualifications to run for office. However, I also think that it is fair to say that just because someone meets the qualifications for a particular position does not necessarily mean that he or she is qualified for that position.

Just my opinion.

Opinions vary.

2

dwbat May 8, 2018 @ 9:30 p.m.

dan, that sounds like skewed semantics to me. ;-) "meets the qualifications" and "qualified" appear to me to be synonymous terms. But yes, opinions DO vary.

0

danfogel May 9, 2018 @ 8:31 a.m.

I meet all of the Constitutionally required "qualifications" to be President of the United States. You probably do as well. Does that mean either of us are qualified to hold the office?? I think not.

Just my opinion.

Opinions vary.

0

dwbat May 10, 2018 @ 7:26 a.m.

Either of us would be MUCH more qualified than Trump.

0

Wabbitsd May 8, 2018 @ 12:25 p.m.

How bout she puts in some work NOW and builds on that to get elected?

0

Sign in to comment

Get $5 off any Reader event

Sign up for our email list to get your promo code

Close