Liccardo continues to lead Low in fundraising in the race to replace U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo

Former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo continues to dominate the fundraising game in the race to replace retiring U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, raking in more than twice as much as Assemblymember Evan Low in the last few months.

Liccardo and Low are vying for the Congressional District 16 seat this November following a contentious recount in the March primary where Low was originally tied for second with Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian. The district includes parts of Santa Clara and San Mateo counties and spans from Pacifica in the north to Los Gatos in the south.

Liccardo, who came in first in the primary, has been the top fundraiser since the race began late last year, amassing $4.3 million over the course of his campaign, compared to Low’s $2.4 million, new election filings show.

In the latest fundraising period, April 1 to June 30, Liccardo raised $1.6 million — more than double the roughly $751,000 Low raised. The assemblymember also gave his campaign a loan of $13,661 during the same period.

With less than four months until Election Day, Liccardo has $1.9 million in his war chest, while Low has $846,497.

Larry Gerston, a professor emeritus of political science at San Jose State University, said Low has “his work cut out for him” to catch up with fundraising.

At the same time, he pointed out Low still has plenty of time to do that — and money isn’t the deciding factor of who will win in November.

“We tend to be fixed on money as a guide for electoral success,” Gerston said. “Yes, it’s much better to have money than not, but there are so many instances out there where the person with less money manages to win the election because of grassroots campaigning or voters attitudes towards one or both candidates.”

Gil Rubinstein, a spokesperson for Liccardo’s campaign, said in a statement that “Sam’s strong support from the people of this district is a testament to his record as an effective leader and to our community’s demands for Congress to get moving.”

“In contrast, Evan Low does what all establishment, insider-funded candidates do: fundraising in Washington DC, Sacramento and LA, because he cannot generate meaningful support from the people he’s represented for a decade,” he added.

Lindsey Cobia, a spokesperson for Low’s campaign, said they “are immensely proud” of the campaign for its fundraising efforts “amidst a costly recount process that was funded by Sam Liccardo’s out-of-state friends to squeeze our campaign out of the financial resources necessary to win this race.”

“While Liccardo’s rich friends tried to knock us out of the race, Evan spent time in the district talking to constituents and raising money to pay our campaign’s legal bills and get us to a strong start towards the general election,” she said.

The latest filings with the Federal Election Commission shine a light on how each of the candidates fared during the nearly three-week recount, which was requested by Jonathan Padilla, a former Liccardo mayoral campaign staffer.

Low’s campaign spent $168,369 on the recount, with $144,160 of that going to the law firm that represented him, Elias Law Group. His attorneys were most notably behind a letter that was sent to the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters trying to halt the recount before it even started. Low’s campaign still owes $77,442 to Elias Law Group, according to the debts and obligations section of the latest election filings.

Though Liccardo was not at at risk of being knocked off the November ballot, he also spent money on the recount: $34,042 with $32,217 of that for lawyers with the Kaufman Legal Group. The former mayor still owes his attorneys an additional $36,160. Rubinstein said the lawyers monitored the recount.