Getty Images

Gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman

As voters head to the polls Tuesday – or, for the most part, stay away – the lasting message of this desultory primary season seems to be this: A shot at the governor’s mansion costs roughly $100 million. The price of securing an energy monopoly is $46 million. And a chance to win a Senate seat comes relatively cheap: $5.5 million.

The influential role of money in politics is obviously not a new discovery, but the naked spending by billionaires and interest groups to win votes in this election has been especially glaring, set against the backdrop of a $20 billion budget deficit that has left the entire state reeling.

By the time the first vote is cast Tuesday, the candidates and interest groups will have spent more than $225 million. The sad irony – candidates spending millions while, at the same time, calling for fiscal responsibility – has subjected the state to a carpet-bombing of negative advertising while offering little insight into how we will get out of this mess.

“Has any of these candidates told the California voter what has to be done to balance the budget?” asked John Ellwood, a political science professor at UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy. “Nobody’s talking about it.”

Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman is the likely winner of the GOP nomination for governor. She’s spent nearly $100 million, more than half of it on radio and television ads that have saturated the Bay Area and Southern California. Whitman has vowed to cut taxes and slash state spending while also investing in education. She has said little about the Los Angeles Unified School District’s $640 million deficit, the second largest in the nation.

To an unprecedented degree, nearly every race Tuesday has been defined – and perhaps decided – by money.

The Democratic frontrunner for governor, Attorney General Jerry Brown, amassed a war chest of more than $20 million, driving the out-gunned Gavin Newsom out of the race, into a run for lieutenant governor. Brown is now gearing up for a battle against Whitman in the general election. But he has yet to offer a detailed plan to relieve the pain of the 11 California cities with unemployment rates of 15 percent or more.

Of course, there is a reason for this: the strategy works.

“Nobody’s out there saying, ‘Let me tell you about the school teachers we’re going to fire,’ or, ‘Let me tell you about the taxes we’re going to raise,’” Ellwood said. “If they told you the truth, you’re not going to vote for them.”

And it’s not just the candidates: special interests and corporations have used the political process to try to buy themselves greater control over consumers.

Mercury General, the insurance giant, has spent $16 million in support of Proposition 17, a measure that would offer financial incentives to drivers who switch their coverage to the insurance company. At the same time, the law would allow Mercury and other insurers to impose surcharges, which have been illegal under a previous measure, Prop. 103, for two decades.

And in an attempt to purchase what is essentially a statewide energy monopoly for private companies, including and especially itself, Pacific Gas & Electric Company has contributed $46 million in support of Proposition 16. The law, singlehandedly funded by PG&E, would require two-thirds voter approval for cities and counties to set up a public electricity option to compete with a company like PG&E.

The opposition has raised $80,000.

The following is a look at the races to watch Tuesday:

Governor

Whitman is the frontrunner on the GOP side, polling more than 20 points ahead of her rival, state Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner.

Whitman, a 53-year-old billionaire, has shelled out more than $80 million on the campaign. She has said she will spend $150 million to win the election. Poizner has spent about $24 million. Spending heavily early on, Whitman once led Poizner by as much as 50 points in some polls. After a series of attack ads from Poizner criticized her stance on immigration and her ties to investment firm Goldman Sachs, Whitman has tried to brand herself as a Republican’s Republican – far to the right of where she started her campaign. Although Poizner cut the spread to single digits, Whitman has since opened up a comfortable lead.

The Democratic side has been quiet, mostly because Brown is a lock. Looking toward November, Whitman is expected to move back to the center against Brown, a former governor with a shifting political persona. Brown will have to use all of his funds – more than $20 million at last count – to fight Whitman’s aggressive ad machine. The most salient issues for this campaign, and what the public and the media have not yet heard much about, are the economy and joblessness.

U.S. Senate

As in the case of the governor’s race, most of the action is on the GOP side, with former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina the frontrunner. Fiorina trailed businessman Tom Campbell in earlier polls and now leads him by 15 points, according to a recent poll. State Assemblyman Chuck DeVore trails Campbell and is a long-shot third GOP candidate.

Campbell has run out of money and can no longer afford to fight Fiorina, who has spent $5.5 million of her own money on the campaign so far, running political attack ads on television. Fiorina has already moved on to attack the incumbent, three-term Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, in television ads.

Fiorina will likely win the nomination, but polls show that Campbell would be the stronger candidate in the November general election against Boxer. Campbell is more toward the center, and more likely to take the Democratic vote away from Boxer. Boxer, who often polls poorly early on, is most concerned with bringing out the vote.

Lieutenant Governor

This largely ceremonial position has led to a contentious battle on the Democratic side between San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn.

Newsom was criticized by Hahn’s camp for dropping out of the governor’s race in the fall before filing for lieutenant governor. Hahn argued that the $3.4 million Newsom raised in the gubernatorial race should count toward the $5.2 million spending limit in the governor’s race. In the end, Newsom was still able to raise more than $1 million for his new campaign—more than twice the amount Hahn has raised.

Newsom leads Hahn by more than 20 percent, according to one recent poll. He is recognized by more than 70 percent of his party’s primary voters. Hahn is recognized by just 30 percent.

Should Newsom win in the November election, he will of course no longer be mayor of San Francisco. Who San Francisco Board of Supervisors would choose as Newsom’s replacement remains unclear, in what may be one of the most intriguing political battles in the city in recent memory. State Senator Leland Yee and board president David Chiu are likely candidates.

On the GOP side of the race, incumbent Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado leads in most polls. Maldonado, considered a moderate, would face a difficult battle to beat the popular Newsom in an election year when incumbents are not expected to fare well.

Attorney General

San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris and former Facebook executive Chris Kelly have battled bitterly for the Democratic nomination for the state’s top cop job.

Kelly’s camp has slammed Harris for her involvement in the San Francisco drug lab scandal. Her office has been accused of withholding information about police and prosecutors from defendants, a violation of law. Harris is still under fire for her work as D.A., and has fought back against accusations made against her in the press. She has criticized Kelly’s role in Facebook’s controversial privacy policies, and accusing him of illegal campaign financing.

Kelly, who like Whitman and Fiorina made his money in the corporate world, has spent $12 million of his own cash on the race so far.

On the GOP side, State Senator Tom Harman leads Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley in the most recent polls.

Incumbent Jerry Brown is not seeking re-election, instead bidding for the governor’s office.

Prop. 16

This PG&E-backed ballot measure would require a two-thirds majority voter approval for cities and counties to establish a public electricity option to compete with private companies like PG&E. The measure has been widely trashed as a brazen effort by PG&E to buy itself a monopoly, but the spending gap is so immense that the outcome is unclear. There is no reliable polling on the measure.

Measure J

Santa Clara, a city of 110,000, will decide whether to build a $937 million stadium for the San Francisco 49ers.

The city expects that about 25,000 voters – nearly a third of the stadium’s capacity – will decide the fate of the team. Most polls shows the Niners measure winning, though not by a landslide. A CBS 5 poll released on May 25 found that 56 percent would vote yes, with 40 percent saying no.

The 49ers are trying not to leave the election to chance. The team has spent $4.1 million, outspending the No on J campaign 500-to-1. Supporters say the new stadium, to be built on the Great America parking lot, would stimulate the local economy. Opponents, working under the name Santa Clara Plays Fair, say it would cost the small city too much without a return on the investment.

The breakdown of who pays for the stadium is this: The team and the NFL pitch in $493 million; the city and a new hotel tax will account for $114 million; and a new stadium authority controlled by Santa Clara will put in $330 million raised from selling naming rights and personal seat licenses. The 49ers say the team will cover any cost overruns, but opponents say the city – and thus taxpayers – could get stuck with part of the bill.