Brian Maienschein had been sitting on hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions he could not use in his campaign for San Diego city attorney — at least not directly. A lingering question in this election season has been what, if anything, he’d do with that money. The answer is now apparent. The Assembly member has put a total of $800,000 into his newly created committee, “For Freedom: Brian Maienschein Ballot Measure Committee – Yes on Prop. 3.” The proposition would enshrine the right to same-sex marriage in the state constitution. The measure also would delete language that only marriage between a man and a woman was legal. That section of the constitution — put there by voter-approved Proposition 8 in 2008 — was invalidated by court rulings. Proposition 3 is statewide, though Maienschein is running ads only in the San Diego market, where he is on the ballot for city attorney. His new committee is not restricted by the city campaign contribution limit of $1,350 per individual for each election, or $2,700 for a combined primary and general election cycle. His city attorney campaign committee, and the one for his opponent, Chief Deputy City Attorney Heather Ferbert, must abide by those limits. There are no limits on such proposition committees. It’s a legal workaround of the city limits as long as his ads essentially don’t say “vote for me.” But there’s no doubt that having his name supporting the popular ballot measure — on television so far, but possibly other media platforms soon — will buttress his city attorney campaign with voters already casting ballots. This is not an uncommon practice for candidates running for office, if they have the money to do it. Campaign finance reports say Maienschein’s Proposition 3 committee has received $600,000 in contributions from Maienschein for Assembly 2022 and $200,000 from Maienschein for Attorney General 2030. That money could not be transferred to a city attorney campaign. “I had leftover funds… and wanted to do something good with it,” Maienschein said in an interview last week, adding, “I could have saved it to run for something in the future.” He wouldn’t answer questions about whether this was intended to help his city attorney bid, or circumvent the contribution limits. Maienschein called Proposition 3 a “uniting issue” and said that it was important to “keep government out of people’s bedrooms.” However much that committee eventually spends, it’s an open question as to what effect it will have on the vote for Proposition 3. Polls show the measure has overwhelming support, a multimillion-dollar campaign has been launched to support it and opponents are hardly spending any money to defeat it. According to a survey released last month by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California, 68% of likely voters planned to vote yes on Proposition 3, while 31% said they would vote no. Strong majorities of Democrats and independents back the measure, compared with fewer than four in 10 Republicans. Majorities across demographic groups said they would vote yes. There was not a specific breakdown for San Diego, but the poll showed the measure had 67%  support in San Diego and Orange counties. Support was highest among voters in the San Francisco Bay Area (81%), followed by those in Los Angeles (70%), Orange/San Diego, the Inland Empire (62%), and the Central Valley (57%). Maienschein’s politics and position on same-sex marriage have morphed over time. Formerly a Republican, he announced his shift to the Democratic Party in January 2019. As a member of the San Diego City Council in 2008, he voted against a resolution supported by the majority to put the council on record opposing Proposition 8. “I thought the city shouldn’t be taking positions on statewide (ballot) issues,” he said in the interview. “Having said that, I wish I had voted differently.” Many Americans have undergone similar transformations on same-sex marriages, including former President Barack Obama and former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who once had opposed them. Clearly, the Democratic Party and allied organizations have looked beyond that. Maienschein has the endorsement of the San Diego County Democratic Party, and LGBTQ groups such as San Diego Democrats for Equality, among others. Ferbert, also a Democrat, outdistanced Maienschein in the March primary 53% to 47%. She has endorsements from several attorney groups as well as City Attorney Mara Elliott, who is termed out of office. Dan Rottenstreich, political strategist for Ferbert, wasn’t so willing to let the past go, accusing Maienschein of “whitewashing his right-wing record on marriage equality.” While a past the Supreme Court essentially struck down Proposition 8, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the current conservative court revisit the issue — when the court overturned the 1973 landmark ruling Roe v. Wade, which gave constitutional protections for abortion rights. Fearing a different court ruling could revive the dormant Proposition 8 language in the California Constitution, proponents of same-sex marriage say that section needs to be deleted, while adding that “(t)he right to marry is a fundamental right.” As for the present, Rottenstreich acknowledged Maienschein’s Proposition 3 spending is legal, but insisted “it’s shady.” “This is not what the campaign laws intended,” he said. Intent aside, the laws allow it. For years, politicians have spent on ballot measures not only to get them approved or defeated but to raise their profile. Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León is doing the same thing as he promotes three ballot measures, including Proposition 3, while running in a tough re-election campaign. He was castigated for using this tactic in a Los Angeles Times editorial, which called the practice a “shell game.” What they said Philip Salata (@philip_salata) of inewsource. “A multibillion dollar transnational wastewater company settled for millions in Flint earlier this year, now it’s got three more lawsuits on its plate in San Diego.”