SACRAMENTO (AP) -- While polls show only a third of California voters support borrowing $15 billion to refinance the state's deficit, formal opposition to Proposition 57 appears unlikely to coalesce in the six weeks remaining before the March 2 election.

Despite the polls and the daunting task facing pro-bond forces, none of the state's major taxpayer groups nor the bond's leading critics - state Treasurer Phil Angelides and Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Northridge - say they are planning any sort of opposition campaign.

The bond measure, largest to ever go before any state electorate, is backed by a powerful bipartisan coalition led by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and State Controller Steve Westly, a Democrat.

Proceeds from the sale would be used to pay off the state's existing deficit and help make ends meet next year, but at a cost of about $4 billion in interest or $2,000 per California household.

The lack of organized opposition is a boost for Schwarzenegger, whose campaign for the bonds could crumble under even the most modest opposition, observers said.

A survey released last week from the Field Poll found only 33 percent of likely voters favor the borrowing. Similar results were measured in a poll from the Public Policy Institute of California.

"It's a huge plus for the governor not to have anyone spending money on the other side," said Bruce Cain, political science professor at the University of California, Berkeley. "I think any opposition would be very bad news.

"Schwarzenegger has to do something that is very rare in initiative politics - build up the Yes side," Cain explained. "Most measures start off high and come down - he's got to do the opposite. It's a tough chore under the best circumstance, the last thing he wants to anyone opposing him."

And so far he's got his wish.

Angelides, an outspoken critic of the governor's economic plans and a likely challenger in 2006, said he would not be spending any of his $10 million campaign war chest to fight the bonds.

"As treasurer, I feel duty bound to express my opinion," Angelides said. "I feel an obligation to fight on the front that does count - making sure that we have a budget with structural balance."

If anyone asks, Angelides said, he'll tell them he opposed the borrowing. Beyond that, however, "the voters should decide."

This comes even though the treasurer organized a No on 57 campaign in December and spent close to $400,000 of contributors' money on TV ads attacking the governor's first plan to borrow the $15 billion.

McClintock, one of the Legislature's leading conservatives, said he too is not planning to organize a campaign to fight against the bond's passage.

"I expect a very one-sided campaign," said McClintock, who ran against Schwarzenegger in the recall campaign and may run again in 2006. "I intend to speak out every chance I get against the idea because borrowing is not the solution. But I'm not in a position to bring together a campaign."

Taxpayer groups, the other likely source for big dollars to fight the bonds, also appear disinclined to take up the challenge. The California Taxpayers Association is supporting the record borrowing; while the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association has not yet taken a position.

Larry McCarthy, president of CalTax, said his group decided the bonds represent the most efficient and least disruptive method for paying off the deficit. McCarthy is even serving as a co-chair of the Yes on Proposition 57 committee.

But Schwarzenegger is risking much of his newly acquired political capital in the race. He has already begun barnstorming the state to inspire voter support and is expected to push campaign supporters to contribute up to $10 million for the bonds passage as well as a companion measure, Proposition 58, that mandates balance budgets in the future and prohibits deficit financing.

He and his supporters argue that without the bonds, the state would be forced to impose deep spending cuts and increase taxes dramatically.

The stakes in this campaign are immense, pundits say.

"This is not just about the bond issue - it's a test of Arnold's ability to lead," said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a political scientist at the University of Southern California.

Schwarzenegger's sweeping victory in the Oct. 7 recall election has made many Democrats nervous given his many threats to bypass the Legislature and take his issues directly to the ballot and even more, his veiled threats to campaign against them.

Cain noted that some Democrats would like nothing better than to see the governor and his bonds fail, because such a loss would quickly cut the larger-than-life Schwarzenegger down to size. But, he suggested, the governor's opponents may be holding back because they agree with the governor that without the bond money the state faces massive financial problems.

"The reality is that they may not want to go eye to eye with the governor with a huge hole in the budget," Cain said. "The gamble is that in that situation they might get Arnold to blink and go for a tax increase. Then again, he might not, and then he's cutting everything."