Tag Archives: voter turnout

LA City Elections: Promise, Pitfalls, Potential

Today is Election Day in LA City, and given the turnouts we’ve seen in other off-year elections, as well as the fact that the mayoral race, the biggest ticket on the ballot, is basically a coronation, turnout is likely to be very small, save for the wide-open 5th District City Council race, which is really anybody’s to win (very unusual in LA politics).  The expectation is about 15%.  Despite the fact that Los Angeles actually has a fairly rich culture of political activism, from the Latino student sit-ins to recent Prop. 8 actions and hundreds more, the recent history is that city elections do not draw much of a crowd.  That’s a shame in a city that’s larger than the total populations of many states, and it reduces accountability on the elected officials.

I don’t live in Los Angeles, but I work here, and I have a conflicted view about the way the city runs.  I think if every resident were forced to watch The Garden, the Oscar-nominated documentary about South Los Angeles residents being forcibly evicted from a community garden, nobody would vote for anyone currently on the City Council, least of all Mayor Villaraigosa.  The film, almost a real-life version of The Wire, revealed a city government of backroom deals and power-brokers able to make their voices heard well beyond the needs of the community.  You can add to that the rare bit of journalism from the LA Weekly about the City Council, and you could be convinced that the lack of accountability from the electoral process has bred a toxic atmosphere at City Hall.  The likely consolidation of power that would result from Villaraigosa allies in the city attorney and city controller offices would lead you even closer to that conclusion.

Yet among the morass, there are some very earnest public servants trying to manage a very unwieldy city, with a host of unique problems and challenges that would vex any lawmaking body on Earth.  Set aside this year’s $1 billion dollar budget; the problems of immigration, gang violence, income inequality, traffic, health care, air pollution, education, and much, much more all converge in this city.  From 10,000 feet these problems look intractable, and yet there are gradual, slow steps toward mitigation, and even areas where Los Angeles is a national model.  The sales tax receipts from Measure R may finally bring sustainable transit infrastructure to fruition for more than a handful of the city’s residents.  The Green Trucks Program is an innovative, first-in-the-nation effort to bring labor and environmental groups together to reduce pollution, create living wage jobs and help save the planet.  And the city’s Green Jobs Training program is seen as so potentially game-changing that it was used as a model in a White House staff report from their Middle Class Task Force:

The City of Los Angeles has undertaken or is in the midst of undertaking several initiatives that, together, begin to constitute a model for how cities can maximize the benefits of “going green” for working families.  As is often the case, necessity was the mother of policy innovation.  A few years ago, the city faced a number of stark challenges including: a state renewable energy mandate (a statewide “portfolio standard” requiring 20% renewable energy by 2017) and a state cap on greenhouse gas emissions; an impending shortage of skilled construction workers; entrenched poverty and joblessness in many low-income neighborhoods; and toxic levels of diesel pollution that were imposing huge health costs and blocking the growth of the nation’s largest port complex.  

In the past year, Los Angeles has adopted a comprehensive approach to redevelopment which will ensure that city-subsidized development projects are built green and serve as vehicles for moving low-income residents into middle-class construction careers.  The Port of Los Angeles has also begun to implement a comprehensive solution to freight-related air pollution that will increase efficiency, enhance security, and improve work conditions and living standards for port truck drivers.  Most important is the fact that these initiatives are being undertaken on a large scale: the city’s construction policy is expected to impact 15,000 jobs over five years while the Clean Trucks Program (discussed below) could affect as many as 16,000 port truck drivers.

In 2008, the City of Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) adopted a landmark policy designed to protect the environment, safeguard the interests of taxpayers, and ensure that city-supported projects create good construction jobs and career pathways for city residents.  The Construction Careers and Project Stabilization Policy establishes minimum labor standards and a process for avoiding labor disruptions by means of a master agreement between the CRA and local building trades unions.  The policy requires participating contractors and unions to make construction job opportunities available to local residents, including individuals who face barriers to employment such as a criminal record or a limited education.

The policy is being implemented alongside a requirement that large subsidized projects meet the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards.  In this way, city leaders have begun to lay the foundations for building a green-collar construction workforce in Los Angeles.  The UCLA Center for Labor Research and Education projects that the policy will make at least 5,000 apprentice-level construction jobs available to residents of neighborhoods with high levels of unemployment over the next five years.  At least 1,500 jobs are expected to go to individuals who might otherwise remain homeless, unemployed, dependent on welfare programs, or caught up in the criminal justice system.  But the most important result of the Construction Careers policy will be to leverage public investments in economic development to turn short-term jobs into long-term careers in the construction industry.

I wish there was more structural accountability in Los Angeles, from the Mayor on down.  I wish the city wasn’t so dominated by big-city machine politics and red-letter projects that often fail to follow through on their promise.  And where criticism is warranted, I’m sure to be first in line.  But Los Angeles is a very complex and hard-to-pigeonhole place, and that is true of its politics as well.

LA County Turnout Ridiculously Huge

LA County does not turn out that heavily.  In the June primary it was abysmal.  But today, people wanted to be a part of history.  Dean Logan, the registrar of voters, is saying that they could break the record of 81% turnout county-wide.  That would be an enormous achievement, and good for progressives.

Here’s a reminder to all LA County voters: if you are in line by 8:00pm, you will be allowed to vote.  That is current law and you need to make sure it is enforced.  Some pollworkers may want to shoo you out, but you can vote if you’re in line by 8.

An Evening With Debra Bowen In Downtown LA

Last night I was fortunate enough to be present at a small-group discussion with Secretary of State Debra Bowen hosted by the California League of Conservation Voters.  Despite this being a hectic time for the Secretary of State (E-12, in her parlance), she took a couple hours to fill us in on efforts leading up to this year of three separate elections.

In the final two weeks for voters to be eligible for the February 5 primary, there was a surge of registration.  At a “midnight registration drive” in Sacramento, over 1,500 citizens registered to vote in one day (sadly, registrars in places like Los Angeles County resisted efforts to do the same because it would be “inconvenient” for them to update their voter rolls).  While she had no prediction on turnout in the primary, Bowen was confident that there will be a lot of excitement and potentially a good turnout.  One drawback is the fact that decline-to-state voters have to opt-in to receive a ballot for the Democratic primary (they are shut out from the Republican primary).  When I asked Bowen about this, she replied that counties are required to actually notify DTS voters of their rights, and that some precinct locations will have signage notifying them to that end, but that this is insufficient and her hands are tied by state law to some extent.  The parties who want to welcome DTS voters into their primary have a big role to play in this.  The Democratic Party, if they want to expand their base, should make a legitimate effort to let DTS voters know they can vote in the primary.  It will have the effect of getting them in the habit of voting Democratic and give them a stake in the party.  There are also legislative reforms, regarding mandatory signage inside the polling place, changes to the vote-by-mail process (nonpartisan voters must request a partisan ballot), that can be taken.

more…

Bowen’s great achievements since taking over the Secretary of State’s office include an insistence on voter security, and outreach to young voters.  On the security front, despite the howls of protest from county registrars, Bowen will be limiting precincts to one touch-screen voting machine (for disabled voters) and will be undergoing increased security and auditing procedures.  A lot of these measures will be behind the scenes, like delivering voting equipment in tamper-proof bags so that evidence of changes to the equipment will be obvious.  And the auditing procedures, with an open testing process, may delay voting results, but are crucial to maintain confidence in the vote.  A court recently ruled in favor of Bowen and against San Diego County in implementing these changes, but she expects an appeal.  As Bowen said, “Since cavemen put black stones on one side and white stones on the other, people have tried to affect election results.”  But she is doing whatever possible to make sure those efforts will be supremely difficult in California.  None of her provisions so far are slam-dunks; it’s hard to create something foolproof, considering that memory cards for many machines can fit in your pocket, and so many machines are hackable.  But Bowen is making an excellent start.

Bowen was cool to this idea of voter fraud, which has been pushed by conservatives for years.  She described that there has only been one documented case of voter fraud in recent history, and that it’s a high-work, low-reward strategy for cheating.  Efforts to stop this non-existent problem include voter ID laws, expected to get a boost with the Supreme Court likely to allow the one in Indiana to go forward, despite Constitutional concerns.  While Bowen deflected many attempts to get voter ID laws enacted in California while on the Elections Committee in the Senate, she believed that such attempts would never pass this Legislature.

As far as reaching out to young voters, we all know about Bowen’s use of MySpace and Facebook to keep young voters informed (and yes, she also reads Calitics).  But one measure she talked about last night struck me.  On February 5, over 140,000 California high school students will engage in a mock election, featuring a Presidential primary and three mock ballot initiatives: 1) should the vehicle license fee be ties to auto emissions, 2) should voting be mandatory, and 3) should government do more to stop bullying on social networking sites.  This is an ingenious way to get people interested and excited in politics at an early age, and sounds like a model program.

We have a long way to go on national election reform; Bowen noted that only three Secretaries of State (her, and the two in Ohio and Minnesota) agree that there needs to be a federal standard for national elections.  What we need to do is elect more competent professionals like Debra Bowen and keep pushing the debate in the direction of reform and voter confidence.

2006 California Turnout Settles at the Bottom of the Barrel

(One of the ways redistricting would be good for us is to increase turnout. higher turnout=more Dem victories. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

The AP reported Monday that 2006 turnout in California was the second lowest in state history, just falling short of the record low of 2002.  This is especially distressing since it comes in a year that saw some states match or exceed presidential-year turnout and since 2006 should have been a year which provided California Democrats a great reason to show up- knocking off Arnold Schwarzenegger.  So I have several problems with this state of affairs on the flip, and I’m sure everyone else has their favorite gripes as well.

One- Democrats had, at most, three big races that might turn people out in a big way.  Governor, CA-04, and CA-11.  Not much else got a ton of traction, despite efforts by many to make the sub-gubernatorial state races more exciting.  An LA Times editorial on Sunday touched briefly on this issue in the context of redistricting, noting that seats simply don’t change hands in California at this point.  Since redistricting in 2001, there just haven’t been very many compelling races.  If every district is predetermined, why do people bother showing up?

Two- The recently released Democratic Party Agenda for 2007 lists nine major points, three of which are directly focused on voter registration or mobilization.  Obviously an important issue if done properly.  But with inspiring and ambitious goals like “Expand the Party’s new citizen voter registration programs”, I’ll have to be forgiven if I’m wary about the underlying detailed infrastructure and institutional commitment to this plan.  Particularly in a political climate in which Democrats are scared to death of the immigration issue thus don’t want to court the Latino vote too hard, I’ll wait for some concrete plans.  In the meantime- how about a full push for the Democratic Party in Spanish?  Anyways, that’s another day.

Third- Perhaps most distressing, this turnout means that, for all the Democrats who tripped over each other trying to line up behind a supposed moderate, reformist winner in Schwarzenneger, he was elected with the votes of less than 19% of potentially eligible California voters.  19 percent!  Let’s start rolling that into his “mandate” shall we?  This great force of political dynamism could only clock in just short of 19-friggin-percent.  The flipside of course, even more painful, is that it leaves Angelides with an even more sad 15.3% of Californians.

If we want to reform the state party, and we do, getting people to vote is going to be the biggest way to make a difference.  I haven’t seen registration or turnout data that would serve as a targeting model, but I have no doubt that it’s out there.  But if this state party is only good for 15% in a gubernatorial race, I’d say we have a pretty good case for its being entirely impotent.

Blogging has provided incredible innovation when it comes to how messages and issues are framed, packaged and delivered.  But getting people turned out hasn’t seen much of the action.  We phone bank, we knock on doors, but we don’t innovate.  MoveOn has made great strides towards nationalizing and simplifying phonebanking by allowing people to do it from home, but the fundamental methods of outreach have remained the same.  Maybe they need to be, but the netroots is packed with creativity and ingenuity, there should be more ways to shake up this process.

So consider this a first sounding board.  I’ve got a few ideas percolating already, but until I get those fully formed, what else is out there?