The Los Angeles Times of March 7 has this interesting op-ed by Tim Rutten. Rutten deplores the very low turnout in recent Los Angeles city elections. All cities and counties in California use non-partisan elections. Rutten advocates partisan elections for cities as large as Los Angeles. He also suggests that there could and perhaps should be parties organized just around city elections, something that is common in states like Illinois, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York. Thanks to Roy Ulrich for the link.
Not very balanced, though an op-ed shouldn’t be expected to be. Still, Rutten’s being pretty brazen ignoring pretty much every other factor that effects turnout broadly and that effected this one in particular.
There’s also some more general flaws in his thinking. “Moreover, this local disconnection between Angelenos and their electoral politics magnifies the power of small, disgruntled groups concerned with narrow issues, and creates a field day for special interests, who only have to swing a few thousand voters to decisively influence an election.” Beg pardon, how the hell do parties even dent this dynamic? Rutten actually advocates local parties be issue oriented, so it’s hard to see what he’s really getting at.
There’s also some humor in using last year’s general election as a baseline for measuring turnout, then throwing it back to partisanship with “Without political parties, the only things around which people can cohere are ethnic identity and personality — politics’ lowest common denominators.” I think it might be lost on the Times though.
A party can amplify the voice of common people. As individuals they are unable to pay for lobbyists and large give contributions -but through political association they could level the field. – As Rutten stated, “They bring government down to the block level.”
“Parties energize people and stimulate participation.” – Rutten is also correct on this.
A party, of course, may still nominate candidates in nonpartisan elections, but the state does not recognize those nominations.
I believe that local elections should be nonpartisan, since (1) the national parties rarely get involved in local elections, and (2) local officials are largely involved with providing services, rather than in policy issues.
Perhaps California needs to change to local option for municipal elections, as some other states now have.
Partisan stuff ALWAYS exists in legislative bodies.
P.R. for legislative body elections.
NONPARTISAN A.V. for executive and judicial officer elections.
Much too difficult for media MORONS to understand.
I agree. Los Angeles’ Nonpartisan elections end up just being runoffs between two liberal Democrats of different races or ethnicities.