Complications : Old Alliance Loses Ardor for Bradley

With controversy intense over Louis Farrakhan’s scheduled speech at the Forum in September, 1985, a small group of young staff members, black and white, went into Tom Bradley’s office to talk to the mayor.

The group pleaded with the first black mayor of Los Angeles to denounce Farrakhan, a black Muslim minister who had been making anti-Semitic speeches. “Our strategy was to tell him . . . that our age group does not give a damn about Farrakhan, that Los Angeles is a multiracial community . . . and Farrakhan is clearly racist,” said one member of the group. Farrakhan, they said, was unwelcome and out of place in this city and the mayor should say so.

He refused. All week, blacks who supported Farrakhan and Jewish leaders had dueled in the press while Bradley remained silent. Some of the Jewish leaders threatened to withdraw their support from Bradley’s campaign for governor.

Pleas of Jewish Leaders

Leaders of the Jewish community, which had been staunchly loyal to Bradley, also asked over and over for the mayor to speak out against Farrakhan.

He refused them, too. Bradley said in a Times interview recently that he believed he had an agreement with Farrakhan: The mayor would withhold criticism of Farrakhan in return for a more moderate Los Angeles speech by the black Muslim preacher.

“Having made that agreement, I was not going to break it,” Bradley said in the interview. “I value my word and my promise.”

Farrakhan reneged on the deal, Bradley said, again attacking Jews in his speech. Looking back, the mayor said, “It was an error for us to assume he was a man of his word. If I had it to do all over again, I would not rely on that kind of a promise.”

With the exception of Bradley’s old friend Bill Elkins, a black aide who had supported Bradley’s strategy then, his entire staff reacted with anger and disappointment. The Jewish leaders reacted with fury. Many foresaw the beginning of the end of the liberal black-Jewish coalition that has dominated Los Angeles politics since Bradley’s election in 1973.

But that was in the heat of the moment. Despite the furor at the time, a Times Poll last month indicated the event was not a watershed. Asked if they agreed with “Tom Bradley’s attempt to moderate between the black and the Jewish communities over the Farrakhan incident,” 64% of all those polled said they were unaware of the Bradley-Farrakhan issue. Of blacks, 58% were unaware. Only in the Jewish community was it a major event. Seventy-six percent of Jews knew about the furor. But of them, 40% said they agreed with Bradley’s stance. Only 24% disagreed and 12% had no opinion.

However, as it became clearer later, there were quality-of-life issues looming on which the races were taking sides that were far more threatening to the Bradley coalition, which has been his political strength and which has helped maintain a degree of racial peace in the city since 1973. Critics noted that the mayor failed to see the changes coming, including new issues between blacks and Jews, and has not developed strategies to deal with new demands for more political and economic power by Asians and Latinos.

“Coalition politics are more difficult now than when Tom Bradley began,” said political consultant Larry Irvin, who is black. “Coalition politics then were between blacks and Jews. Coalition politics now becomes complicated. Tom Bradley must retain his sense of credibility and commitment to the Jewish community, at the same time putting emphasis on outreach to the black, Asian and Hispanic communities, and he needs younger people who have been raised in this broader framework of coalition politics.”

Two Dominant Groups

When Bradley started in politics, blacks and Jews were the two dominant minority groups. Latinos, while large in population, were disorganized and their voting numbers were low. The Asian population was comparatively small.

Blacks and Jews were natural allies. There were, of course, tensions on the street level. Stores owned by Jews were attacked by blacks in the 1965 Watts riots. Many Jews in the Fairfax district were unhappy about blacks moving in during the late 1960s. But common political goals were stronger than street tension. Through most of the city’s history, both blacks and Jews had been excluded from the power structure. And both groups shared a strong commitment to civil rights and the rest of the liberal political agenda.

Bradley rose in politics through the black-Jewish alliance. Old timers still remember Bradley, as a police lieutenant, settling fights between blacks and Jews. In the 1950s, Bradley started his political career with a group of liberal young Jewish activists in the California Democratic Council volunteer movement. Jewish and black liberals worked side by side to help him get elected to the City Council in a then predominantly white district, and then worked for his election as mayor.

“In Los Angeles, Jews have consistently provided the main non-black base for . . . Tom Bradley,” said Political Science Prof. Raphael J. Sonenshine of California State University, Fullerton. “In his losing 1969 mayoral race against (Sam) Yorty, Bradley’s only nonblack majority came from Jews. Hispanics, for instance, overwhelmingly supported Yorty. By 1973, Bradley was the choice of a large percentage of Jewish voters whose turnout and support guaranteed his election.”

Environmental Issue

An important factor in the alliance was Bradley’s support of strong environmental controls. That was a big issue to Jews, and to other whites, who even then feared their neighborhoods would be wrecked by development. By battling developer power in City Hall, and by pledging to stop plans for oil drilling at the Pacific Palisades beach, Bradley expanded his political base deep into white areas, both Jewish and non-Jewish. It helped him carry such affluent areas as the Palisades, whose heavily white population is not as strongly Jewish as other areas on the Westside.

The racial situation started to change in the late 1970s. The Asian population grew through immigration and an Asian became a City Council member. The Latino community continued to increase and, through improved political organization and a reapportionment of City Council districts, elected two Latinos to the council. And the black-Jewish alliance behind Bradley became severely strained in a way particularly damaging to Bradley and threatening to future race relations in Los Angeles. Rather than being split over an emotional issue, such as Farrakhan, they are divided over something more fundamental.

The latest Times Poll revealed that Bradley is not losing the Jews because of Farrakhan. He is losing them because they no longer agree with his handling of quality-of-life concerns revolving around development, growth, traffic, environment and congestion.

Bradley began losing Jewish support months before Farrakhan, according to the Times Poll. The break occurred when he reversed himself and backed the Palisades oil drilling plan.

It was an unpopular decision citywide. But Jews registered their opposition in the poll 67% to 13%, far above the citywide figure of 39% to 17%.

Looking for Solutions

That carried over to feelings in the Jewish community on other issues. Jews were negative when asked about whether they thought Bradley “or some other mayor” was the best person to solve environmental pollution, public transportation and traffic congestion problems and to slow the pace of development and growth.

In each case, Jewish respondents to the poll chose “some other mayor” by substantial margins while blacks just as strongly picked Bradley. Some examples: Environment, black 41% for Bradley, Jewish 14%; traffic, black, 46% Bradley, Jewish, 23%. Significantly, Jews were less supportive of Bradley on such issues than other whites.

The defection of Jews was detectable in responses about Bradley’s future, too. Fifty-two percent of the Jews (the same as all whites) thought Bradley should run for a fifth term, compared to 63% of the blacks. But only 47% of the Jews polled were inclined to vote for Bradley, 3% more than for all whites, but far behind his levels of previous Jewish support.

The Times Poll, directed by I.A. Lewis, interviewed 923 residents of the City of Los Angeles by telephone for five days ending June 17. The margin of error was 5% in either direction.

Splitting With Old Ally

This year the poll took a larger-than-usual sample of opinion from Jews--a relatively small part of the population--because of the importance of the Farrakhan issue. There had been no comparable sample taken earlier from which to draw comparisons. But one measure gives an indication of the decline in Jewish support for Bradley. In a 1985 survey, 77% of those sampled on the Westside, which has the largest concentrated Jewish population in the city, approved of the way he was doing his job. In the current survey, 64% of the Westside sample approved of Bradley’s job performance.

In splitting with Bradley on the quality-of-life issues, Jews, who tend to be in the higher echelons economically, are siding with their economic class against the pro-growth politics of minorities, who generally are poorer. On the growth issue, Bradley lost 53% to 16% on the Westside, but also 49%-19% in the northern San Fernando Valley, which has a much lower Jewish population.

Latino support for Bradley also shows signs of weakening. In the recent poll, 64% of Latinos approved of the way Bradley was doing his job. The same question asked about him in 1985 showed an approval rating among Latinos of 79%.

Bradley’s political problems are complicated by declining enthusiasm within his own black base.

While poll results on differences between younger and older blacks were inconclusive, younger black leaders in interviews said they felt Bradley was out of touch with their generation.

In particular, they cited his decision this year to back an old friend and Police Department colleague, Homer Broome, to run for a vacant seat in the 10th City Council District, instead of pushing for the election of a black woman, or a younger black man. Such a move, they contended, could have given the black community fresh leadership. As it was, both the mayor and the young black leaders lost out. Broome was defeated by Nate Holden, a political veteran.

Political consultant Irvin said, “In retrospect, that was not a good move for Tom Bradley.”

Mark Ridley-Thomas, who heads the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in Los Angeles, was a younger black leader who was hurt by the move. Bradley had been asked to support a black woman, school board member Rita Walters, for the council seat. That would have left an open school board seat for Ridley-Thomas to seek. But with the mayor backing Broome, Walters decided to stay on the school board and Ridley-Thomas lost to her overwhelmingly.

“The effect of that was to damage Tom Bradley,” said Ridley-Thomas. “I think black people are justified in the expectation that he would give consideration to this community and the cultivation of (new) leadership in this community.”

An older black leader, John Mack, president of the Los Angeles Urban League, a longtime Bradley adviser, said: “I would agree the man has to open up, he has to bring more young people in. My counsel would be to him in the next coming months that this is an area he has to pay attention to.”

The political impact of such discontent in the black community, plus disaffection among Jews, is clear from election results and from The Times Poll.

Voter Response Slackens

In the 1986 gubernatorial election, a major goal for the mayor was to increase black community turnout from the first time he ran for governor in 1982. Get-out-the vote workers were sent into the streets, but running statewide, the mayor emphasized environmental themes of interest to the white majority electorate.

“He came out on the environment and pollution and that is a little bit too sophisticated for the black community,” said Wilson Riles Jr., a city councilman in Oakland, a city with a large black community. “The black community is concerned with jobs.”

Turnout in black communities around the state was disappointing for Bradley.

Jobs versus environment--that is the dilemma Bradley faces in holding together his black-Jewish coalition in 1989, along with enough Latinos, Asians and non-Jewish whites to win.

The Times Poll showed Bradley is trailing on the Westside against Zev Yaroslavsky, a Jewish city councilman who, according to the survey, is the favorite of the Jewish community. But there are many months before the election and the poll shows the mayor is better known and running ahead of any challenger at this time.

And, he has mended past breaks in his racial coalition. But this time, the division between the races stems from deeper and more complex causes.

As Bradley noted in an interview, that makes the city’s problems more difficult to solve than when he was elected.

They were not easy then, but in the ‘70s, Bradley was able to confront them with strong voter support and a City Council that consistently backed him on big issues.

His personal demeanor, his ability to bring people together and his willingness to compromise helped keep racial tensions cool, even when the Board of Education embarked on a court-ordered school integration program late in the decade.

Power Base Weakens

His control of the council, plus strong support of the city’s corporate leadership and labor, permitted adoption of a downtown redevelopment plan that gave birth to the high-rise office buildings, a new Museum of Contemporary Art, and new theaters on tattered old Spring Street--in short, brought downtown Los Angeles back to life. His conciliatory ability, plus strength in the City Council, won the city approval needed for the 1984 Olympics.

But recent elections have taken away his council power base. And the racial implications of the development issues have puzzled him and others. Solving that one may elude him, or at any rate be his toughest job, more difficult even than healing civic wounds after the Watts riots.

As Bradley said: “As the growth of the ethnic communities have developed, and as they have melded into one another, you will find there is a tendency to have some frictions and conflicts. I think that has to be dealt with. We have to try to anticipate it, stop it when it begins. . . . I think that is one of the hidden problems facing the city in the years to come and I am determined to do everything in my power to prevent it from growing and to correct it.”

BRADLEY AS PROBLEM-SOLVER The Los Angeles Time Poll asked 923 city residents to rate Mayor Tom Bradley as a problem-solver. They were asked: “Do you think Mayor Bradley or some other mayor is the best person to solve the problems of . . . “ Those who “did not know” were the remaining respondents in each category.

CRIME

BRADLEY OTHER City 35% 35% Whites 28% 45% Blacks 44% 28% Latinos 41% 24% Jews 25% 40% Westside 34% 36% Valley 25% 43% Central 40% 34% South 42% 25%

POLLUTION

BRADLEY OTHER City 30% 39% Whites 26% 47% Blacks 39% 26% Latinos 29% 34% Jews 14% 54% Westside 20% 51% Valley 30% 42% Central 33% 38% South 32% 28%

HOMELESS

BRADLEY OTHER City 39% 32% Whites 32% 40% Blacks 49% 27% Latinos 47% 23% Jews 32% 39% Westside 32% 38% Valley 32% 38% Central 47% 27% South 42% 26%

PACE OF DEVELOPMENT

BRADLEY OTHER City 26% 42% Whites 19% 50% Blacks 34% 33% Latinos 31% 35% Jews 10% 60% Westside 16% 53% Valley 19% 47% Central 31% 40% South 32% 31%

TRAFFIC CONGESTION

BRADLEY OTHER City 34% 36% Whites 26% 45% Blacks 46% 25% Latinos 45% 24% Jews 23% 47% Westside 20% 46% Valley 23% 47% Central 45% 28% South 41% 27%

PUBLIC TRANSIT

BRADLEY OTHER City 38% 33% Whites 29% 43% Blacks 53% 22% Latinos 47% 22% Jews 29% 47% Westside 29% 45% Valley 30% 42% Central 45% 27% South 44% 23%

THE FARRAKHAN AFFAIR The Los Angeles Times Poll asked, “Do you agree or disagree with Tom Bradley’s efforts to mediate between the black and Jewish communities over the Farrakhan incident?”

CITY BLACKS JEWS Not Aware 64% 58% 24% Agree 16% 19% 40% Disagree 9% 9% 24% Don’t Know 11% 17% 12%