Party Labels Vital in Telling Voters About Candidates

The “Party Labels Damaging” (Oct. 26) opinion piece by Norma Brandel Gibbs is an exercise in self-disillusionment and illustrates why there needs to be more, not less, politicizing of nonpartisan election races.

First, the traditional career path for politicians has been to start as the dog catcher then run for water commissioner or city council and on up through the ranks. It’s called paying one’s dues.

Now, these people are not apolitical until some magical office at the county or state level makes them become “born again” public servants who acquire a flash of insight about differing viewpoints.

If one is a racist or Socialist as U.S. Senator, then he or she probably was such as the dog catcher. And that’s where they should have been stopped cold in their career.

Second, as long as nonpartisan offices are government offices the possibility exists for some special-interest party to extend the office’s services to unreasonable lengths. Former Irvine Mayor Larry Agran’s antics and efforts to make Irvine a nuclear-free zone come to mind.

Third, while currently there is not a dime’s worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans in how they actually govern, third parties are a growing movement in this country and should be differentiated even at the lowly, nonpartisan school board elections.

STEPHEN J. MOORE

Irvine

* I could not disagree more with Norma Brandel Gibbs’ recent argument in support of nonpartisan local elections. She submits that voters should be able to measure the worthiness of potential office holders based on their qualifications rather than on any political affiliations. That sounds noble but in practice few of us have the time.

Huntington Beach, for example, has no fewer than 23 names on the ballot for City Council. Does Gibbs truly expect voters to research the “record of accomplishments” of all 23?

A candidate’s party identification speaks volumes about his/her approach toward government and its role in our lives. Denying voters this pertinent information succeeds only in blurring the distinctions between the many choices available on election day and is a disservice to those of us who make the effort to participate.

DAVID C. BLOXHAM

Huntington Beach