Recall: Slavkin’s Opposition to Prop. 187

Carol Chastang’s article on the Mark Slavkin recall (“Slavkin Recall Forces Gain Momentum,” Jan. 5) was probably the most objective piece carried by The Times in its yearlong coverage of Proposition 187. And Slavkin seems to remain “disturbed” that “the level of hate is so high” (as to seek his recall). Let me tell him why, first moderating the word “hate” to “disgust” to avoid rhetoric.

Mark Slavkin kind of grew up as a Westside career politician, representing, among others, the estimable Ed Edelman as a field deputy. He was later elected to the school board, and was defeated in a try at higher office during that incumbency. Slavkin was always regarded as promising--liberal, but not hateful. (He was) fair, anxious to hear both sides of a question.

All that promise came to a bitter end last year, when he literally began to savage Proposition 187 and its supporters, the 60% of California voters who backed the measure. As president of the school board, he presided over a meeting where his group announced they would “go to jail before they would enforce 187,” damn the voters. (If Slavkin is recalled, perhaps he can avoid going to jail with his fellows.)

He took to appearing at “town meetings,” ostensibly arranged so voters could hear both sides of the question. Those who supported 187 were then denied a voice, while Slavkin and the other indoctrinators on his panel called those silenced supporters every name in the book. Goebbels could not have employed more unfair tactics or such a loaded podium.

Slavkin never made clear, while name calling, just why he felt that beleaguered Los Angeles taxpayers, unable to keep their libraries open, light their streets or fill the potholes, repair schools, hire sufficient police, build storm drains or refurbish aging public hospitals, should be required to provide free medical and education to those foreigners who had jumped our borders to lawlessly enjoy our benefits by using forged documents. We who had patiently endured this for 20 years were now labeled “white supremacists” for objecting.

But the last straw following the overwhelming victory of Proposition 187 was Slavkin’s rush to hire at public cost one of the nation’s most expensive law firms to thwart the public will. In brief, the public, having spent millions of hours in steaming parking lots and sidewalks all spring and summer to gain signatures sufficient to qualify 187 for the ballot were now being required by this arrogant public servant to foot the bill to extinguish our own victory, in California’s new “legislation by loophole” substitute for democracy.

Looked at that way, perhaps hate is not too strong a word for Slavkin. His tactics are better suited to a banana republic, where winning an election means nothing more than the right to defend against the loser’s guerrilla warfare.

TED BENTLEY

Media chairman,

Westside Citizens for

Immigration Reform

Los Angeles