Popular Support for Reform Inoculates L.A. Politics

The role of Los Angeles’ Latinos is increasing, not just as voters but as leaders who cannot be ignored in civic debates.

Some say that a powerful elite is united in its opposition to the rise of Latinos. Others say that a Latino machine is on the verge of taking over the city and turning Los Angeles to its nefarious purposes. An irresistible machine against an unmovable elite?

A closer analysis reveals that these are exaggerated stereotypes. And the depth of support for reform in Los Angeles is probably our greatest protection against unresponsive elites and political machines.

Los Angeles once had true power elites who pulled the strings of the city’s elected leaders. Today’s elite is a moneyed group brought together largely by Mayor Richard Riordan to create big projects downtown and to support charter and school reform.

However, it will be hard for this group to match the influence of earlier elites. They are fractured without Riordan, who will be out of office in 2001, and face revived union organizing; ambitious, diverse and powerful elected officials; and, most of all, the spiraling threat of secession.

Members of the school board majority--who won election backed by Riordan--certainly acted precipitously and secretively in the recent tussle over the ouster of Supt. Ruben Zacarias. Still, the reform slate was chosen by the voters out of widespread public dismay about the operation of the school system. The bumbling attempts to carry out a mandate from the people are hardly signs of rule by a dominating elite. And if the board can turn the schools around, criticism is likely to fade.

At the same time, some say that a Latino political machine is about to take over Los Angeles. Charges of boss rule surround state Sen. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles), who has built a strong organization in state politics.

Los Angeles has in the past generated highly partisan, ethnic political organizations. While these organizations have built state Senate and Assembly power on Los Angeles constituencies, they generally have been unable to penetrate the nonpartisan city politics of Los Angeles. The organization built by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) and Assemblyman Howard Berman (D-Panorama City), centered in the Jewish community in the 1970s and 1980s, was the most recent case in point.

Los Angeles rewards independent-minded reformers, not partisan, organization politicians. The last mayor with a true machine, Frank Shaw, was recalled by the voters in 1938. The turnout in off-year Los Angeles municipal elections is substantially lower than in even-year partisan elections, and the balloting overrepresents middle-class voters who are hostile to political machines.

Just as minority communities sometimes produce machines, they also produce reformers. When reformer Tom Bradley emerged in the 1960s, the African American community was dominated by a political machine allied with Assembly Speaker Jesse Unruh and led by former Lt. Gov. Mervyn M. Dymally. Bradley, not his competitors in the regular Democratic party organization, ended up taking City Hall. When Unruh himself ran for mayor in 1973, he finished a dismal third behind Bradley and Sam Yorty.

Los Angeles voters demand clean, constructive and accountable government. The sword in that stone can be pulled out by an African American Democrat, a wealthy Republican or by any of the strong candidates lining up for mayor in 2001. However, they need to be effective reformers, and they had better convince the voters of it. Neither elite nor machine backing will answer the challenge.

Latinos have not been hostile to the politics of reform. Reform school board member David Tokofsky now has been elected twice in a mostly Latino district, despite strong Latino opponents. Riordan received a two-thirds majority from largely Democratic Latinos in his 1997 reelection. The new City Charter received strong voting support from working-class districts on the East Side, even though the popular council members of those districts opposed it.

While maintaining our resistance to machine politics, we must broaden participation in Los Angeles elections.

Machine politics is unhealthy for the city, but so is a narrow electorate. We must broaden the base for reform, whether of the schools or of the government. Elite decision-making on policy matters needs to be challenged.

As we pursue these vital objectives, all Angelenos need to ask whether the bad dreams we sometimes have about one another are simply stereotypes.