Voting Against Politics of Exclusion

Re “MALDEF’s Lawsuit Is Racially Divisive,” Commentary, Nov. 1: Are state Sens. Martha Escutia (D-Whittier) and Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles) now advocating that because they are part of the Democratic Party establishment they only carry the Latino-agenda torch? Are they not also the beneficiaries of past voting-rights lawsuits by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund? Gerrymandering is gerrymandering--just ask the Latino voters in the East San Fernando Valley who feel nothing has changed from 1975 to the present.

Ironically, MALDEF was historically chastised by the white establishment--whether Democrat or Republican--for racial divisiveness. It is progressively enlightening to know that the new Latino political establishment is utilizing the same rhetoric of exclusion.

Julian Segura

Whittier

*

Escutia and Romero claim that Latinos don’t need to seek office in “safe” districts created by “court-imposed barrios” and blast MALDEF’s lawsuit as “frivolous” and its proposed redistricting plan as inadequate because the plan “jeopardized the seats of many female elected officials,” including “a number of Latina legislators.”

They claim citizens cast their vote “the American way” because “they vote for the most qualified, regardless of race or gender.” Sounds to me like the senators want it both ways: redistricting maps without regard to race or gender that, incidentally, protect their incumbency as Latinas.

Their argument is politically disingenuous and intellectually dishonest. When it comes to redistricting, they know that politics has much to do with race and gender and not a little bit with the mother’s milk of politics, money.

Under the new redistricting plan, Escutia and Romero will represent districts with the highest percentage of Latino voters of any state Senate districts in California.

Gilberto Y. Moreno

General Manager, L.A. County

Chicano Employees Assn.