To the editor: Shame on those of us who could not even get off our couches or our electronic devices to vote on Tuesday. The dismal percentage of eligible voters who turned out for L.A. County's local election was pitiful. ("Tuesday's L.A. voter turnout was likely the lowest ever, muddying Garcetti's historic reelection win," March 8)
How can we sit and complain about all that is wrong with the world and not even take the time to vote? Are the people who did not vote the ones who complain the most about the results?
I pride myself on never missing an election. Since 1970, when I first became eligible, I have never passed up a chance to vote. We had been taught by our parents and our teachers that voting was our right and our duty, and I am proud to have exercised it. Surely I am not always happy with the results, but I know I did my part.
With all that is going on in our country now and the major division among the people, we are not able to spend the time to get to the polling place. Shameful.
Leah MacKinney-Buckley, Los Angeles
To the editor: As Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti celebrates his re-election victory, let's call it like it is.
Yes, he received 81% of the more than 200,000 initial votes cast on Tuesday. But that's only a small percentage of votes from the nearly 2 million registered voters in the city of Los Angeles.
There is nothing new at City Hall, as residents refuse to go to the polls to vote and support the obvious — the obvious being the professional politicians who continue to be re-elected over and over again. The saddest parts are the nearly $250,000 paid to Garcetti and the almost $190,000 earned by City Council members.
Richard Whorton, Studio City
To the editor: Now that this election is behind us, is it too much to hope that the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, by far the biggest financial backer of the handily defeated anti-development Measure S, will refocus on providing services to its clientele? Or that the foundation's rage against the political ills it perceives will be left to a more suitably chartered organization?
If the foundation is unable to properly manage itself as a healthcare nonprofit, perhaps the benefits it receives by virtue of its status should be stripped away as improper.
Donald Duckworth, Arcadia