Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

Local reps react to recall postponement

Ryan Carter

Local political representatives greeted the decision this week by a

federal court to delay the Oct. 7 special election to recall Gov.

Gray Davis with a mixture of frustration, agreement and zeal to move


ahead with a process that has cost the state millions of dollars.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled

Monday that the special recall election must be postponed until at

least March because of antiquated voting machines used in six


California counties, including Los Angeles. County officials have

reportedly said voting machines will be revamped by March. The same

punch-card machines were at issue in the 2000 presidential election,

sparking concerns over accuracy and equal access to the polls.

“We are especially mindful of the need to demonstrate our

commitment to hold elections fairly, free of chaos, with each citizen

assured that his or her vote will be counted, and with each vote

entitled to equal weight,” the judges wrote in the opinion. “A short


postponement of the election will accomplish those aims and reinforce

our national commitment to democracy.”

Advocates of the recall have vowed to appeal the ruling, setting

up a possible review by the U.S. Supreme Court if the Court of

Appeals stays the opinion. Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, the

state’s top election official, reportedly said Tuesday that he would

submit a brief to the court today asking for an 11-member panel of

the same court to overturn the panel’s decision.


“It is a bombshell,” state Sen. Jack Scott (D-Glendale) said. “I

am sympathetic with the voters who are anxious to have the matter

resolved, but I have to defer to the courts.”

Assemblyman Dario Frommer (D-Burbank) said the vote raises the

question of whether federal law can trump state law on such matters.

Still, Frommer agreed with the decision on the question of equal

access to the ballot box.

“You would have many voters in the state using old punch- card

systems, which would be troublesome,” he said. “It needed to be

examined. I’ve always been concerned that there would be a number of

people in the state that would be disenfranchised by this process.”

Frommer and others, however, did express concern over the cost of

the election and further delays, which already have cost the state an

estimated $60 million to $70 million.

The court’s ruling did not sur- prise Republican Party officials.

“We’ve seen the U.S. 9th Circuit on numerous occasions act

completely in conflict with the electorate, and almost contrary to

common sense,” said Mike Wintemute, press secretary for the

California Republican Party.

Delay or no delay, Wintemute said it will not affect what he said

was the recall’s momentum.

“I don’t think it is a major problem,” he said. “It will take more

resources, but the governor is unpopular, and I do not think that’s

going to change between now and March.”

But the momentum is moving the other way, state Democrats said.

“Politically, we believe the momentum against the recall would

lead to the defeat of the recall on Oct. 7,” said Bob Mulholland,

California Democratic Party advisor. “We have to comply with what is

legal, and if a delay is what the court decides, then we do not