LA Times Declines To Endorse Barbara Boxer
By Anita Finlay ("Ani") on May 10, 2010 at 10:30 AM in Current Affairs
On Friday, the LA Times made a rather shocking announcement in advance of the primary races for Senator and Governor – they are “Choosing not to choose.” They will not endorse anyone from either party for either race stating that “[i]n both parties, the races for governor and Senate have been undermined by politics and money” and that they “inadvertently saved the worst races for last”:
On the Democratic side, we find that we’re no fans of incumbent Barbara Boxer. She displays less intellectual firepower or leadership than she could….
The fast-growing population of California voters who no longer affiliate with a party are seeking a dynamic and creative representative to help direct national policy. But the substantive debate about whether Boxer or the Republican nominee is the best person must wait until after the primary. Then, we hope, it will be possible to endorse a candidate.
What does it say to you that after the Boxer has served the State of California as a Senator for 18 years, the LA Times – big Obama cheerleaders – cannot even come out to endorse a big Obama ally, stating that she has not displayed any firepower or leadership on behalf of the State of California in her campaign.
I cannot imagine that was anything less than a severe blow to Ms. Barbara “Call me Senator” Boxer.
Clearly, if on the basis of her record alone, this paper finds no reason to endorse her in the primary – that’s not saying much for the quality of her leadership in the Senate on behalf of her constituents.
Whereas the LA Times is sitting out the primary…
“In general elections, we put ourselves in the shoes of voters and call on ourselves to make a decision one way or the other, no matter how disappointed we are in the choices.”
They continue:
Perhaps the general election campaign will spur the candidates for the state’s most important offices to dig deeper and to present voters with rational plans to move California forward or to represent it in Congress, but in the primary phase, it’s impossible to forthrightly back any of them.
We Californians voted ourselves into many of the problems we face today, but it’s hard to believe that we deserve these dismal choices for the state’s top elected offices. Voters cannot be blamed for being disappointed at the options and dismayed at the process, which is warped by the increasing precedence of money and party leaders over voters.
Democratic voters have been excised from their gubernatorial primary. They will hear no discussion or debate, because there remains only one viable candidate: Jerry Brown. Six others are running, and they deserve gratitude for making a go of it, but they lack the following they need to compel the former governor to engage them in any exploration of their ideas or platforms. Brown’s consultants, allies and Democratic Party supporters skillfully aced out any would-be opponent…
The result is that Brown doesn’t have to present voters any plans or positions. He doesn’t have to say whether he will buck his labor supporters and trim the state’s costly pension obligations. He’s the nominee. If you’re a Democrat, you can take him or leave — well, no, you can’t even leave him. He’s who you’re getting.
The Times also states that Brown has a “somewhat mixed record of achievement.” Unless he shows some great new policy “he’s one more celebrity candidate.”
While there is no love lost for any of the Republican candidates either, their declining to endorse Boxer is a shocking development. As to the interesting but unlikely candidacy of Democrat Mickey Kaus:
We appreciate the challenge brought by Robert “Mickey” Kaus, even though he’s not a realistic contender, because he asks pertinent questions about Boxer’s “lockstep liberalism” on labor, immigration and other matters. But we can’t endorse him, because he gives no indication that he would step up to the job and away from his Democratic-gadfly persona.
But how do they know he would not “step up to the job.” How could this principled columnist be any worse than the entrenched voices that have been ignoring constituents? While Mr. Kaus doesn’t give himself much of a chance in the race and is likely running to be a thorn in Ms. Boxer’s side, making her answer to the concerns of constituents, I’d rather we take our chances with him. Mr. Kaus penned a rather courageous article discussing the value of unions, yet he criticizes the outdated 50s model by which they still function sixty years later. He discussed, quite specifically, the need for changing that model, particularly since California’s bloated government budget and pension system is one of the chief causes of the problems Californians face:
Keep in mind that Detroit’s union, the United Auto Workers, is one of our best. It’s democratic. It’s not corrupt. Its leadership has often been visionary. Yet working within our archaic union system, it still helped bring our greatest industry to its knees. And the taxpayers were stuck with the bill for bailing it out, while UAW members didn’t even take a cut of $1 an hour in their $28-an-hour basic pay. How many Californians would like $27-an-hour manufacturing jobs? Actually, there was a good auto factory in California, the NUMMI plant in Fremont. It got sucked under when GM went broke. Those 4,500 jobs are gone.
Yet the answer of most union leaders to the failure of 1950s unionism has been more 1950s unionism. This isn’t how we’re going to get prosperity back. But it’s the official Democratic Party dogma. No dissent allowed.
Government unions are even more problematic (and as private sector unions have failed in the marketplace, government unions are increasingly dominant). If there are limits on what private unions can demand — when they win too much, as we’ve seen, their employers tend to disappear — there is no such limit on what government unions can demand. They just have to get the politicians to raise your taxes to pay for it, and by funding the Democratic machine, they acquire just the politicians they need.
No wonder that in our biggest school systems, it’s become virtually impossible to fight the teachers unions and fire bad teachers. The giant L.A. Unified school system, with 33,000 teachers, fires only about 21 a year, or fewer than 1 in 1,000, according to the findings of an L.A. Times investigation. Now either Los Angeles has the greatest teachers in the world or something is very wrong. Talk to parents and you’ll know the answer.
When I was growing up in West L.A., practically everyone went to public schools, even in the affluent neighborhoods. Only the discipline cases went off to a military academy. It was vaguely disreputable. Now any parent who can afford it pays a fortune for private school. The old liberal ideal of a common public education has been destroyed. And it’s been destroyed in large part not by Republicans but by teachers unions.
As the private economy has faltered, we increasingly have a two-tier economy: If you’re an insider, a unionized government employee, you’re in good shape. Even if you don’t do a very good job, you won’t be fired. Even in hard times, Washington will spend billions in stimulus funds so that you don’t get laid off. You won’t even have to take much of a pay cut. And you can retire like an aristocrat at taxpayer expense. But if you’re an outsider, trying to survive in a world of $10-an-hour jobs, competing with immigrant labor, paying for your own healthcare, forced to send your children to lousy public schools run by unfireable teachers and $100,000-a-year bureaucrats — well, good luck to you. But be sure to vote Democratic.
Anyone want to take odds on Boxer as Senator or Brown as Governor tackling this issue in any meaningful way? Didn’t think so.
I venture that Kaus would be more willing to but since he is drowned by the campaign funds of those well known candidates – what is the chance a person like him could get any traction?
Senator Boxer needs to go, along with many other incumbents in both parties who have stayed too long at the fair, going along to get along with the herd mentality, led by the party powerful instead of representing the interests of those they were elected to serve.
Who would have thought the LA Times would actually get one right. Perhaps their ever decreasing circulation has caused them to find two minutes worth of honesty. Unfortunately, like some of our elected representatives, answering the wake up call now is too little too late.
by Ronald Scott
* More novels by 
* 
(
)
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
Pingback: Tweets that mention LA Times Declines To Endorse Barbara Boxer : NO QUARTER -- Topsy.com