There has been talk of monkey wrenches thrown into the gears of
the recall election, of grand crusades to ensure voter equality,
and of liberal judges on a mission to thwart the will of 1.6
million voters.
However you want to describe it, the gubernatorial recall has
taken enough twists and turns to put the roller coasters at Magic
Mountain to shame.
The roaring locomotive that is the recall has stalled, sitting
in limbo while the same court responsible for delaying the election
decides whether to reverse its judgment.
The controversial decision made by 9th Circuit Appeals Judges
Richard Paez, Sidney Thomas and Harry Pregerson ““ a UCLA
alumnus ““ has been received with both bipartisan support
and skepticism. It has made it so that California Secretary of
State Kevin Shelley and the pro-recall movement are pursuing shared
goals, both arguing the election must be carried out as scheduled
and not be put off until the state Democratic primary election in
March 2004.
Part of Shelley’s reasoning lies in the fact that nearly
400,000 Californians have already voted in the election via
absentee ballot. Another part has to do with abiding by the state
constitution, which mandates that an election must be held no more
than 80 days after a recall is certified for a vote.
The current target, Oct. 7, is day 80. Officials in the
state’s largest county say keeping on-track is vital to
maintain vote integrity.
“It would be much more confusing and much more likely to
disenfranchise voters (in March 2004) than if we went ahead and
held the vote now,” said Deborah Wright, executive liaison
for the L.A. County Registrar/Recorder-County Clerk.
Whether an expanded panel of the 9th Circuit Court will review
the three judges’ decision may not be determined for at least
a week, according to court sources.
The controversy stems from six counties ““Â including
Sacramento, Santa Clara and Los Angeles ““ that make up 44
percent of the 2000 state electorate and will use punch-card
ballots in an Oct. 7 election. The American Civil Liberties Union,
along with the Southwest Voter Registration Project, sued to
postpone the election until the punch-card machines can be
replaced.
With their notorious hanging chads, the punch card served as the
centerpiece of the 2000 presidential election controversy that was
decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore.
In that ruling, the Court halted the recounting of Florida
ballots, arguing that the recounts were not being conducted in a
uniform and consistent way.
The 9th Circuit’s three-judge panel used the ruling as
precedent for its own decision, arguing that since counties would
use different systems for voting, the punch cards’ margin of
error would hurt voters in the counties that can’t make the
switch to another system.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista ““ who bankrolled the initial
recall movement ““ has said if a punch-card ballot was good
enough to elect Gov. Gray Davis in November 2002, it should be good
enough to recall him out of office.
But with a 135-candidate ballot roster, which makes for eight
text-heavy pages of names, the consensus is that there will be
errors in administering the election.
“Let me be clear. … There will be problems,” said
Shelley, at a panel discussion held at UCLA on Sept. 10.
At that panel he also encouraged citizens to vote early. But if
the recall delay is upheld, those early votes could be thrown out
and voters would have to wait until March 2004 to recast their
ballots.
As it stands, counties are scrambling to get ready for the
recall election, and do not have the luxury of waiting for an
appeal of the 9th Circuit’s ruling. Many have already spent
millions in printing costs for the absentee ballots alone.
“We can’t afford to stop,” Wright said.
“If we take a day off, we will fall so far behind we
won’t be able to catch up.”
Elections administrators face other logistical problems if the
elections are held in March 2004, when the state’s Democratic
primary election would also be held. Wright said
“there’s no way” the recall candidates could fit
on the same ballot card along with Democratic presidential
candidates.
With reports from Daily Bruin wire services.