Los Angeles County District Attorney
Voters have a choice between the incumbent, Jackie Lacey—a dedicated, career prosecutor who has been running her office ably since her election in 2012—and George Gascón, a wily politician who resigned from his post as district attorney of San Francisco in hopes of using the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office as a springboard to higher positions.
He has never tried a case—yet wants to direct the efforts of the 1,000-or-so lawyers in the office.
Gascón is riding on the current soft-on-crime wave, pledging deference to wrongdoers, while ignoring the need for protection of the public against those who would prey on them.
He is for the death penalty, or against it, depending on what stance is currently in public favor.
Lacey has declined to prosecute in cases, such as police shootings, where it would be politically advantageous to do so, but where such would be a misuse of her authority in light of the lack of evidence warranting a conviction. That reflects honor, for which she should be hailed, not denigrated.
Despite her dedicated service, Lacey is, lamentably, the underdog in the contest. George Soros, the billionaire who delights in funding left-wing causes, recently plunked $1.5 million in Gascón’s coffers.
penly running as a Democrat, although the office is a nonpartisan one, Gascón has the support not only of the California Democratic Party and the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, but top Democrat office-holders including some who have no connection with this county and whose preferences in the race should be regarded as an irrelevancy.
Interjecting themselves are U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont; U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a San Franciscan currently residing in Sacramento County.
Conscientious Democratic voters ought to revile at the effort of Gascón and their party to turn an election which is, under the state Constitution, nonpartisan in nature—and wisely so—into one in which they are implored to vote for own their party’s chosen candidate, rather than the opposing contender (impliedly, a Republican, though Lacey does happen to be a Democrat).
onpartisan local elections were brought about by the reform movement of the early 1900s.
Pioneering in the institution of nonpartisan elections (as well as the initiative and referendum) was the City of Los Angeles. On the Nov. 9, 1909, City of Los Angeles primary election ballot, names of the candidates for offices—though nominated by political parties at their conventions—appeared without a reference to their parties. This was pursuant to a charter amendment. Such an amendment was soon adopted by cities throughout the state.
Through actions of the state Legislature, there have been nonpartisan elections of judicial officers since 1911, and county officials since 1913.
This was a reform—an improvement. The system has worked well; it’s a venerated one. Yet, there is now an effort to sabotage it.
hat effort, it is to be hoped, will fail.
If it does not, Los Angeles County will have two misfits in an elective office—the district attorney and the sheriff.
We enthusiastically “re-endorse” Jackie Lacey for reelection as Los Angeles County district attorney.
Copyright 2020, Metropolitan News Company