Recall decision blasted by all

Lolita Harper

NEWPORT-MESA -- Neither side of the local political machine was

pleased with the wrench the federal court of appeals threw into the

recall process Monday, as each camp said a six-month delay because of

“faulty” ballots could possibly weaken their anticipated victory.

Both chairmen of the Republican and Democratic parties of Orange

County claimed to be winning the recall battle and said they were

disappointed with the court’s decision. Republican Tom Fuentes called

it a “partisan” attempt to kill the momentum of recall supporters.

Democrat Frank Barbaro said it was an unfortunate delay to getting

the state “back on the right track.”

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals postponed California’s

unprecedented Oct. 7 gubernatorial recall, ruling that many of the

votes in six major counties, including Orange, Los Angeles and San

Diego, would be cast on the highly unreliable punch-card ballots. A

major decision, such as whether to oust Gov. Gray Davis, cannot be

determined by antiquated voting methods because it is likely to

produce inaccurate tallies, the court opinion reads.

The appellate court sided with the American Civil Liberties Union,

which initially filed the case, and suggested a special election date

of March 2, by which time when counties should have

“However, 44% will be forced to use a voting system that is so

flawed, the Secretary of State has deemed it ‘unacceptable’ and has

banned its use in all major elections,” the official court opinion

reads. “The inherent defects in the system are such that 40,000

voters who travel to the polls and cast their ballot will not have

their vote counted at all.”

Area Republican leaders aren’t buying the “chad” excuse.

“Obviously there is more work to do,” Fuentes said. “Now we’ve got

to figure out how to recall federal judges.”

Fuentes gave little credence to the decision, saying that this

particular court has had a national reputation for “wacko decisions

for years.” The decision was a “blatantly biased, partisan reaction

by an exceedingly liberal federal Democrat court,” Fuentes said.

But partisan politics are a large part of the recall, he said. If

the action to postpone the election to the March 2 primaries

succeeds, it will mean more Democrats at the polls and, assumedly,

more Davis supporters.

“The March primary will be energized by the competition of many

Democratic candidates [for president],” Fuentes said. “There is no

big reason for Republicans to participate because President Bush is

already our candidate.”

Democrat Barbaro disagreed, saying a six-month delay only drags

out the time it will take to defeat the ludicrous recall effort and

keeps California in a state of uncertainty for longer than necessary.

It increases the possibility of the Republicans gaining support, he

said.

“The longer you put something off, the greater the possibility

that something might go wrong -- something unforeseen,” he said.

Barbaro cited the most recent polls, which showed increasing

support for Davis, and in the event of a recall, showed Lt. Gov. and

candidate Cruz Bustamante as the most popular replacement. Either

way, a Democrat would retain the seat.

“We need to get it out of the way and people will return to sanity

and we can go back to the old-fashioned way: You win and lose

elections and if you don’t like it, you move on and move away from

Mulligan politics,” he said.

While Republicans and Democrats worry that more time would

undermine the special election, former candidate Peter Ueberroth said

last week he wanted more time to get his message across to voters.

The local fund-raising favorite and Laguna Beach resident

announced last week he would no longer seek the gubernatorial

position because there was not enough time to run an issue-oriented

campaign.

Members of the Ueberroth campaign could not be reached for comment

Monday afternoon. In a press release, Ueberroth did announce plans to

meet today with candidates Arnold Schwarzenegger and state Sen. Tom

McClintock.

The decision on the special election date now could go the Supreme

Court. If the Supreme Court ultimately weighs in, it would mean that

another major election will be in the hands of nine Washington D.C.

judges -- much like the 2000 presidential election in Florida.

* LOLITA HARPER writes columns Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and

covers culture and the arts. She may be reached at (949) 574-4275 or

by e-mail at lolita.harper@latimes.com.