Election 2013: Can We Stick to the Issues Mr. Bauman?

Eric Bauman
Eric Bauman

Changing the subject. Karl Rove was a master at it. In the decade past, he pushed the GOP to victory by focusing on “family values” (i.e. opposition to abortion and gay rights). He convinced voters to ignore such major issues as the country’s growing income disparity and the disastrous war in Iraq and to focus on what people did in their bedrooms. So I find it odd that it’s a Democrat who’s trying to get West Hollywood voters to look the other way in the upcoming municipal election.

LA County Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman says the party establishment opposes proposed term limits for West Hollywood city council members because it’s “a divisive measure funded and led by Republicans and failed candidates for city council …”

Bauman has at least one thing right. The term limits campaign, now dubbed “Yes on Measure C,” is chaired by Lauren Meister, who lost a bid for a city council seat. A leading supporter is former council member Steve Martin, who has lost other election bids and is trying again. Meister and Martin, however, are Democrats. It’s true that another prominent supporter is Scott Schmidt, a Republican. I’m betting a deep dive into the Measure C supporter list also might turn up members of the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, the Peace and Freedom Party and maybe a few elderly Communists that Joe McCarthy didn’t flush out in the 1950s.

Frankly, who cares? Party affiliation has nothing to do with the issues — including term limits — that face West Hollywood today. I say that as a “yellow dog Democrat,” a term used in my native North Carolina to describe someone like me who has always voted for Democrats and always will. But I vote “party” when party matters.

When it comes to city government, party doesn’t matter in West Hollywood. What matters is the positions candidates take on issues such as preservation versus community development, on whether WeHo benefits from more urban density or should remain an “urban village” and on whether term limits will solve a problem that, in my estimation, stems from a lack of civic engagement (evidenced by the fact that the turnout for municipal elections has fallen by two-thirds since West Hollywood’s incorporation in 1984). At WEHOville, we’re not pressing council candidates to declare their political affiliation. Instead we’ve asked each of them to offer his response to the issues noted above and others that they think matter. So far, four of nine have deigned to reply. We’ll post all the responses later in the month, along with a list of those who aren’t willing to speak to the issues.

As I end this commentary, I’d like to suggest that just as council candidates better serve West Hollywood by taking positions on the issues, Eric Bauman and the Democratic leadership will better serve my party if they start focusing on the issues. Surely Bauman, like Karl Rove, must have noticed that changing the subject didn’t work in the 2012 election. Bauman’s effort to blame mysterious forces for publicity about Betsy Butler’s role in killing a law to expedite removal of sexual predators from classrooms didn’t get her re-elected to the state Assembly. Donald Trump’s incessant questioning of Barack Obama’s birthplace and the far right’s attack on  Obama’s bold declaration of support for gay marriage didn’t get Mitt Romney into the White House.

Changing the subject. Think about it Mr. Bauman. As Sarah Palin or Dr. Phil might ask: “How’s that working for ya?”

  1. Well when I met Eric Bauman in 1991 during the AB 101 demonstrations, he was President of the local Modonna fan club and I was president of Stonewall Democratic Club. He and his husband Michael were bright and full of engery so I was happy to help mentor Eric as he and I were very excited about this long shot candidate, Bill Clinton. A few years later Eric took over Stonewall and changed it from a grassroots club to an organization that was primarily a bunch of hacks who were mostly interested in leveraging the fact they were gay “activists” into party titles and paid political jobs. Eric just became another party hack, although a very clever and well paid one and changed Stonewall to his image. Bauman has opposed every effort to reform the Party and is now part of the constipated party leadership that makes governing this State so diffucult.

  2. Excellent commentary, Hank. The Los Angeles County Democratic Party has no clue what is going on in West Hollywood and apparently no idea what is going on in Los Angeles…a large city that already HAS Term Limits. Must be all those Republicans in LA who installed Term Limits in Los Angeles, in California and in the Federal Government. If the opponents of Measure C don’t live here, why do we think they are so opposed to Term Limits? Oh wait…maybe the incumbents are afraid someone will finally put a stop to their lifetime of $upport by developers who are supporting their campaigns and their “reigns” on the dais. One candidate/challenger told me that he could not get ONE business to endorse his campaign, that when he approached them they said they were supporting the incumbents…if that’s not business as usual, I don’t know what is. I’ve also heard that the WeHo Chamber of Commerce does not want to host a debate this year either; why would that be? Rumor has it that Heilman spent in the neighborhood of $100,000 on his last campaign. Really? In a town of 34,000 people? Well, postage IS expensive. We need CHANGE and if term limits is the only legal way to get it (intimidation and bribery are illegal, although we heard from Chris Landavazo that Duran and Prang’s campaign, being run by a Lobbyist Steve Afriat, has tried intimidation already) then so be it. Vote “Yes” on C.

Comments are closed.