American Renaissance
Previous Story       Next Story       View Comments       Send This Page       Date Archives       Category Archives

Madera Unified Case Is Changing Elections Throughout California

More news stories on Elections

Mitchell Landsberg, Los Angeles Times, January 4, 2009

{snip}

Lopez [Jesse Lopez Jr.] was one of three plaintiffs in a lawsuit earlier this year against the Madera Unified School District aimed at greater Latino participation on the school board in the San Joaquin Valley town.

An injunction in the case is forcing Madera Unified, which is 82% Latino, to change the way it elects its board.

The decision has already begun to reshape school boards, city councils and special districts throughout California. Dozens of jurisdictions have Latino majorities with few, if any, Latino elected officials—the very conditions that led to the ruling that the Madera district’s electoral system had fostered “racially polarized voting” in violation of the California Voting Rights Act.

“I think what we’re looking at is a quiet revolution,” said Robert Rubin, an attorney with the San Francisco-based Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, which brought the Madera case. “I think this will sort of usher in the transfer of power from the Anglo community to the Latino community … with fair and equitable voting procedures.”

The latest step along that road was a ruling in September by Madera County Superior Court Judge James E. Oakley, who invalidated, in advance, the results of the November school board election. Oakley said Madera’s at-large voting system, in which all voters in the district cast ballots for all board members rather than for a candidate representing their section of town, violated the Voting Rights Act.

Relying on the remedy suggested by the law, he called for the district to be divided into seven trustee areas, with candidates to run in each.

Roughly 90% of California school boards use at-large voting, as do many city councils and other local boards. The state’s Voting Rights Act, enacted in 2002, bans at-large voting if there is evidence that it “impairs the ability” of a minority group “to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to influence the outcome of an election.”

Other jurisdictions are paying heed. {snip}

{snip}

Madera, about 20 miles northwest of Fresno, has had Latino residents as long as anyone can remember—probably since it was founded in the 19th century. Today’s Latino population is a mix of long-established families, many of them securely middle class, and a large influx of newcomers, many of them poor, Spanish-speaking immigrants from Mexico.

The city of 55,000 is more than two-thirds Latino. Yet just one Latino sits on its seven-member school board. Why can’t a Latino majority elect more Latinos?

The easy answer is that many of the newly arrived immigrants are not U.S. citizens and can’t vote. But Latinos hold a slight majority even among U.S. citizens of voting age.

In interviews, several incumbent board members and a member of Madera’s City Council argued that Latinos had effectively marginalized themselves, with too few involved in civic affairs.

{snip}

Madera isn’t the first proving ground for the California Voting Rights Act, which gives civil rights lawyers tools not covered by the U.S. Voting Rights Act. In the most prominent case, the Modesto City Council agreed last year to abandon at-large voting after a $3-million fight with the Lawyers’ Committee.

{snip}

Original article

Email Mitchell Landsberg at mitchell.landsberg@latimes.com.

(Posted on January 5, 2009)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment     Send This Page      Search

Comments

1 — Anonymous wrote at 5:52 PM on January 5:

If you want greater participation at the school board where hispanics make up “82%” of the students, change the way you are making babies. Once again whites are disadvantaged, but the media sell is that this is a disadvantage for people of color, One that needs to be corrected no matter the cost.

2 — A Reader wrote at 7:06 PM on January 5:

It is as absurd as it gets: the U.S. and California laws are used in order to help the invaders (mostly Mexican mestizos) to conquer our country.

The said outrageous ruling was based on the California Voting Rights Act of 2001, passed by prevailingly Democratic Latinophil legislature and signed by Democratic governor Davis. The language of that law claims it implements the requirements of the federal 1971 Voting Rights Act championed and signed by the deceased L.B. Johnson.

Many of the draconian (some call them “venomous”) laws that were passed as a part of Johnson’s nation-wrecking package took decades before they showed their actual devastating effects on America. Here is a verbatim excerpt from the 1971 Voting Rights Act (emphases added):

All citizens of the United States who are otherwise qualified by law to vote at any election by the people in any State, Territory, district, county, city, parish, township, school district, municipality, or other territorial subdivision, shall be entitled and allowed to vote at all such elections, without distinction of race, color, or previous condition of servitude; any constitution, law, custom, usage, or regulation of any State or Territory, or by or under its authority, to the contrary notwithstanding.

When you read it carefully you will see that, under that poorly drafted and harmful law, all the Mexican illegals who are currently allowed to vote “at any elections”, for instance, at “school district” will be “entitled and allowed” to vote in all elections, regardless of “any constitution, law”, etc.

So, they really don’t need no stinking amnesty to elect our governments here. Just wait until Johnson’s package is implemented to its last letter.

And there are people on this forum who claim that “W” is the worst president in their memory. Did they forget the worst of the worst, the LBJ?

3 — Joe B wrote at 8:08 PM on January 5:

Hm. Looks like California has invented a new right for local ethnic majorities to be represented by someone from their own ethnic group, even if that person doesn’t come from their own community. How racist is that? Really racist. On the other hand, I like the idea of breaking up big school districts into wards. The at-large voting system stinks. Better yet, why not break up all of California’s large school districts, so that every public school is controlled by people living in the neighborhood where it operates? Of course teacher’s unions will hate that because then voters become extremely cost-conscious, which puts a damper on outsize benefit gets finagled out of board members elected in big money campaigns — hugely driven by union and contractor donations.

4 — Bobby wrote at 11:38 PM on January 5:

Anyone closely watching California politics for the last twenty five or so years understands what is happening. Some 15 or so years ago, the residents of the City of Bell Gardens,in Southern California, decided to vote out ALL of the white city council people. It happened in other cities as well such as South Gate, Southern California. BUT DUMBHEAD WHITE AMERICANS, CAN’T CONNECT THE DOTS. The band plays on. The reconquista continues.

5 — Anonymous wrote at 10:13 AM on January 6:

Bobby: White Americans can connect the dots. In national, state, or local elections, mainstream politicians simply refuse to give them a voice in the matter of immigration restriction. Seems to me a reduction in the number of third world people in the US can happen only through the agency of some huge natural (or unnatural) disaster because only Whites have historically shown the ability to extend cooperation beyond the boundaries of familial and tribal lines and organize to rebuild community infrastructure.

6 — Southern Hoosier wrote at 12:22 PM on January 6:

I think it is great.

For the last 20 years, government officials and bureaucrats have sat smugly by, while illegals flood this country. The illegal took jobs away from hardworking American, because Americans can’t afford to work for below poverty wages.

Now the illegals are taking away jobs from those government officials that let them in to this country in the first place. Maybe now that these fat bureaucrats are loosing their jobs to illegals and their supporters, they will now do something about illegals in order to save their jobs.

7 — Anonymous wrote at 3:57 PM on January 7:

Fresno is one of the poorest cities in California. With 82 percent Mexican population, why should anyone be surprised?

8 — Robert Lindsay wrote at 7:13 AM on January 8:

Voting Rights Act was signed by Nixon, not LBJ.

TI live in this town, Madera. It’s full of Hispanics, but not that many of them vote, because about 50% of them are illegal aliens!

The schools are a wreck because the Hispanics have ruined them. No sane person would put their kid in these public schools. Electing Hispanics to the board won’t fix that problem.

9 — Robert Lindsay wrote at 7:43 AM on January 9:

Fresno is NOT 82% Hispanic.

However, my city, Madera, is 82% Hispanic in the schools. Of the population as a whole, it is 67% Hispanic. We Whites are still about 1/3 of the population here.


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Send This Page      Search