Hold Santa Barbara District Elections in 2016

It's not like anyone is stopping Latinos from exercising their constitutional rights. ALL US citizens are free to vote in any election, no matter what year it's held in. Saving a few bucks on election costs seems to be an attractive reason to change though.

But if we wait until 2016, we cannot get those gerrymandered districts that will lock in a permanent majority of four city council members who are old, affluent, property owners from very safe districts with little or no competitive elections.

Let them all run for governor.

http://storyoftheweek.loa.org/2012/11...

Salud, next week co-author with Cathy Murillo. INDY is boring these days.

Then again don't.

Wow! Now if any of these so-called concerned citizens could get off their indignant @$$ and run for a position, then have these so-called constituent's step up and vote for them instead of hiding from ICE or the Federal's maybe their voices could get heard but alas complaining and demanding a new set of privileged rules to best fit their needs is the least they can demand.

When you cant compete on virtue, you find a way to skew the system in your favor.

Is this affirmative action for elections?

Moving local elections to even years might be effective on a cost basis, but doing it to get a particular group to vote seems purely political.

And district elections? Seems to me that if a particular ethnic group wanted to be represented it would be better for them to gather votes from all over the city.

The real issue hear is voter apathy.

BTW, isn't this article a form of racism?

I find it interesting that the three elected officials co writing this opinion along with veteran out of town social justice hero Marcos Vargas have twisted the District Elections argument to include even year elections. The point they serve to make is not only to increase Latino voter turnout but to really support the work of the Democratic Central Committee. In recent years, the DCC had worked hard to ensure their darling candidates were elected by co-opting the work of PUEBLO, which was their brain child from the very beginning. The DCC was shocked that Cathy Murillo was elected over their Anglo candidates in 2011 and are now using the scare tactic that district elections will lock 4 conservative candidates every election.

With the addition of even year voting and the hard work that Vargas and CAUSE will have to do during district elections, the DCC feels more comfortable funding their darling candidates under the impression that Latino residents will have political representation.

Well the DCC has a horrible track record of recruiting Latino candidates and were miffed that Murillo was elected by calling it a "Fluke".

Voters are fed up with the idea that the DCC represents the progressive liberal agenda in SB when all along rents are 70% over value, Latino workers continue to be exploited and educational attainment for all Latinos suffers. These examples did not happen over night. The margins are well defined and the DCC has not done anything meaningful to change it. I would even say they have allowed it.

Let's strike at the root of the problem. The problem has been identified, now, what must be done about it?

First of all, who are the "other" disenfranchised groups?...or is that a Red Herring to simply get us away that we are only talking about one group? What has happened is that the traditional standard that expecting people who immigrate to the U.S. to assimilate into American culture has been waived for the demographic in question. No longer does the concept of the Melting Pot exist, no longer are these people expected to learn the language of the land, or do as well in school, yet the people who are behind the double standard of which I speak cry "racism" when their social engineering policies result in failure.

Look at the history of Jews and Asians in the United States and all the discrimination they went through. Moreover consider the much greater language barriers they had to overcome--which they did--and not only that, they excelled and did better than those who oppressed them. Why was this?...this was because there were no "advocacy" groups spreading the idealistically-fueled lie that "we must unite" which is code for "we must reject the dominant paradigm" which results in isolation from the culture of the country in which one lives. Instead, the unspoken message was that literacy/education was power, and that was the only way one was going to get ahead. I realize this is offensive to idealists, but life isn't always easy--or fair.

We can keep feeding into the Nanny State concept and providing everything in Spanish, pass more affirmative action laws, and continue trying to appease the collective feelings of guilt which have resulted from historical racism in the U.S., and the problem will not be solved--it will only get worse. We can however, face the fact the Mexico is a mismanaged dystopia of corruption and poverty, and embrace what is good about this country, and hold *all* who immigrate here to the standards which have made this country--for all of its faults--a place where people are still willing to risk their lives to enter.

Some good news outta Mexico. The President has withdrawn permission from the Chinese to build and operate a giant trade facility which would've included housing for 700 Chinese Nationals at the core. This saved Mexican AND US industries, if not all of the Americas as well as regional jobs. Not to mention the enviro damage that would've happened.

There are two latinos on city council right now; Francisco and Murillo. What is your problem Salud. No one is disenfranchised if they are just too lazy to vote.