Proposition 183: Sense Out of Nonsense : Measure would make it possible to avoid wasteful back-to-back elections

Los Angeles County was forced to hold a special election last April on whether to recall state Sen. David A. Roberti, a Van Nuys Democrat, from his 20th District seat in the San Fernando Valley; this happened just two months before the regularly scheduled June primary election. If that makes no sense to you, then the good sense of Proposition 183 will be evident.

The enemies of Roberti did not launch the recall move against him because he had violated a law, abused the public trust or was unable to perform his duties. Rather, the election was brought about by a vocal few who targeted the senator because he had the courage to express strong views on gun control.

In the recall voting, Roberti won easily--but Los Angeles County taxpayers lost big; nearly $1 million in public money had to be laid out for the special election. All this just weeks before the June primary.

Proposition 183, a proposed state constitutional amendment on the Nov. 8 ballot, couldn’t prevent stupid elections or unnecessary recalls, but if approved--and it should be--it could save tons of tax dollars.

This well-thought-out measure could prevent the counterproductive scheduling of elections back to back, as was the case earlier this year.

Proposition 183 authorizes a recall election to be held as late as four months after certification. Now a recall election for a state office requires a vote to be scheduled between 60 and 80 days after a recall petition is approved.

Opponents argue that the constitutional amendment would allow politicians to avoid recalls. Absurd. Under Proposition 183 the governor would be free to schedule a recall as early as necessary.

Moreover, with a much more liberal time span for setting a recall vote, the governor would have the option of combining a recall with an upcoming primary or fall election. That could mean higher voter turnouts and potentially big savings.

For those reasons, Proposition 183 deserves a “yes” vote.