home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
041993
/
04199929.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1993-04-15
|
4KB
|
87 lines
<text id=93TT1483>
<link 93TO0120>
<title>
Apr. 19, 1993: City Hall Free-For-All
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1993
Apr. 19, 1993 Los Angeles
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
LOS ANGELES, Page 31
City Hall Free-For-All
</hdr>
<body>
<p>By JACK E. WHITE--With reporting by Jeanne McDowell/Los
Angeles
</p>
<p> Los Angeles voters had hoped the current mayoral race
would feature a searching debate about the city's direction in
the post-Tom Bradley era. What they got was the political
equivalent of a freeway pileup. Even though 28 candidates have
pulled out of the race, the names of 24 more still clutter the
ballot for the April 20 election. "There are too many choices,
too many options," says voter Stephanie Mancillas, a
grammar-school instructional aide, echoing the widespread
perplexity. "It's like when you take a child to the candy store
and tell him there are hundreds of pieces to choose from. He
can't."
</p>
<p> Even worse, the campaign has shed little light on how Los
Angeles can cope with its lagging economy, rising crime and deep
racial divisions. The size of the field has muffled debate on
the issues. The strongest candidates are not even trying to
finish first in what everyone assumes will be merely an initial
round of voting, with no one likely to get a majority. All are
angling for just enough support to get into the two-person
runoff election on June 8. Since the vote will be split among
so many, a contender could do that by getting as little as 15%
of the ballots next week. To that end, the mayoral hopefuls are
playing it safe, narrowcasting their messages to voter segments
where they are already popular rather than making broad appeals
to the entire electorate. Their caution makes political sense,
but it has left voters thirsting for inspiration.
</p>
<p> The leader in recent polls is Democratic city council
member Michael Woo, a 41-year-old Chinese American who would be
the city's first mayor of Asian descent. By campaigning as a
conciliator, Woo seeks to inherit the coalition of minorities
and liberals that supported Bradley. Says he: "I want to be the
mayor who unites the city," the one "closing the gap between the
haves and have-nots." His critics fault Woo for being too soft
on crime.
</p>
<p> His closest rival, who is gaining fast, is Republican
Richard Riordan, 62, an attorney and investment banker who
presents himself as a Ross Perot-style outsider "tough enough
to turn L.A. around." Riordan has already spent $3 million of
his own money to spread his message that he would put more cops
on the street and open more city government functions to bidding
by private enterprise. But while Riordan has gained strong
support from conservative whites in the San Fernando Valley, he
has almost no name identification among minorities. And the
little they know about him, they might not like. Last week a
Dallas (Texas) Morning News story described an alleged
conversation between Riordan and a woman in wealthy Bel-Air.
According to the newspaper, when the woman remarked, "Black
people are just awful--don't you think so?" Riordan replied,
"Some of them." He insists he does not recall saying it.
</p>
<p> At this point, neither Woo nor Riordan has an absolute
lock on making the runoff. They could lose to either of two
experienced city council members, Nate Holden and Joel Wachs,
or to Assemblyman Richard Katz, whose campaign is being run by
James Carville. Whatever the outcome, the campaign has been a
disappointment for voters who yearn for a more edifying
exploration of new ideas. They can only hope that the quality
of the debate will improve after the field is reduced in next
week's voting.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>