Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Oragark. Endorsements of political candidates or measures by contributors are solely their own and are not representative of Oragark’s editorial stance. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple perspectives before forming their own opinions.
By Garen Yegparian
This piece has two parts. The first is a list of endorsements, the second a discussion of a problem that plagued us until a decade or so ago that I thought had been resolved, but seems to have reared its disruptive head once again. The endorsements are local to California, Los Angeles County, and heavily-Armenian-populated cities, so you might choose to skip over that part, depending on where you reside. Please see the relevant ANCA websites for your area for many more endorsements.
=====================================================================
Endorsements of candidates below are all those of the ANCA in the case of the cities, but my own recommendations for the other positions, as are those for the various ballot measures. I have included the local ANCA endorsements because they did not appear on the regional ANCA’s website when I last checked.
In Burbank Konstantine Anthony and Judie Wilke received the nod for City Council as did
Laurette Cano (1), Emily Weisberg (3), Armond Aghakhanian (5), marked with their respective districts. Burbank ANCA is also recommending a “yes” on Burbank Unified School District- Measure ABC to fund the updating of schools’ facilities. This and other bond measures require a 55% majority of votes cast to pass.
In Glendale, there is no election for elected positions, since these were already filled in March during California’s Primary election. However, Glendale ANCA is recommending a “yes” vote on Glendale Community College – Measure GCC, again for facilities upgrades. There is also
Glendale Unified School District – Measure X, which should get a “yes” vote, since it looks like an administrative process that needs voter approval.
In Montebello, Jack Hajinian is vying to return to the City Council and is endorsed.
In Los Angeles, another favorite son, Adrin Nazarian, is running for City Council in District 2 to replace Paul Krekorian who is termed out, vote for him of course! Charter amendments are also on the ballot in Los Angeles, most the result of a lengthy process to make redistricting and related processes more democratic and less politically self-serving. All, listed below, deserve a “yes” vote:
HH- City Governance, Appointments, and Elections.
II- City Administration and Operations.
ER- City Ethics Commission Authority and Operational Independence.
FF- Los Angeles Fire and Police Pensions; Peace Officers.
LL- Independent Redistricting Commission for The Los Angeles Unified School District. LAUSD (1) – Local Public Schools Safety and Upgrades Measure.
At the Los Angeles County level, a heated race for District Attorney is afoot with incumbent George Gascon being vilified for his more enlightened and balanced approach to law enforcement. Problems that are statewide have been blamed on him, disregarding such achievements as his enforcement of environmental laws that protect everyone from harm caused by irresponsible actors. Please vote for him.
Three seats are up for the LA Community College Board of Trustees, my suggestions, noted with the respective seat number are Nancy Pearlman (3), Michelle M. Henderson (5), Kelsey Iieno (7).
Then there are the judges… This is always a problem since no one really gets heavily involved in these races. My recommendations are based primarily on the LA Bar association qualification assessments (“well qualified”, “qualified”, “not qualified”). The better rated one of each pair appearing on the ballot is who I went with, unless they both had the same rating, in which case I did some probing to come to a conclusion. My recommendations, with the respective office number are: George A. Turner Jr. (39), Renee Rose (48), Sharon Ransom (97), Steven Yee Mac (135), and Tracey M. Blount (137).
On Measure G- Los Angeles County Government Structure, Ethics and Accountability Charter Amendment, vote yes, since it expands the board of Supervisors from five to nine members and adds a mayor-like position to handle administration. This creates more representative government and better management. Vote no on Measure A- Homelessness Services and Affordable Housing Ordinance because this effectively transfers an existing tax burden onto more people who can least afford it. Vote yes on Measure E- Consolidated Fire Protection District of LA County Emergency Response and Infrastructure Ordinance, if it’s on your ballot (only unincorporated [non-city]) parts of LA County will be impacted by this measure. It helps pay for more firefighters, a rising need, and exempts low-income elderly from the 6-cent per square foot property tax it creates.
On the state level, I recommend voting yes on all the measures. Whether they are laws (statutes) or constitutional amendments and where they originated, in the legislature or by public signature gathering, is also indicated. Some of the titles are self-explanatory, so I won’t be commenting on them as they appear below. The numbers preceding each one are their designations on your ballot.
2- Authorizes Bonds for Public School and Community College Facilities. Legislative Statute;
3- Constitutional Right to Marriage. Legislative Constitutional Amendment- this measure simply updates the California constitution to reflect the current legal status of who can marry whom;
4- Authorizes Bonds for Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, and Protecting Communities and Natural Lands from Climate Risks. Legislative Statute- this one is very important since it not only enables continued funding for expanding outdoor recreational lands, but also prepares for climate change impacts;
5- Allows Local Bonds for Affordable Housing and Public Infrastructure with 55% Voter Approval. Legislative Constitutional Amendment- this enables cities and counties to pass bond measures with a more reasonable level of voter approval than the current level.
6- Eliminates Constitutional Provision Allowing Involuntary Servitude for Incarcerated Persons. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. If you thought slavery-like arrangements were a thing of the past, seeing conditions in California’s prisons would change your mind. This measure corrects the abominable abuse of prisoners.
32- Raises Minimum Wage. Initiative Statute. Unless you believe that someone who is working full time should NOT be able to live a decent life, this measure is for you.
33- Expands Local Governments’ Authority to Enact Rent Control on Residential Property. Initiative Statute. Ignore the noise about this measure from the real estate industry. This measure will help countless families who are struggling to pay their rent and reduce one of the pressures contributing to the homelessness crisis.
34- Restricts Spending of Prescription Drug Revenues by Certain Health Care Providers. Initiative Statute. Instead of lining their pockets with the profits from government enabled reduced costs on medications, health care providers will be required to spend 98% of those profits on patient care.
35- Provides Permanent Funding for Medi-Cal Health Care Services. Initiative Statute. Even medical organizations support this measure which makes permanent the current funding source.
36- Allows Felony Charges and Increases Sentences for Certain Drug and Theft Crimes. Initiative Statute. Since the dollar level for determining the severity of a theft increased, a sensible change, the number of thefts has increased. This measure makes a reasonable adjustment by enabling the prosecution of repeat offenders who keep their misdeeds below the threshold so that law enforcement authorities will not bother to hold them accountable
Finally, in the race for Senate, the Armenian vote will naturally be going to Adam Schiff who has long been a strong supporter. The reason I even address this race is that you must vote for him “TWICE”! That’s because there are two elections for that seat happening. One is for the very short remainder of the current term of office, and the other is for the full six-year term that starts in January of 2025.
=====================================================================
The problem I mentioned above, which I think even qualifies for the term affliction, is our community’s natural, but politically unsophisticated, inclination to support Armenian candidates no matter what they stand for, whom they are running against, and how viable they are.
In this discussion, the key point to keep in mind is that our, or any other interest group’s, reason for participating in the election process, is to have people in office who are supportive of our interests and issues. These are the people who will set policy, enact legislation, and distribute funding. If the candidate we support does not get elected, then (in almost all cases) we are left out in the cold. Our access to the office-holder is minimal and ability to influence decisions negligible.
Which brings us to the most salient current example. In California’s 30th congressional district, an Armenian is running as a Republican against the Democratic party’s candidate.
In this district, voter registration is more than 3-to-1 Democratic-to-Republican, and it’s about the same if the minor parties are factored in based on their ideological proximity to the two major parties. Plus, over 23% of registered voters are unaffiliated, and they tend to break down in about the same proportions as those who are affiliated when considering which way they lean, Democratic or Republican. Armenians who are registered in the district constitute something under 20% of the total.
Why all these numbers? To show that no Republican has a chance of being elected from this district, barring some earth-shattering scandal involving the Democratic candidate. In this case, even if all the Armenians in the district voted for the Republican Armenian candidate, he still would not get elected. Do the math yourself, remembering that if Armenians are registered 50-50 in each of the parties, you should only add about half the Armenians to the Republican tally, since half are already included there!
The ANCA has gotten a lot of criticism for endorsing the Democratic candidate over the Republican, Armenian, one. The implication here is that the ANCA should act irresponsibly and support an Armenian candidate at the cost of losing the ability to pursue Armenian concerns with the candidate who is assuredly going to win.
I hope I have been able to make clear how important it is to think rationally, informedly, and practically when it comes to whom we should support as a community.
Please, don’t wonder about the presidential race. I do not think either of the candidates is good on Armenian issues. Think as a citizen as to which one is more competent and fit to govern, or, vote for a minor party candidate whose politics align with yours.
Whatever you decide regarding any of the above or other elections, be sure to get out and VOTE, VOTE, VOTE!
Garen Yegparian (20241029)
