Hanging Up On Hahn

I got a phone call from L.A. Mayor Jimmy Hahn today. Or at least from one of his surrogates – a well-spoken woman with a perky voice. I’m not surprised by the personal call. After all, I live in an upper middle-class burb of Los Angeles in the West San Fernando Valley, among the few areas in which Mayor Hahn retains any credible base.

I wasn’t home, so she was kind enough to leave the message for me on my machine.

It was quick and to the point. Basically, she said, I shouldn't trust Hahn’s rival in this Tuesday’s election because he – Antonio Villaraigosa – is a Mexican gangbanger who hates Jews.

Well, she didn’t quite put in those words. Instead she politely referred me to a web site where, she said, I could learn of Villaraigosa’s ties to “radical anti-American” and “anti-Israel” groups. Yeah, you know what groups she means: such nefarious outfits as the California State Assembly where Antonio was speaker. And the L.A. City Council on which he currently sits. Oh, yeah, and the Southern California ACLU where he was once Board President.

The only amazing part about Hahn’s raw sewage campaign is that it so closely mirrors the smear he used in 2001 to hose out Antonio.

It’s not always better the second time around, though. Hahn is falling like a rock, last seen about 11 points behind in the poll. His only chance of being re-elected is to depress the voter turn-out so low that only he, his sister, some loyal labor hacks and a few hundred scared white people are the only folks casting ballots.

As it is, Tuesday’s turn-out, in the second most populous city in America, is expected to be around 30%. With both candidates in the non-partisan race being Democrats, and with not that much ideological difference between them, and the whole thing basted in negative advertising, public interest has been greatly turned off.

I, for one, will be up and early to vote for Antonio. Not just because I know him and like him. But because I really, really, really want to squeeze this sleazeball Hahn out of power. Not that Antonio is an angel. He got caught  last week in a rather embarrassing situation—taking 40g’s in campaign donations from workers in Florida whose boss wants the LAX airport gift shop concessions. Antonio gave back the money and claimed ethical innocence.

But Antonio’s peccadillo is Hahn’s standard pay-to-play m.o. and not for nothing is his City Hall under the scope of local and federal probers looking into some rather egregious influence peddling practices.

Mostly, it’s the overtly racist scare campaign being run by Hahn that demands he be defeated. It’s a disgusting throwback to a cracker L.A. that some of us thought perished when the infamous former Mayor Yorty was laid in the grave.

More nauseating, as I have pointed out on two previous occasions, much of the Hahn campaign is being carried and financed by a misguided County Federation of Labor who ought to know better (indeed 75% of its rank and file voted against Hahn in the March primary). But here are the professional hacks this weekend, “mobilizing” their workers to defeat Villaraigosa, who not only held 3 different jobs as a union organizer but was, as Assembly Speaker, the most pro-labor pol west of New Jersey. Fortunately, the teacher's union has not been bamboozled by the pro-Hahn hacks and has laid a cool half-million in Antonio's campaign coffers.

I can’t say the L.A. Times has been doing the best job on this campaign (my hometown paper usually does a lot better covering places like Iraq or South Africa then it does reporting on places like Compton or Van Nuys). Instead of focusing full blast on the last 48 hours of the dirtiest Mayoral campaign in a generation, The Times, instead, has spent the last few days on soppy profiles of campaign staff! Whose idea was that?

Former Times-guy Ken Reich has a similar take as he blasts the paper for playing down Hahn’s racist pandering. It makes a good read.

Another favorite local commentator, Joe Scott, does some serious analysis of this Tuesday’s election. A former columnist for the L.A. Herald-Examiner and the Times, Joe later became a successful campaign consultant and strategist. Here’s what he says we should look for in the final Hahn-Villaraigosa battle:

 

1.  Turnout will be key. Since 1969, when Tom Bradley lost to Sam Yorty, registered voter turnout in runoff elections has steadily declined from 76% to 37.7% in 2001 when Hahn defeated Villaraigosa. With little interest, estimates suggest turnout of perhaps 30% but it could be lower.  A low turnout may favor Hahn; a higher one makes a win by Villaraigosa more probable. The early absentee returns will provide a clue about the outcome.

2.  Lacking Villaraigosa’s TV funds and dependent on independent expenditures, Hahn must continue to maximize his base vote in two groups to score an upset: among blacks where he has pulled even with Villaraigosa—a major comeback since March; and in heavily Republican enclaves, especially in the western San Fernando Valley.

3.  Predictably, Hahn hopes to nuke Villaraigosa on the crime issue as in 2001. His final chance may depend upon the success of a new attack TV ad featuring the mother of a dead toddler criticizing Villaraigosa for voting against stricter penalties for child abusers when he was in the state Assembly. 

4.  Mourning the death of nationally recognized union leader Miguel Contreras, whose County Federation of Labor backs Hahn, has distracted labor and caused uncertainty in both campaigns about its political impact on the rank and file. Villaraigosa, a former union organizer and close to Contreras, got strong labor support in the primary. But the Fed is expected to go all out for Hahn. 

5. Newsday reported that L.A. Police Chief Bill Bratton is hinting that he may return to New York when his five-year term is up. The report suggests that the former NYPD commissioner might consider a race for mayor in 2009. Both candidates have made clear they want Bratton to remain as chief, whatever the election results. Hahn recruited Bratton to replace Bernard Parks whom he fired and, in doing so, initially hurt himself with black voters.  Bratton, who has appeared with Hahn during the campaign, has dismissed the speculation. But the report, leaked to a New York paper, signals a potentially veiled exit strategy for Bratton who has many media pals in Manhattan. For Hahn, who’s made the chief a centerpiece of his anti-crime campaign, it’s an intriguing late May surprise. It may also signal that Bratton is not excited about working with a mayor-elect Villaraigosa. Time will tell.

In the meantime, I'm disconnecting the phone.

Comments

[Susan]

Um -- my not being familar with current LA politics all I can say guy is this:...I believe you, go for it and do disconnect your phone.

[Michael Turmon]

A couple of comments and a question. Yes, voting for AV is the only reasonable option. It's amazing how backwards, unresponsive, and fossilized many of the city processes have become. AV is clearly a move in the right direction.

Here's the "on the other hand" -- The lack of energy and few concrete ideas AV has put forward in the campaign do not inspire confidence. He's my councilmember and there hasn't been any movement on the several local issues he promised to "get the stakeholders around the table" on. (Note the noncommittal nature of this "strategy.") There aren't many AV signposts around my neighborhood, and little enthusiasm, very unlike the recent council election when they were everywhere.

Given that "other hand" -- prognostication time. Older and wiser people than I scoffed that AV had bigger ambitions than council and would jump as soon as he could. This has come to pass (despite promises otherwise). Given the national scope of AVs activities and fundraising, doesn't it seem likely that he sees Mayor as a transitional post too? His council strategy seems to have been to offend no one. I hope he's got a more serious strategy as Mayor.

My question is -- what do you reckon the likely bigger ambitions would be? US Senator?

[Parke]

Do you have that message on your machine still?

[Josh Legere]

Hahn being a sleaze ball aside, Villagrosa is no sweetheart. He did lobby Clinton to pardon a well connected drug dealer out of jail (and succeeded).

Many in the LAPD are really fearful of Villagrosa. He sort of made a deal with the devil (Parks) and many fear a return of Parks to some sort of role in the LAPD. In case some of you forgot, Parks was the guy who allowed the murder rate to increase 100% after the Rampart scandal. In short, the last thing LA needs is bad moral in the LAPD.

LA radicals, liberals, and "activists" are totally clueless when it comes to the mess that is Pico/Union or Nicholson Gardens, and the "reform" they prescribe in the LAPD will not solve the major problems in those "invisible" communities. LA has a major gang problem and is the epicenter of 2 of the largest and most brutal crime groups in the hemisphere (Mara and 18th Street). The gang problem needs to be addressed through serious economic reform and serious and aggressive law enforcement. Sorry, "aggressive" is needed to deal with gangs as brutal as Mara. Of course, many in LA (including the Times and the Weekly) cannot honestly address this situation.

Villagrosa is slick and will probably turn out to equal Hahn in the Sleaze factor. Yes what Hahn is doing is wrong, but Villagrosa IS NOT the answer. Despite the hoopla about his progressive credentials, he is a phony who will whore himself like very other LA politician.

So we will have a whore in power and the LAPD in tatters and another spike in crime? Doesn't sound good to me.

[Mark A. York]

I'll be voting with Marc but I'm not all that excited about it even with the Kerry event I went to for Antonio.

[Mark A. York]

Michael that's quite a world one enters through your handle. Cnidarians as a welcome?

[Jim Rockford]

Marc -- you seem to buy into the assertion that any criticism of Antonio is racist, because he's "protected class" status. I think that's awful, honestly. Villaraigosa has gotten a free ride from the LAT and other media, Commentariat, precisely because of his background. FINALLY ONE PIECE in the LAT calls that for what it is. Frankly his playing of La Raza card is divisive. It's pretty clear that his Administration would be a Latino only one and pretty much exclude anyone else. His pandering on Consular IDs, Drivers Licenses for Illegals, failure to push for extradition of criminals finding sanctuary in Mexico, refusal to deport alien criminals, support of Order 40, and refusal to condemn his unsavory and frankly anti-Semitic Latino activist allies paint an ethnic spoils politics Mayor. Sorry Marc, Latinos can be racists too, just ask Vincente Fox. Bottom line Villaraigosa lacks the political courage to repudiate the racist kooks in his ethnic coalition. At least Clinton could upbraid Sistah Souljah. Villaraigosa won't even do that.

BOTH Hahn and Villaraigosa are crooks, the problem with Antonio is that his crookdom is more threatening to the City. Neither candidate, as the LAT Business columnist Flanagan points out, will do much of anything to make LA more business friendly (by streamlining bureacracy and lowering barriers to entrepeneurship), or address the Port congestion problem, or reform the airports to make them better job creators (Palmdale COULD be an air freight hub with proper investment). NEITHER of these guys is going to do anything about the blue collar manufacturing jobs draining away, or pushing LA as a fashion industry center (which helps with jobs).

However, Villaraigosa has decisively rejected ANY possibility of addressing the out of control gang problem by citywide injunctions, or deporting gang members, or pushing for Mexico to extradite criminals, or push for more police, or much of anything. He's in the pocket of both felons with wealthy fathers and the ACLU, which prefers the rights of organized criminals to gather than the right of ordinary people in gang infested areas not to be shot. Antonio's personal history of carrying water for politically influential felons, softness on drug traffickers or child murderers guarantees an out of control crime rate. If anything his long history of penny ante corruption (the Florida Gift Shop scandal) shows that he can be bought cheaply.

Hahn is a crook too, but at least he requires serious money like Eli Broad or other connected developers. Since these guys require a crime rate under control for things like Staples Center to make money, Hahn can be expected to at least react to crime waves which are already gathering force. Villaraigosa won't even do THAT.

People are keeping their kids home from LA schools because of Black/Latino riots. Gangs are killing fourteen year olds who refuse to join with impunity. MS-13 rules Pico-Union. Violence is spreading and it won't be contained just in poor areas, Westwood, Downtown, Venice/Santa Monica, Hollywood, Culver City, and the Valley/North Hollywood will see it's share of innocent people killed by gangs if Villaraigosa is elected.

Villaraigosa has made it clear his number 1 priority is spoils politics and helping his Westside Liberal ACLU backers over crime control. "Hug a thug" hasn't worked, and all it will take for the city to further slide down the tubes economically is for the perception that it's a war zone to take hold (that perception is the truth in South Central, East LA, parts of Venice, Westlake, Pico-Union, and other areas).

Villaraigosa is a disaster waiting to happen. Hahn is the safe crook.

[green dem]

I woulda figured you for a denizen of hardboiled LA Marc (a funky 1920s Spanish style near Balboa park perhaps, or a groovy modernist pad off of Laurel Canyon) although to be sure lotsa funky stuff happens in the west valley (green dem knows your hood well magoo - at least part of his youth was expended there).

[Marc Cooper]

Green Dem.. Im a longtime suburban swimming-pool socialist.. y'know the whole nine yards.. water temp 89degrees, weber grills, tiki torches, rainbirds..ahhh...little walkway lights..

[rosedog]

Marc....excellent post. As I said off site, I'd love to see this same essay---or some version of it---posted as a web-only column up on the LA Weekly website before the elections on Tuesday.

In response to Josh's post about Hahn v. Villaraigosa around issues of public safety, a few points: (WARNING: This is probably far more than most will care to hear about this stuff.)

CHIEF OF POLICE - Bernie Parks will NEVER be reappointed LAPD chief---not by Villaraigosa or anybody else. Never---for all the reasons you mentioned and then some. Bernie endorsed Antonio for a host of his own reasons. And, yes, horses were traded. But the position of Chief...was not among them. Read my lips. Bernie Parks will never be police chief again. NEVER. Not a chance. Fugeddaboudit.

LAPD - I’ve said this before on another thread, but I’ll say it again, the LAPD is NOT in fact worried about Antonio---at least not at command staff level. I know this why? Because I’ve spoken to the main players personally. In terms of rank and file, opinions are all over the map. But trust me, if Antonio gets the LAPD more cops, the rank and file will be his new best friends. Hahn SHOULD have been able to get more cops on the street. He promised 1000 and couldn’t manage 300--- specifically because he colossally and repeatedly mismanaged his negotiations with the City Council. Antonio is likely to do much, much better on this crucial issue. (You're worried about gang violence Josh? In terms of law enforcement and gangs, it's not about the injunctions---although judiciously used, they can be helpful--- it's about the number of uniformed bodies on the street.)

GANGS - And about that gang thing: If for no other reason, Hahn deserves to lose because of the loathsome ads he’s put on painting Antonio as soft on gang crime. Jim Hahn himself knows that the accusations are ENTIRELY bogus. I know both of these men; I know their past records and their current stands and actions on gang-related issues. And, in truth, Hahn and Villaraigosa are about equal in their ability to address the gang problem. There is nothing that Hahn is saying about Villaraigosa on this issue that isn’t absurdly skewed, entirely misleading, and 100 percent political BS. And he knows it.

One more note on this: Hahn was a hard ass on gang issues in the late 80’s to the mid 90’s. And guess what that hard ass approach brought us? A ten year period in which gang violence was at its most deadly the era that those of us watching it at ground level refer to as the Decade of Death. Hahn has since gotten much, much smarter. He now knows---like Antonio, Bill Bratton and anyone else with any sense-- that the problem of gangs has to be addressed through a three-pronged strategy: 1. law enforcement, 2. prevention AND 3. intervention,.

But he knows people like you and the white folks in the Valley DON'T know this. That you feel safest when you hear a bunch of tough guy rhetoric. So he's playing on your fears and your lack of knowledge in the creepiest of ways.

18TH STREET AND MARA SALVATRUCHA –

First of all, Josh, to avoid personal embarrassment, please don’t refer to Mara Salvatrucha as “Mara.” If you want a short version, it’s “MS” or “MS 13.” (In El Salvador---where the gang did NOT originate---it is sometimes called “La Mara” but that’s not used in the US.)

Second, about the “clueless” LA Times, did you bother to read the above the fold article on the front page of today’s LA Times? I’m not promoting this article. It’s deeply flawed for reasons too long to go into here...But one can hardly say it's not aggressive.

Okay, end of polemic. If you don't like Antonio for other reasons, fine. But if you're not voting for him because you think he's soft on public safety.... you're mistaken.

[rosedog]

"However, Villaraigosa has decisively rejected ANY possibility of addressing the out of control gang problem by citywide injunctions, or deporting gang members..."

Rockford...you don't listen. Citywide injunctions are NOT practical. Ask Bratton and Sheriff Baca. Once again, we have 22 of them already. We might be able to use more. If so, chances are the City Attorney's office'll impose 'em. But not a citywide injunction. It’s a red herring, for God’s sake.

And what the hell are you talking about with this non-sense about Villaraigosa won't deport gang members...?

Laughable. Cite your source.

NEWS FLASH: Gang members, and every other non-citizen---legal permanent resident or no---if they've been convicted of even the most minor crimes, are being deported by the fucking trainload. Get a clue.

Oh, and the mayor has ZERO control out of any of this---one way or the other.

[Marc Cooper]

Jim.. Not true. I dont think ANY attack on Villaraigosa is racist. I think that Hahn's current line of attack, pandering to the law-n-order suburban vote, his linking of AV to gangs, to crack pipes etc is absolutely racist. But if u think that tag is too narrow... fine.... Im happy to call it absolutely sleazeball.

Ur comments about AV's outlook on crime and gangs and cops is simply without any foundation. Period. Full stop. What do you really think AV would do as Mayor? Compromise public safety and reassure no re-election because....? Because why? Because he really prefers helping out gangs rather than getting re-elected? Please.

What AV did as ACLU Pres in opposing the gang injunctions was clearly his duty. That's the job of ACLU. You can disagree if you please and argue that this is not wise policy. But to suggest that AV or ACLU for that matter loves gangbangers and disdains public safety is, Im afraid, pure rightwing propaganda.

What Rosedogs says, in the end, is the most salient point... the LA Mayor has very little to do with any of these outcomes. The gang ijunction, for example, came from the City Atty's office. The Mayor has no say over deportation.. not even over police deployment or strategy. The whole issue as currently framed is completely bogus and is a cheap, desperate scare tactic from, indeed, a bum named Hahn.

[The_DC_Sniper]

"softness on drug traffickers or child murderers"

You are indeed right, Jim. What most people don't know is that research shows child killers to be severely masochistic. So when Villaraigosa voted against one crime bill and then later supported an even harsher one he was trying to give child killers exactly what they wanted-- more punishment. In fact, I think there was a provision of that bill that would have diverted funds away from our children's schools in order to buy leather masks and ball gags for inmates.

"overtly racist scare campaign"

Marc, that call is eerily similar to one I received in which a campaign worker said to me, "What I want to tell you, Mr. Sniper, is that there's not enough voters in the electorate to force Angelenos to break down segregation and admit the brown race into our mayoral mansions; into our Education Committees, our MTA Board of Directors and our EMA Committees." The only real difference is that the call I received was just slightly subtler in its racism.

[Josh Legere]

I am surprised you are so street wise to the correct gang slang out in the Santa Monica Mountains!

Well, I don't talk much to the "players," but the reality is that the rank and file DOES matter. Far more than the “players.” But I am not that connected, maybe my friends on the force (3 that I went to college with including my roommate for 5 yrs). Morale for them, their families, etc… does matter. It may not matter in Topanga Canyon, but to those that have to work in that neighborhood that most of us pass on the freeway without a second thought, morale is a serious thing. Not someone sitting in an office making policy for the department. How very elitist of you.

When Antonio posed with Parks, yes the rank and file got VERY nervous. NO Parks will not be chief again, but he could get close enough to cause serious morale problems. Check and see what happened to the homicide rate after the Rampart scandal when morale was at a low. Yes morale for the rank and file matters. Did you see the opinion page of today’s LA Times? Jack Dunphy has a column.

Antonio is a bullshit artist like ever other LA politician. Just like Kenny boy. If any election deserves a "none of the above," this is it. Wait and be disappointed. It will be fun to watch his strident supports have to eat crow 2 years from now. You will be awfully "embarrassed' about having to admit you were wrong about Antonio.

Hold no delusions, illegal immigrants will STILL be getting viciously exploited by MS 13 (did I get it right?) and 18th St in Pico/Union, and they will STILL be getting exploited by the service industry. LA will still have a massive gang problem and potentially serious economic issues if more garment jobs are lost. At the moment, LA’s great export to the hemisphere is not the shitty pop culture, but MS and 18th St. How sad.

These problems cannot be solved unless the public takes the problems in these invisible communities serious. The establishment is to blame and both Hahn and Antonio are a part of it. This is a weak campaign with very little substance. If Antonio had any, he would actually address these issues in the election. Like everything in LA, the campaign HAS to appeal to the BoBo’s. Gotta keep it light.

[rosedog]

“It may not matter in Topanga Canyon, but to those that have to work in that neighborhood that most of us pass on the freeway without a second thought, morale is a serious thing. Not someone sitting in an office making policy for the department. How very elitist of you.”

Josh. You’re barking wa-a-a-aaay up the wrong tree on this one.

I live in Topanga. But, I report and write ON GANGS (and law enforcement) in the poorest, most violence-ridden neighborhoods in LA---and have for the last 14 years. (I’ve mentioned this on other threads, so I won’t bore everyone with the details again here.) Suffice it to say, I know the high cost of gang violence from an extremely up close and personal perspective.

“Yes morale for the rank and file matters….”

---Yep. With you on that one too. In fact in the spring of 2002, when gang homicides were starting to spike again, I wrote the first piece that connected the dots between the ghastly post-Rampart morale problem and the rise in gang violence. (Through the miracle of on-line archiving, you can always look it up. It was the cover of the LA Times Sunday Op Ed section – 5/4/02. You actually might enjoy it.)

And, yeah, I know the enormous damage Bernie Parks did to the department. (I’ve said THAT in print repeatedly too.)

Look. I don’t mean to be snarky. I respect the fact that you have close friends in the LAPD, and that they’re nervous about Antonio. I’ve also talked to rank and file guys who express those same sentiments. But you can’t take your personal experience and globalize it into “The rank and file thinks…yadda, yadda, yadda…” It isn’t supportable.

As it happens, I like Antonio for mayor better than I like Hahn. I’ve observed Villaraigosa enough times over the years when the cameras were off to know that he’s got at least the potential to be a good mayor. I also know his downsides. If he’s elected, I hope to God he rises to the occasion. He may not.

“These problems cannot be solved unless the public takes the problems in these invisible communities serious.”

Okay, here you and I are on precisely the same page. I agree that too many people seem unable to grasp that we’re all in this together, that what happens in what you call the “invisible communities” affects the well being of the city as a whole. But, here’s the deal, Josh, I don’t just agree with you. I’ve staked much of my life on exactly that premise. So when somebody starts hitting me with a bunch of high horse-y lectures on these issues….and then tells me I'm an elitist….I tend to get a bit pissy.

PS: I read the Jack Dunphy piece in Sunday’s Opinion and liked it a lot. I do think, however, that the dance between Bratton, Hahn and Villaraigosa is more complicated that Dunphy’s saying.

[Woody]

I put my phone on the "Do not call list." One problem. Politicians conveniently exempted themselves from these otherwise prohibited marketing calls.

Frankly, this is all politics as usual. Just don't hold this up as a shining example as to why the rest of the nation should follow the lead of the Golden State in election choices.

[Fcb]

It would be interesting to learn what messages the campaigns are calling into different districts - to compare, say, Hahn's Valley message to his "South LA" message? I'm guessing that race-oriented messaging depends very much upon being heard in one place, but most definitely not in some others?

[Woody]

They might need a "cell phone book" to reach some neighborhoods. They could probably get that from the police who monitor calls for drug deals. Wait. The only way that will work is if they are allowed to vote *before* they become felons. On the other hand, maybe a lot of people in the inner city neighborhoods are already felons and not eligible to vote and not worth a phone call. That makes things easy. Arrest everyone in the areas supporting your opponent, don't make the phone calls to them, get elected. I think I could be a campaign adviser.

[Michael Turmon]

M.A.Y. -- That's my wife's site. (Is it a Cnidarium, or a tree, complete with roots?) I give that one because my own site is a .gov.

[Mavis Beacon]

Marc's exactly right - our newspapers owe it to us to go out and debunk Hahn's nasty accusations. There's plenty of evidence that readers want more "fact-checking" (though often they have a partisan view of facts) and this Democrat v. Democrat battle gives the paper a chance to build credibility without raising the spectre of media bias.

Question for the non-L.A.ers: Does your hometown paper do a good job of shining light on down-and-dirty political slime?

[Mustang]

Marc:

Looking at this from the macro level, what does all of this suggest to you about the quality of American politicians. Given our choice in candidates between Crook A and Crook B, Crook B is a better choice?

If the situation you've described is typical of American politics, and I assume it is, then the system under which "we the people" are forced to select our leadership is in serious trouble.

So I guess my question is this: Are there any watch-dog organizations exposing these people on a non-partisan basis? You know, I think that if we don't start demanding that our politicians reach a higher standard, politics as usual isn't ever going to change.

Am I wrong?

[Jim Rockford]

Why aren't Citywide injunctions practical? MS-13, various Crips and Bloods organizations are NO DIFFERENT from any organized criminal activity. They are just like the Gottis and Gambinos and such. Citywide injunctions were used against those guys in NYC, as well as RICO statutes and everything else city, federal, and state prosecutors could throw at them. These are bad guys who should belong in jail, and the issue is the most pressing to the people who live their and are the primary victims. Law and Order is always most popular among the people who have the least of it.

Baca and Bratton (see "Jack Dunphy" for the take on Bratton's politicking) are nothing but politicians. They are interested in getting re-elected and require the approval of various machines (Baca) or their next job (Bratton). Top LAPD officials are the PROBLEM, since they are more adept and attuned to politicking with various interest groups than addressing crime. The tough Hahn measures worked, slowly, by putting violent felons in jail where they were not out shooting people on the streets. "Hug a thug" hasn't worked, anymore than embracing John Gotti with publicity stopped his murderous criminal enterprise. Knocking down the Gottis as much as possible helped the NYC economy by removing the Organized Crime tax aka rakeoffs the Gottis and their soldiers took on everything. Doing what we can to destroy 18th Street and MS-13 would do the same.

Villaraigosa not only opposed a Federal Law requiring cities to enforce immigration laws (or lose grant money), including co-operating with the INS with regards to arrested gang members who are illegal aliens, he voted on the City Council (with the rest) to lobby against the bill (which died in Committee IIRC). Given that MS-13 in particular hurts poor people the most, you'd expect a City Councilman to support ANY tool that would break that criminal enterprise in this city. However, immigration orthodoxy (Special Order 40) which forbids any City agency from enforcing Immigration laws is more important to Villaraigosa. This in practice prevents the LAPD from co-operating with the INS to identify gang members in jail who could be deported. Local authorities CAN cooperate with Feds to reduce crime. They choose not to do so, for political reasons, which Villaraigosa supports.

Marc -- I don't think the Crack Pipe and Gang imagery is sleazy or racist. I think focusing on Villaraigosa's personal life (which Hahn so far has not done) is sleazy. But hey, the guy DID go to bat for a big time crack dealer who's father was a wealthy contributor. He has rejected real measures in cooperating with the feds above that could take on MS-13, for pure ethnic machine politics (modern Tammany Hall). Cooperating with the INS is a political no-no for his machine and that he won't reject it says a lot about his political will. I don't think focusing on Hahn's own pay-to-play politics or runaway mayor (which is accurate) is sleazy either. Both of these guys are horrible. But Hahn at least is not as bound to machine orthodoxy and his being bought and paid for by Broad and others can work (in a weird way) in the city's favor. Hahn HAS to get crime down, Villaraigosa can coast on his machine and Westside Liberal alliance and do nothing.

Villaraigosa being a director of the ACLU is not bad in and of itself, however being that and Mayor of LA are incompatible. He's rejected measures such as the Tyler Jaeger Act that did not require prosecutors to prove "recklessness" in a second degree murder conviction (and was the only one in the Assembly, with only one opposition in the Senate to oppose the act). The other act that required proof died in committee. That's fine, Villaraigosa chose civil liberties over law enforcement and that's OK for a legislator representing his constituents. Term limits means never having to say you're sorry. However as Mayor that seems incompatible with promoting public safety in time of a crisis.

Villaraigosa probably was no worse than many Councilmen or Assemblymen, but as a Mayor responsible for public safety I see even less than Hahn's pathetic attempts to address the problem. Hahn acted incoherently to fix the gang problem, I don't see Villaraigosa frankly even thinking there would be a problem, much less increasing the police force (LAPD is severely undermanned and losing skilled officers), pay, and critically, training. I don't see him supporting longer jail terms for gang activity, or deporting known illegal alien gang members. Hahn would at least do some of this (though certainly not much or all).

[Virgil Johnson]

I find it quite useless to call both these guys crooks and panderers. Frankly, how do you expect them to gain ascendence in political ranks without those qualifications? There are no other standards, the way the system is set up so no outsider with any modicum of morals can run the mayoral office. Welcome to La La Land reality, and any other view is just so much nonsense. But not to worry, the mud wrestling match will soon be over and we will all get what we deserve.

[Mark A. York]

So if it's "ethnic" it a "machine." And if it's a white guy it's a contraption?

[rosedog]

Oh, Rockford….Rockford,,,,Rockford...

So much of what you’ve written is so wildly factually incorrect I don’t know where to begin. You’re clearly a bright guy, but you get hold of a few parts of a couple of facts, and bits of knowledge here and there, and then start running naked down the street with these shreds and pieces, waving them behind you like victory flags It’s both odd and maddening.

Okay, about the citywide injunction: in short, the reason it’s simply a stupid campaign pronouncement is that A) we don’t have anywhere near enough cops to adequately enforce it; B) The City Attorney’s office would collapse under the weight of filing the friggin’ injunction; and C) It would open itself up to a host of constitutional challenges.

(Here’s a short column I wrote a year or two ago about a particular gang injunction: It doesn’t get to everything, but explains some of the way it works, at least in broad strokes. http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/35/news-fremon2.php)

Jim, the NY crime families were a handful of organizations that could be reasonably targeted. In LA, according to CAL/GANG, a statewide database maintained by the California Department of Justice, the city of Los Angeles is home to 463 gangs with 39,032 members. To do a citywide injunction, the City Attorney would have to not only do 441 mini-injunctions (since we have 22 already in place), the significant individuals in each of those gangs---the ones at whom the injunction is aimed---would have to be specifically named, and the various appropriate tenets of the injunctions would have to be worked out. This is, how to put it..? IMPRACTICAL AND INSANE!!!!

Contrary to what you clearly want to believe, most gangs do not work like the mafia. With a few exceptions, they are DIS-ORGANIZED crime. That’s part of the problem when it comes to enforcement. RICO is an essential tool to use against the prison gangs---the EME and Nuestra Familia---which ARE analogous to the Sicilian Mafia. With rare exceptions, Street gangs aren’t.

Yes, yes, there are certain SETS of certain gangs that have moved to that kind of sophistication.

But most haven’t. IT WOULD BE EASIER IF THEY HAD. Half the time what we’re talking about is a bunch of disaffected, hopeless 14 and 15 and 16 year olds---who act on impulse---and do a whole lot of tragic damage.

I realized that now it’s all the rage to blather on about MS and 18th Street. (And I notice that the same three ghastly murders are mentioned in every article about MS-13 et al.) That’s so much EASIER than dealing with the hard-ass, labor intensive, heartbreaking, four-steps-forward, three and a half back WORK of dealing with the garden variety gang violence that causes most of the misery on our city streets.

I was just talking to the main spokesman for the City Attorney’s office last week and we were laughing---very, very sadly---about how now everybody now thinks they’re gonna send in a few FBI agents armed with RICO …like that’s gonna help---and how ENTIRELY CLUELESS this perspective really is.

“Hahn acted incoherently to fix the gang problem, I don't see Villaraigosa frankly even thinking there would be a problem, much less increasing the police force…..”

Jim. What the fuck are you smoking?

“I don't see him supporting longer jail terms for gang activity…”

Well, let’s see, first of all, the mayor has NOTHING WHATSEVER do with ANY sentencing. That would be the job of the California State Legislature. Secondly, here’s the present state of our laws vis-à-vis gangs: A 16 year old with no priors and no previous contact with law enforcement is in a car with two gang members, one of whom fires a gun at some “enemies” who had fired on them. Fortunately everyone’s a bad shot. No one is hit. No one is hurt. (But of course that’s just luck. They could have been. But they weren't.) Nonetheless, the 16 year old, who didn’t shoot, didn’t touch the gun, and had no previous record of any kind….got…. 35 to life in a level four adult prison. He’ll be first eligible for parole when he’s 51 years old.

That tough enough for you?

That case is not an anomaly, it's emblematic of the laws we’ve got on the books right now in California with regard to gangs: specifically Prop. 21, the STEP Act and 10-20-Life.

Okay, that’s as far as I’m going. Have a good evening. And vote for whoever you think is right. But stop making sh*t up.

PS: Your takes on Special Order 40 and criminal aliens are equally stupid and uninformed. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.