I. The Ghost of Bush v. Gore
Theres separation of powers for you. Just when Democrat Gray Davis looks like he may survive the October recall, along come three Democratic-appointed judges to postpone the vote.
Mondays decision by a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals didnt merely scramble the already jumbled electoral situation in California. It was also a direct challenge to the Supreme Courts Gang of Five, the justices who plunked down George W. Bush in the White House three years ago with their ruling in Bush v. Gore.
Now, the 9th Circuiters have called Bill Rehnquists bluff. Did he really mean all that stuff about extending the Equal Protection Clause to voters who stood a greater chance to be disfranchised due to the absence of a uniform standard of counting votes? Was he really concerned about the tabulation disparities between one county and the next? Or was Bush v. Gore just a one-time-only decision crafted to elect a Republican president?
Plaintiffs claim presents almost precisely the same issue as the Court considered in Bush, that is, whether unequal methods of counting votes among counties constitutes a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, the three judges wrote. In Bush, the Supreme Court held that using different standards for counting votes in different counties across Florida violated the Equal Protection Clause.
Before the recall was a mote in any Republicans eye, former California Secretary of State Bill Jones had already agreed to end the disparity in California vote counting by ordering counties to eliminate their punch-card voting machines by next Marchs primary. Mondays decision pushes the recall back to March despite a state law that calls on the state to hold a recall within 60 to 80 days of certifying the signatures. To justify this move, the appellate judges twice quote the same passage in Bush: The press of time does not diminish the constitutional concern. A desire for speed is not a general excuse for ignoring equal process guarantees.
In short, the three 9th Circuit Court judges are asking the Supremes to apply their application of the Equal Protection Clause equally, even when the likely beneficiary of such a decision is oh, the horror a Democrat. Whats at stake to quote Justice John Paul Stevens mighty dissent in Bush is the nations confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.
Recall opponents are prepared to make the most of that lack of confidence among Democratic voters should the Court ultimately reverse the three-judge panel (The case will first be heard by 11 members of the 9th Circuit.) Weve been down this Supreme Court route before, so were continuing to go full blast with our [voter mobilization] campaign, says Miguel Contreras, head of the L.A. County Federation of Labor and architect of the nations most successful Democratic get-out-the-vote campaigns over the past decade. If the Supremes overturn the decision, says Contreras, it would give us an issue with Democratic voters: There they go again, the Supreme Court playing partisan politics.
Delaying the vote until March would immediately confound the calculations of all Davis challengers. The two front-runners, Cruz Bustamante and Arnold Schwarzenegger, have been speed-skating on thin ice, hoping to reach the finish before their weaknesses become so apparent that theyre plunged into the briny deep. Bustamantes dependence on tribal casinos for virtually all his funding has already rocketed his negatives up to 50 percent in the latest L.A. Times poll, and extending that dependence for five more months may render him nearly as unpopular as Davis.
In a campaign slated to run just three more weeks, Schwarzenegger has plainly been hoping that he can continue to duck behind the scenery whenever the press looms menacingly to ask him just what he would do as governor. Five more months of hiding under rocks would make Arnold look sillier still, if such a thing is possible.
Schwarzeneggers GOP rival, Tom McClintock, would have to simultaneously defend his state Senate seat in the March primary, and would surely face a furiously well-funded Republican senatorial opponent if he had the temerity to stay in the governors race, too. Arianna Huffington would run out of both money and free media.
By contrast, shifting the recall to coincide with the Democratic presidential primary in March would clearly help Davis. Then again, if an initiative to overturn the law he just signed granting drivers licenses to illegal immigrants were to qualify for the March ballot, that could cancel out almost any Davis advantage. The white backlash that is already an implicit factor in the recall campaign would become an explicit factor shaping an electorate that would not be Davis-friendly. All in all, moving the vote to March might prove little better than a wash for Gray.