INGA BARKS: You can't change the rules for out-of-district Rubio
| Monday, Jun 28 2010 04:30 PM
Last Updated Monday, Jun 28 2010 04:30 PM
Kern County Supervisor Michael Rubio has lived and voted in the 16th Senate District for years, never knowing that the county elections office mistakenly recorded the home he now owns as in that district a decade ago.
He filed papers this year to run for state Senate in good faith, his viability was confirmed by his own name on his primary ballot, and it seems ridiculous to deny Rubio his opportunity to run for Senate when he's only a few hundred feet off the border and didn't do it on purpose!
But there are some facts that shouldn't be overlooked.
He doesn't live in the district. He just doesn't. Even though Rubio has said he will move, according to state law he's missed the deadline to move into the district before an election.
If it goes to a judge, how long might it take? If a judge overrides the state law, what precedent does that set?
At the state level we have a law that lays out the rules. If the law is set aside for one candidate who lives a few hundred feet from the proper border, why not set aside law for a candidate who lives 1,000 feet off the mark? Or one whose wife was having a baby the day the registrar's map was available for review? Or the soldier just back from Afghanistan who missed the deadline to file by just a few days but really wants to continue service to his community?
Sadly, this might end up like that near-perfect baseball game where the umpire made the wrong call and knew it. The rules say he couldn't change his call, the pitcher lost his perfect game and all he could do in response was graciously accept the apology of the tearful umpire.
Ironically, Rubio might have fallen prey to the bureaucracy and gerrymandering created mostly by the political party for whom he is running. In an attempt to make sure that legislative seats are safe seats, the district lines have been drawn in such a contorted fashion that even the people in charge of knowing where the boundaries are couldn't tell! And as you read this, the Democrats in the legislature are trying to overturn Proposition 11, the redistricting statute that Californians passed, to take the authority of drawing the boundaries out of the hands of politicians and parties.
Proposition 11 is an effort to make the boundaries fair, not safe, and the Democrats oppose this. By protecting gerrymandered districts they are ensuring the probability of this calamity happening to another candidate.
And what about Democrat voters who might just lose their candidate as a result of this mistake? Well, had there been a primary election with more than one candidate, Rubio's residence issue might have come up before the people chose a possibly ineligible candidate.
But in Kern County, if you're not a millionaire or have name recognition through the roof, it's near impossible to challenge the chosen establishment candidates, and so people rarely do. As a result, Kern County Republicans and Democrats often have only one choice in their primaries. In this case, the only choice for Democrats might leave them with no choice at all.
As I told Supervisor Rubio by text, I want him to lose -- but not this way. If he loses it should be because Tim Thiesen's ideas are better. But above all, we are a nation of laws that are more important to protect than any political career.
-- Inga Barks, who hosts a talk show on KMJ AM 580, is one of four conservative community columnists whose work usually appears in The Californian one Saturday a month. These are the opinions of Barks, not necessarily The Californian. You can e-mail her at ibarks@ bakersfield.com.
