Disagree with Lempert

Districts help amplify the voices of voters and enhance equity in elections. Local districts are drawn through public hearings and consulting extensive amounts of data. Members of Congress, state legislators and county supervisors are all elected by district. Districts are hardly a foreign concept to us.

Lempert describes incumbents losing their seats to the districting process as “a steep price to pay.” She names multiple talented politicians who, as a result of being placed in newly-drawn electoral districts, ran and lost against a fellow official in the same district. However, this shakeup in the political establishment is a one-time phenomenon that comes as an inevitable and intended result of adopting districts.

Lempert acknowledges that these reforms have ushered in “minorities who would not have had the resources” to run were it not for districts levelling the playing field. “That’s the entire point of district elections,” she says, “and it has opened the door to a more diverse group of candidates.” Lempert then suddenly U-turns and personally attacks me for wanting district elections in Millbrae: “He sounds like a sore loser blaming his loss on having less money than the candidate who beat him.”

Lempert seems forgetful both of her words five sentences prior and of her Nov. 6, 2017, column titled “Special interests in local elections,” where, like I am doing now, she fiercely condemns obscene amounts of real estate money tainting her city’s election. She can’t possibly label me a “sore loser” for denouncing the same, so does she think I’m a “sore loser” for wanting to increase diversity in our political candidates and reduce the influence of special interest money in local politics? As I await her response, I will continue championing reforms that make our government more transparent and equitable for everyone.

You You Xue

Millbrae