Assemblyman Evan Low, representing Santa Clara in Sacramento, is on a campaign to get Donald Trump off the California ballot. Hmmm. Low appears to have become a self-appointed judge and jury.
It does not matter if you hate Trump, tolerate Trump or approve of Trump. Until and unless former President Trump is found guilty of a crime by a judge and jury, he is entitled to be a candidate. This is not a determination to be made by an elected representative.
Residents appointed Low to represent the people of this district, including Santa Clara. This does not permit Low to think for his constituents, his job is to represent and protect them. All of them. Considering Donald Trump received 74 million votes indicates there are a lot of voters who hold a different point of view about whether or not he should be on the ballot.
If Evan Low is really representing our district, why hasn’t he proposed a repeal or revision to AB 44 that permits “free theft without incarceration” up to $950? This amounts to aiding and abetting crime. However, Evan Low should still be on the ballot.
If we become a country that loses the right to dissent, we have lost our country. We must have dissent, disagreement and diversity. A one-party system is a dictatorship. Eliminating an opponent by legislation is detrimental and destructive to democracy…our democracy.
Santa Clara has recently witnessed the result of a single strain of thought held by the previous council majority. This was an unhealthy experience for residents and the City. During Mayor Lisa Gillmor’s reign while holding a majority of council votes, Santa Clara in FY 2016/17, had a $19.9 million surplus. Four years later, when her majority council departed, FY 2020/21, the City had a $22 million deficit. A deficit the current council is still battling to fix.
It was the ballot however that set Santa Clara on the right highway. Residents determined that Gillmor’s regime lacked responsibility and elected a new council majority.
Of course, there was dissension. Some folks thought there were unworthy candidates. Others thought the current council was doing just fine. It was the people, the voters, who made the decision because options were made available on the ballot.
Santa Clara voters may once again be asked to decide in March 2024. The Charter Review Committee could advise the council to place a charter amendment on the ballot to make the police chief or city clerk or both positions elected. But it will be up to the voters to decide the direction of the City, not one man or woman or a small group of them.
So, Assemblyman Low, while your opinion is your own, take us to a new high and let democracy decide our destiny which is best determined by all our voters, not a representative of some voters.
