A Wide-Open Race for Judge?

Even in the unpredictable world of politics, it’s not often that we hear of a situation in which one candidate is eager to get out of the race and an opponent wants him to stay in. The saga of Orange County Judge Ronald C. Kline, under house arrest for criminal charges for child molestation and child pornography, continues to unfold with a remarkable series of twists and turns.

The latest developments in the emerging runoff election are complicated enough. Kline, mindful no doubt that he still could receive his salary for the remainder of his term, opted to minimize the bad publicity by withdrawing from the runoff campaign now. Surely two surviving runoff candidates who would then square off would make it a point of running against him anyway, but it would not be quite the same if he were no longer a viable candidate.

The leading write-in vote getter, Dana Point attorney John Adams, has his own interests and would much prefer to run against Kline rather than having the campaign open up to a wide-open battle for the seat between him and the second-highest write-in vote getter. He has taken an early lead and publicly opposed Kline’s withdrawal.

From the public’s point of view, it would be desirable under the best of circumstances to have a wide-open race, where candidates barely known during a hasty write-in campaign get a chance to make their cases before the public on a fresh canvas. But it’s not so simple. Enter the courts and election law.

Candidates can’t be removed legally unless they are appointed to another office or die well before the election. The courts generally have held that the names remain on.

Finding the public interest in this complicated story, or more precisely, what it is that the public is likely to come away with from a runoff, considering the narrow interpretation of law, is difficult. In the best of all worlds, Kline would be granted his wish and the public would hear a fresh campaign conducted from scratch.

But while Kline fights his legal battle, the public may have to be satisfied for now knowing that there really will be at least one viable alternative to an incumbent accused of very serious charges.

Only a remarkable effort by last-minute write-in candidates to educate the electorate brought the election process to this point. It seemed more likely that the incumbent would simply get his 50% of the vote plus one and be unchallenged. For voters, it was necessary to get up to speed on write-in procedures and then properly mark and punch the ballot.

The voters managed to do what they had to do. So whether the public gets a race of two new candidates, or one new one with a clearer shot at the incumbent, it is in a better position now than it was just before the last election.

That’s worth something.