The Electorate on the Elections

* I voted at the Coast Bible Church this election day--so much for the separation of church and state provided for in the U.S. Constitution.

When I asked why a church had been selected as a polling location, I was told that nobody else had volunteered their property.

I am a professor of experimental psychology with some expertise in the effects of subjective influences on perceptual judgment. Whether or not voting in a church building could subtly influence the direction of the votes or even selectively determine which of the electorate choose to vote is open to question. But why risk compromising the integrity of the process in this way?

Orange County has a history of election-day shenanigans, some subtle and some not, carried out by politicians, their aides and citizens with a religio-political agenda. Two years ago, a large portrait of Richard Nixon hung in clear view from the inside of my voting booth. Just as no electioneering is permitted at the polls, neither should any party-specific or religious icons be present.

I would gladly offer my home as a polling location to avoid these constitutional affronts to the election process.

FRANK M. BAGRASH

Mission Viejo

* Your articles about poll monitors being sent to polling places in different L.A. and Orange County areas brought to light an issue that has come to the forefront at the end of this election.

I really don’t have a problem with the Justice Department making sure that all citizens have access to taking part in their constitutional right to vote. Maybe there needs to be more done to ensure more citizens vote, regardless of ethnic origin or class. As a Republican, it sickens me that 10 years ago, uniformed guards showed up at polling places in an alleged attempt to dissuade Latin voters in Santa Ana. The right and responsibility to vote is what makes this the best nation in the world. Any citizen who wants to participate should be allowed to do so.

I do, however, have a problem with there being such a backlash against Republicans for something that some rogue campaign manager or volunteer did 10 years ago. What about 1996 and the illegal votes cast by non-U.S. citizens? I haven’t heard word-one about Nativo Lopez and his drive to get as many Latino voters as possible to vote for him in the Santa Ana school board race and Loretta Sanchez in the congressional race that year, regardless of citizenship status. The fact that Lopez’s organization encouraged noncitizens to vote basically canceled out who knows how many votes by the rest of us participating legally is more of a problem than poll guards trying to ensure that no noncitizens vote.

The solution to both problems is this: Require identification at the time of registration and at the polls. This should not intimidate anyone; after all, if you are a citizen and want to participate in your right to vote, what have you to hide? There should be no fear of deportation or jail if you’ve already attained citizenship.

All U.S. citizens should be willing to proudly identify themselves as they participate in this country’s democratic process.

JOEL SIMONDS

Santa Ana

* How ‘bout if next election Bob Dornan runs as “Roberto Dornano”? That would boost his credibility as the Latino candidate.

RICHARD A. HALLAHAN

Redondo Beach

sg,1.5

* Being a registered voter with a community mailing address, I am literally drowning in a tsunami of political junk mail, as all my neighbors are. The inside of my mailbox is coated with mud and I have enough libelous junk mail insults to wallpaper my garage. Each candidate seems to have the same hungry, rehearsed smiling grin and swears to: fight for education, fight crime, lower taxes, etc.

While all are admirable promises and “feel good” issues, few--if any--will be fulfilled. Translation: “Get me a place at the government trough, so I can feed and obtain a windfall pension later.”

Knowing your right from your left is education, and can be taught at school. Determining right from wrong relates to an individual’s basic character and moral code. As far as all the “fighting” promises, all assault weapons have been banned. So, it sounds like they will be fighting crime in our communities with light traffic conditions. We need real protection from developers covering over every square foot of Orange County, but they are bosom buddies with the bureaucrats.

WILLIAM LAWSON

Costa Mesa

* Arturo Montez is so critical of both major political parties (“Latino Interests Are Ignored Left and Right,” Orange County Voices, Nov. 1), for whom does he suggest we vote? Should we vote for a third party that has no chance of winning? Or do we wait for him to tell us which party is most responsive?

Mr. Montez, the issues you raise have nothing to do with political parties. It has to do with access to decision-makers. To have access you must have influence either through political participation or political contributions.

I have made demands on politicians of both parties and have gotten results most of the time. I suggest that instead making wild accusations, Mr. Montez, that you take it upon yourself to learn how the political process works and how to influence it. Then you can set about training tomorrow’s leadership.

SANTIAGO QUINTERO

Tustin

* Doesn’t it bother anyone at The Times that your paper is so biased toward the Democratic Party?

Is there anyone there who might be concerned that you are not balanced in your coverage? Doesn’t your newspaper have a mission statement? Would not fair reporting have a place in it? How can an opinion poll by your newspaper be newsworthy enough to warrant a headline? Can you honestly say you are serving your community?

LOTHAR VALLOT

Huntington Beach

* Rarely do I find an article in the paper that either makes me cheer or cheers me up.

However, Ken Khachigian’s Oct. 25 column (“Boxer’s Tactics Show Her Not Fit for Office”) was an exception in both regards. Finally, someone has taken a stand on both the record and on sound ethics. I have been a Democrat, for better or worse, for 26 years. What astounded me about the recent “partisan” vote for Mr. Clinton’s impeachment inquiry was that only 31 House members had the gumption to eschew politics in favor of principle. Not that the president has committed an act to warrant removal from office, but to send him a message that we Americans are concerned with his indiscretions and that he should get on with the business of governing.

In my eyes, the Democratic leadership has been as much to blame [as Republicans] for the divisive paranoia that has encouraged sycophants like Boxer to run for office. Perhaps the Republicans are the mouthpieces of the radical right, but if that is the case, and senators such as Barbara Boxer are funded to stay in office, then my party is promoting the radical wrong.

DONALD G. BATCHELOR

Brea