It was predictable that two days after Proposition 1 went down in flames, you would offer up a simplistic editorial explanation (June 6), "Getting More Police Protection--Somehow," for the resounding defeat of a measure your paper sacrificed integrity to support. Proposition 1 lost, you said, because Los Angeles residents worry more about taxes than they do about crime.
That is a simplistic explanation. It's also dumb--and insulting.
Proposition 1 lost, in part, because the voters were not convinced that hiring more cops would reduce crime in Los Angeles.
Proposition 1 lost, in part, because the voters know that police protection can be substantially improved in Los Angeles without levying new taxes, or hiring more cops.
Proposition 1 lost, in part, because voters resented being told--by a police chief who chases prostitutes while rapists go free--that they must either submit to higher taxes or live with the lousy service they're getting from their Police Department.