Orange County California's Trio of Corruption (Rackauckas left, Steiner center, Whitaker right)
At the Orange County GOP Central Committee endorsement meeting, the voting body stood divided over the issue of who to endorse for a Superior Court race. Typically, a small-scale judicial race would not be the center of rigorous debate and party divide. The incumbent judge, Scott Steiner, had been censured in 2014 for sexual misconduct, caught having sex with his interns inside of court chambers. It seemed like an obvious decision to endorse his opponent, Karen Lee Schatzle, a highly qualified Senior Deputy District Attorney with 26 years of experience, and demonstrated conservative values. However when that incumbent judge is Scott Steiner, Orange County Republican royalty, those at the center of political decision making are willing to forget your past in an adherence to one simple rule: In local politics, anything goes when nobody is watching.
In an election season where the practices of our two major parties have come under scrutiny by those at the center of national political discourse, it is important to remember that party politics have implications all the way down the ticket, from the presidential primaries to non-partisan judicial races. Distrust in government has fueled major political movements on both sides of the aisle, sending the parties into disarray and the political scene into a virtual free for all. However these cracks in the party system cannot be attributed to the workings of outside candidates such as Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders; as the case of Orange County’s most contested judicial race goes to show, these cracks often emerge at the local level.
At the Orange County GOP Central Committee endorsement meeting, party leadership’s loyalty had been decided long before Schatzle spoke to the floor asking for their endorsement. Her opponent, Scott Steiner, had not sought an endorsement from his party, illustrating a disingenuous sense of complacency as the incumbent in the race. In this contest, he did not need to file for an endorsement to win the support of local republican leadership; he had been pursuing it his entire life. Two close friends of his, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas and OCGOP Chairman Fred Whitaker would relentlessly defend the disgraced judge in his bid for reelection, working to prevent advancements from his opponent on every front. Their support coupled with Steiner’s name recognition had sealed his standing with the executive board of the county party, and led the board to recommend a “no endorsement” motion for his opponent, Karen Lee Schatzle.
Karen Lee Schatzle, Candidate for OC Superior Court Judge
However the motion would still require a vote by the entire body, not just the leadership. Schatzle gave a routine speech outlining her long tenure as a Senior Deputy District Attorney for the county, explaining her qualifications for the seat and why she was seeking the party’s endorsement. To everyone in the room, the decision was clear that she had earned the party’s support, but OCGOP chairman Fred Whitaker was determined to prevent such course of action.
Whitaker embarrassingly took the stage and declared his friendship with Steiner proudly, informing the room that he eats three meals a week with Judge Steiner and believes him to be the more qualified candidate. What Whitaker seemingly forgot, was that the group was not considering Steiner for an endorsement. In an explicit decree of party loyalty, the chairman of the local party himself indirectly issued a statement that regardless of ethics, procedure, or qualifications, the party should support its longtime friends. No matter how egregiously Judge Steiner abused his position, he was one of them, and that enough should prevent them from endorsing the more qualified alternative before them.
Whitaker’s efforts to prevent an endorsement failed; Schatzle won the endorsement by a landslide 24-7 margin. However, when voting occurred there was a notable distinction between those in favor of endorsing Schatzle and those against. When asked for those in favor of endorsement, the standard members of the room, everyday voters holding terms in the county party, supported Schatzle. When asked for those against an endorsement, longtime friends of Steiner on the executive board stood in opposition.
Whitaker may have failed in his attempts to stop Schatzle, but County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas and close personal friend of Scott Steiner had a better shot. Rackauckas is Schatzle’s boss, giving him a personal stance to attack her character from. In an article published by the OC Register, politics writer Tony Saavedra explains, “[Schatzle] was sent to do low-level attorney work in retaliation for running against Steiner and her character has been under attack”. While these actions are deplorable, for Rackauckas, defending Steiner and defaming Schatzle is calculated political collateral. Few voters in the county pay attention to judgeship elections, and even fewer will remember his support for Steiner when Rackauckas is up for election in 2018. His defense of Steiner illustrates his loyalty to the party leadership, an elite body whose support is inherently more valuable than the party itself.
When we hear the likes of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders exclaim the corruption of our political parties, it is important to take a closer look. Abuse at the national level is a noteworthy debate, but corruption at the local level is an indisputable fact. While we fail to pay attention, our parties go on to support candidates like Scott Steiner, who misuse their positions for personal gain, and disrespect the office that they swore an oath to serve. What is even worse is that we listen, by reelecting these individuals simply based on partisan loyalty.
On Tuesday evening we will find out the fate of Karen Lee Schatzle, whose race will be decided on the California primary ballot. However all over the country, candidates like Steiner are defended and get away with it. If we continue to let the parties choose who we vote for without applying an ounce of scrutiny, then the political corruption, abuse of power, and misuse of government will perpetuate, and we will have nobody to blame but ourselves. It is our duty as voters to go beyond making the easy decision, voting for the “incumbent”, the “republican” the “democrat”. If we want the direction of our country to improve, it is time to start electing individuals based on their qualifications.
