I'm also worried that the Wisconsin recall, which has drawn nationwide attention and money, will trigger a vicious cycle of partisan retribution. Your guy didn't win in November? No problem. Start a recall drive now.The recommendation, from Jonathan Zimmerman, who teaches history and education at New York University, is that Wisconsinites vote to keep Scott Walker in office — even if they are opposed to him.
Most of all, though, I fear that the recall threat will make our elected officials even more timid and poll-tested than they already are. Sometimes, great leaders need to take unpopular positions...
On top of that, I'd say get rid of the recall mechanism altogether.
Posts
71 comments:
Recall and initiative are populist notions that readjusted the roles and responsibilities of representative democracy in some states and localities.
In Texas, those didn't much catch on. The Texas Constitution traditionally imposed a different limitation on unresponsive elected officials, in the form of a relatively short two-year term for most offices. In the 1990s, though, we moved in the anti-populist direction, lengthening state-wide office terms to four years.
Rick Perry, for one, is glad to have two more years before he has to face re-election (should he choose to try to extend his already-record tenure).
The California recall of Gray Davis was FOR timidity in the face of serious problems. Turns out, though, the voters didn't want action, either.
Just because they misused the recall in Wisconsin doesn't mean they will always misuse it. After all, you could say the same thing about all elections after Obama got elected. The recall power is worth it, but like the Sword of Damocles it is best kept as a threat.
Arrogance, which leads to this lack of an ability to imagine one's own ox being gored at some point, is the best explanation.
Zimmerman will never have lunch in that town again.
God forbid, the public gets the idea they can throw out bad politicians before the next election.
We might have lost the only Messiah we know.
PS Beldar, I thought Perry had decided to retire.
Or was he just toying with the idea?
@edutcher: Perry has neither confirmed nor denied that he'll run again, and the Texas governorship isn't term-limited, so he certainly could.
It's an open and serious question how much he hurt himself in Texas, though, with the bungled presidential run.
Any intelligent person would agree recalls should be for criminal activity, malfeasance, etc. As has been said numerous times, this is just a very expensice hissy fit which tv loves..the sales staff just sits back and rakes in the commissions.
I sort of like the idea of having a recall mechanism, but making it hard to invoke. But I would have thought the requirement to hold a recall election in Wisconsin would be challenging enough to satisfy me, and I don't think that's holding empirically.
What I'm now thinking is that it should not be harder for a recall election to be held, but that it should require a supermajority to evict someone from office. An elected official shouldn't be recalled because a highly organized special interest is dissatisfied and they think another bite at the apple might give them a majority. Making the hurdle to create an election would just empower highly motivated minorities even further; maybe requiring a supermajority to win would prevent organizations from bothering with it unless they can convince themselves that an overwhelming portion of the electorate is also dissatisfied. Alternatively, maybe office-holders that have four-year terms should face retention elections part-way through: one of the races on the ballot in November would say, "should we have a senate/gubernatorial election in March?" with 60% of the vote required for the ayes to win and no other provision for cutting a term short.
Mind you, having no recall provision wouldn't be a terrible thing. It would probably be better than what Wisconsin is going through now.
Doesn't Wisconsin have an impeachment and removal procedure? Why do you also need the recall process?
As a liberal is a library card.
I like to go as a pirate myself..
I'm generally with Zimmerman - if recalls are used and abused over what are just political or policy questions, then the endless campaign truly won't ever end. A recall should have a very high bar, and ideally should only be used when the a big chunk of those who generally support the incumbent's party have also lost confidence in the incumbent.
Agree with the professor--he states the case very well; and as Molly noted there are in most constitutions, mechanisms for removing an executive for mis or malfleasance.
There is a mechanism to remove people from elected office for criminal malfeasance. It is called impeachment. This option requires a majority in the House of Representatives and a super majority in (2/3 of the members) in the Senate to convict. The DemocRATs in Wisconsin did not have the majority in either house. Oh they tried, but it did not work out for them.
The spin begins. Now, everyone knows that it is highly likely Walker will win. But, liberals are laying the groundwork to argue that even if he wins its not because people support him.
The leftists in Wisconsin are sorely abusing the concept of a recall election. It was never intended to give sorehead losers a second chance at an office - rather, it's for the rare case in which the incumbent does something notably crooked, or goes nuts.
One would think that our learned journalists would know this and remark on it. But that might damage the hopes of their Democrat allies in this hijacking. Oh, the dilemma. Better wait until Republicans try using the same tool against a Democrat.
The California recall of Gray Davis was FOR timidity in the face of serious problems
IIRC, Ahnold made one shot at serious process reform early on which the voters rejected. It would have been better to have left Davis in and maybe swept the Dem majorities out of the legislature in the next election. Now, with Brown, their decline is fixed for another few years.
Absolutely I will work to recall the best Democratic targets. Not everyone, but every elected Democrat there is chance of defeating. The Left has broken what I believe is a major part of the social contract in Wisconsin with their endless recalls.
"The California recall of Gray Davis was FOR timidity in the face of serious problems. Turns out, though, the voters didn't want action, either."
Davis' timidity cost the state billions because he should have let the utilities sign long term contracts for energy (after the legislature took away their generating capacity) but he froze like a deer in the headlights.
California is screwed but that was a first step. Arnold tried to do something about the public employee unions but the teachers' union spent $50 million to defeat a modest reform and he lost his nerve. His big error was calling a special election instead if waiting for the next primary. The unions used the cost argument and the low turnout to defeat him. Thereafter, he was useless. If he had won that battle, and he could have, the California story might be different.
I oppose everything that moves the form of government away from small "r" republican towards small "d" democracy.
Recalls, citizen initiatives, weakened senate filibuster, the "national popular vote movement" are all bad ideas.
In my own state, I'm worried about citizen initiatives. I've noticed that very well organized special interests get the necessary signatures to place an issue on the ballot during special or off year elections.
The last citizen initiative was a special sales tax to benefit the local zoo. Only 47,000 people voted in the two counties where it was proposed voted on the issue. The two counties have a combined population of almost 900,000 people. It passed. But only about 5% of the population in the two affected counties voted. The additional sales tax is perpetual - no sunset date.
The special niche groups that promote these things rarely put them on the ballot during presidential election years when voter turnout is large and and the outcome will better reflect the will of the people affected.
Some of us are ready to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Beldar said...
@edutcher: Perry has neither confirmed nor denied that he'll run again, and the Texas governorship isn't term-limited, so he certainly could.
It's an open and serious question how much he hurt himself in Texas, though, with the bungled presidential run.
He acknowledged he should have waited longer after his back surgery before hitting the campaign trail.
Saw him on Cavuto a week or so ago, and he still seems to have some problems, although not like before.
Second Beldar's proposal to get rid of the 17th amendment--Let the state legislatures select senators.
IIRC, about the time Arnold's initiatives were coming to a vote some Hollywood bimbo came forward with stories, now entirely credible, of him groping her. The popularity contest that is California politics prescribed punishment for Arnold, never mind that it was also punishment for the rest of the state.
"The Left has broken what I believe is a major part of the social contract in Wisconsin with their endless recalls."
Oh Good Lord. Do y'all not even listen to yourselves at all? Oh, that "Left" and its "endless," groundless recalls! Nobody can at all understand why these recalls have taken place! These particular recalls establish cover for everyone to recall every politician they do not like.
Oh the humanity!
I just had brunch with my sister's in-laws. I sat next to X. We have a long history. We share the same fraternity. He's a year older.
My sister studied economics, and she rolled out such questions to stimulate the conversation.
X declared the he was a "re-inflationist".
I'm dumbfounded. What the fuck is a re-inflationist?
Finally....it dawned on me, "I'll take all of your money today, if you will give me more money tomorrow".
X is one of the executives at Microsoft.
Divest now!!
It's a ponzi scheme.
I believe that even most anti-Walker Cheeseheads believe that Wisconsin will be worse off if the recall succeeds and the Walker reforms are reversed. They just don't care. That's not their top priority.
Have you ever had a spoiled child who wants something stupid and really wants it bad? You explain to them how it will have a net negative effect on them or the family. What's their reaction? Someday they will make signs.
"great leaders have to take unpopular positions..."
hoot.
The California recall of Gray Davis made much more sense. The State was clearly heading down the disastrous path we are well down now. The Governor was handing out huge political favors and rapidly raising taxes to pay for them, while going deeper into debt. The case was convincingly made that it would take a recall to prevent disaster. We did it, and then Arnold the Governator gave the voters a clear choice to make reforms. The brain-dead electorate voted them all down, and added new spending. They believed that the old Governor was the whole problem, but he was just face of the beast. So, Arnold the pussy immediately became a virtual Democrat in very way, and a few years later every bad forecast has come true and gotten worse. The estimated debt was just revised up today by half. Strangely, the income expected from taxing the hell out of everyone did not come in.
The voters are the problem here, and they can be the solution there. Your state still has a chance. Don't let it slip by. It's a lot harder to climb back up the cliff.
Get rid of the recall mechanism? WTF, after Walker dispatches what's-his-name he is going to have a shitload of cash left, which he can sprinkle on GOP candidates in November. This is the gift that keeps on giving!
This second bite at the apple hardly ever wins support. But Recall Elections are slow developing and they do provide a mechanism for letting off steam besides lynching of the Governor by a mob.
Or what about cases when there is a dying Governor between his election day and swearing in day and then his son occupies the office and refuses to allow the Lt. Governor elect to get in.
Wisconsin politics is entertaining, but it has nothing on Georgia politics.
"As a liberal, I'm troubled by the prospect of voters unseating an elected official over taxes. Or abortion. Or gun control."
I doubt it. This is only being said because the probability of success for the recall now appears very low, and a loss would discredit the liberal agenda mightily.
No such concerns were raised by the left when they were intoxicated by the moment, drumming and chanting and generally in the sixties element.
This exposes them as a spent force, it's ideas stuck in the 1930s, unable to fix now what it didn't fix then.
bagoh20 @ 8:02
What he said.
One of my favorite memories of the California recall was how the L.A. Times had Arnold losing to Davis by 20 points right up until the vote. The paper of record, and absolutely bias free.
Our founding fathers (or for you lefties in Madiscon, our founding persons) were very smart. They built in many checks and balances.
If you get a crappy executive, well, then vote in opposition candidates for the legislature in the next election. They will stifle much of the exec's power.
I don't think the recall mechanism should be, er, recalled. If a politician is criminal, should we really have to wait 'til the end of his (or her) term to show 'em the door? No.
I think of recalls as a bit of a steam valve on the boiling caldron of public anger. Put your energy to work on a recall instead of rioting.
Too many recalls is a self-correcting problem. People will tire of them.
The Democrats in Wisconsin want the recall as they fear that if the reforms work, Governor Walker (and Republican legislators) will be there for a while. They can't wait for results to the budget fix to appear.
But that may be too late anyway. Things aren't as bad as the left predicted, and there are signs of economic issues stablizing in the state.
MadisonMan, no one is calling for a ban on recalls of criminals. We are calling for bans on recalls of elected political leaders over policy differences.
And I don't think they self correct. If I lived in western Wisconsin, I would start a recall of angry Katheleen Vinehout just to piss her off.
I always go (!) inside when someone introduces him/herself by an identity that is not their name.
"Hello, I'm blind, and I'm calling about..."
"I'm mad as hell and I want to speak to the manager."
"As a lifelong Democrat and an educator I am predictably annoyed."
All politicians are removed for political reasons, so that's a moot point.(except for tweeting underage girls pics of your junk). Someone up-thread mentioned spin? These guys were creaming their jeans during the occupation of the capital, and now that defeat is staring them in the eye, they act like they don't know what all the fuss was about.
@harrogate
I had 2 paragraphs I just erased, you ain't worth the effort. Take some of your Obama money, and buy a clue.
Good news!!! Squirrel season opens Saturday! I think I'm gonna go give them damn hawks a run for their money.
Tired of politics...time to kill something!
As a Californian, I rue the day I signed the petition to recall Governor Gray Davis. If we Californians had left well enough alone, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in with a second-go-round of Governor "Moonbeam" Brown.
Professor Zimmerman is a bigtime liberal. If, and it is a big if as noted by Pogo, Zimmerman is being sincere, then I view this as a good sign of integrity by a semi-regular OPED contributor to my local paper.
On top of that, I'd say get rid of the recall mechanism altogether.
Just like the independent prosecutor.
The argument should not be the fear of a tit-for-tat world (Zimmerman's first quoted point), but the fear of structural degradation of good governance (Zimmerman's second quoted point).
At the Federal level, it is important to remember that the government was established as a Republic instead of a Democracy for the both of Zimmerman's reasons. For a long time the regionalism of politics and especially the media protected the commonwealth from idiot populism.
But now, both at the state level and at the national level, the media is the thoughtless inciter of the mob.
If walker is unseated, i would send monies to start the recall of the new governor once it became possible to do so. Paybacks are hell, at least, that is the rumor
If a governor is incompetent, incapable, or corrupt -- but can't be impeached and won't resign -- then having the recall option is good. But after that ... isn't filling an unscheduled vacancy the sole raison d'etre of the lieutenant governor?
"Too many recalls is a self-correcting problem. People will tire of them."
The people I've watched in the past year are so full of hate, I can't see them stopping.
It is really sad when people start demanding less accountability from their elected officials.
Aaaannnd, there goes Purple missing the entire point, as usual.
I'll tell you who needs to be held accountable: the freakin voters. That means no do-overs. At the least, it should be only for the worst of acts for which most people would demand removal. So, make a recall require a 60% vote to remove (bipartisan) combined with a standard vote for a replacement all in one election. If you can't get 60% to say he should go, then it's just a partisan do-over.
It's quite clear that the Recall in California was the wrong thing to do. The voters in California wanted Gray Davis all along, and deserved exactly what they got.
You think anyone will ever want to sign a petition of ANY kind ever again since this time around they sifted, and published and tied to tax delinquency and jobs and criminal history and whatnot?
Without the recall in California, the current disaster here would have never even had a chance of being averted. The recall gave the voters a clear choice to install reforms. Due to our referendum system, the reforms were actually voted on, and the jackasses voted against them. That's what democracy looks like: fiscal irresponsibility. Public sector unions dominate everything in California, from media to the legislature, and they completely bamboozled a very gullible public. You get what you vote for, and we got a disaster.
MadisonMan asked: "If a politician is criminal, should we really have to wait 'til the end of his (or her) term to show 'em the door?"
But in a representative democracy, if your state legislators are doing their own jobs in a timely and competent fashion, they will impeach and remove criminals from office.
The point of initiative and recall is not to fix things in a hurry. It's to short-circuit legislative power and shift power from the elected legislators back directly to the voters.
It's deliberate undermining of the concept of representative democracy at its edges: Yes, the legislators still are deemed to speak "for the People," but entirely subject to the louder speaking from "the People" themselves in such special elections.
There's a question whether this is a feature or a bug. But I'm convinced that recall and the initiative undermine legislative power most fundamentally, and therefore that if they have any justification, it's because one wants to do that (rather than do a better job replacing criminal actors once discovered).
bagoh20, I live in CA (NorCal, Bay Area) and your comments on the Davis recall and Schwarzenegger's reform attempts are right on the money.
Part of me would like to see the recall mechanism done away with.
Part of me thinks that my existing legislators lack the intestinal fortitude to remove or impeach one of their own, even when the case is clear cut.
Anything that gives the electorate more control of the elected can't be a bad thing.
Choice is good.
Recalls (do-overs) should only be available to remedy serious offenses.
Not for the reasons cited in the Wisconsin recall. Walker did not unilaterally or unlawfully pass legislation. What we have here is political theater as a result of reform.
Reform is needed everywhere, to deconstruct the public troughs erected everywhere by the left.
I expect the dramatic hissy fits, sob stories and histrionics to continue as the sugary treats are taken from the fat lazy baby.
"Beldar said...
But in a representative democracy, if your state legislators are doing their own jobs in a timely and competent fashion, they will impeach and remove criminals from office."
Well at the end of Jim Doyle term the Democrats removed a criminal Assembly member from jail so he could cast a deciding vote.
I agree that the bar should be set high in a recall. For example, each and every signature on the recall petition should be carefully validated - just like they did in Wisconsin! sarc/
" I'd say get rid of the recall mechanism altogether. "
I'd settle for a supermajority requirement- at least two thirds, or perhaps 70 percent.
That way the People's power to recall an elected representative is preserved.
BUT requiring only a simple majority just enables sore losers to demand a re-do. And so long as we elect officials for fixed terms, demanding a re-do just because you're unhappy with the result is not legitimate.
"Peter said...
BUT requiring only a simple majority just enables sore losers to demand a re-do. And so long as we elect officials for fixed terms, demanding a re-do just because you're unhappy with the result is not legitimate."
Wisconsin requires only 25% of the total vote of the election applicable to the official the recall is directed against.
Keep the recall mechanism so the voters can get rid of the crooks but make the percentage to recall at least 55% so that it can't be done just to overturn an election.
Chuck66 says: MadisonMan, no one is calling for a ban on recalls of criminals.
Quoting althouse: On top of that, I'd say get rid of the recall mechanism altogether.
Althouse is some one.
Original Mike: The people I've watched in the past year are so full of hate, I can't see them stopping.
Maintaining hate is an exhausting proposition.
Recalls have been around for ever. There were efforts to recall Doyle. It's a great tool to give angry people a way to channel their energies. Why take that away? Thankfully, nothing usually comes of it because the sane people in the state don't often care for it.
We have elections every two, four and six years therefore we don't need recall elections.
"It's a great tool to give angry people a way to channel their energies. Why take that away?"
This: "Most of all, though, I fear that the recall threat will make our elected officials even more timid and poll-tested than they already are. Sometimes, great leaders need to take unpopular positions..."
Did you let your kid(s) throw public temper tantrums, MM? Because that's what this is. And everybody else in Restaurant Wisconsin is sick of it.
You think anyone will ever want to sign a petition of ANY kind ever again since this time around they sifted, and published and tied to tax delinquency and jobs and criminal history and whatnot?
you should whine to the anti prop 8 people who established a precedent and besides, don't you like taxes?
Thank You for your words. I appreciate them greatly. "Great leaders have to take unpopular positions" I will add that Scott Walker is a class act! And also that liberals and conservatives don't have to hate one another.
As far as I can tell the WI recall method is just fine.
The election will have a clarifying effect, if Walker survives then he will be able to go forward with his reforms knowing he has the clear support of the electorate. If not, then the people of WI will suffer the consequences of their actions. Either way, it will be the will of the electorate. Zimmerman is afraid because he can see the writing on the wall: recalls will becoming soon to CA and it will democrats who will be facing the music.
Too many recalls is a self-correcting problem. People will tire of them.
I agree. Especially after this one. People will waste their own time and money on such frippery foever.
Republican incumbents (and their constituencies) just cannot believe that their behavior and agendas would push individuals into the political process. Walker, Fitzgerald, et al, are too comfortable with top-down and secret coordination (think the redistricting legislation, hidden email communications and withheld anti-collective plans) to recognize democratic and spontaneous initiative when it takes place right outside their doors. Keep the recall process…remember this was the opposition’s only recourse, as state law would not allow Act 10 to be put to referendum (though, I’d of preferred this option). Also, changing the state’s constitution in reaction to this anomaly of current events, is in itself a bad idea – an overreaction to an overreaction. And I thought you guys were rational…
jimspice said...5/14/12 12:13 AM
Gee, I hope nobody will give to Republicans anymore, or oppose Dem legislation, now that Obama has minions digging into their backgrounds.
FTFY.
Post a Comment