General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCalifornia's costly, confusing recall sparks an effort to rethink the rules
The rules governing recall elections in California will be subject to new scrutiny and possible changes, as two state legislators said Wednesday that the failed effort to remove Gov. Gavin Newsom from office was too costly and needlessly confusing.
Though election returns remained incomplete following Tuesday's contest, recall supporters found their effort millions of votes short with projections that Newsom easily won enough support to complete the final year of his current term. California lawmakers agreed to spend at least $276 million in the most recent state budget to cover the costs of the recall, but some elections officials have estimated the final tab will be closer to $300 million.
"That money could be spent on housing, on homelessness, on combating climate change, forest fires, early childhood education, you name it," said Assemblyman Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), chairman of the Assembly Elections Committee. "There's a lot of desire, and need, for reforming the recall process."
Voters were given the power to remove an elected official before the end of their term in office through an amendment to the California Constitution in 1911. In the years that followed, only one small change was made to the recall process. Although most recall efforts have failed to qualify for the ballot, similar concerns about the rules were raised in 2003, when then-Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, was ousted in favor of Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/california-s-costly-confusing-recall-sparks-an-effort-to-rethink-the-rules/ar-AAOukF3
superpatriotman
(6,232 posts)Thats an expensive jobs program.
padfun
(1,780 posts)It went into the pockets of signature gatherers, radio stations, TV Stations, and many other jobs as well. And Right Wingers invested quite a large amount as well.
We had a 65 billion surplus this year and another huge one next year.
All political campaigns end up being jobs programs.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,789 posts)Wheel spinning jobs.
$275 million later California has the same Governor. No change.
$275,000 spent on a numerically controlled milling tool is $275,000 that is still out there producing wealth and employing people year after year.
$275,000 spent on a campaign bus tour is lost money, dead money, done and gone.
$275 million spent on the recall is like spending $275,000,000 on an ICBM. At least it doesn't continue to suck money down a hole guarding it and maintaining it.
padfun
(1,780 posts)We have machines and robots do all that. There is no need for human labor anymore.
That's why I am for a guaranteed salary. Otherwise we will have 95% unemployment and massive homelessness.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,789 posts)I get that you are being sarcastic with your first sentences, but machines and robots only do some work.
On the other hand, I am fully with you for a guaranteed basic income, guaranteed healthcare, and guaranteed housing. Experience has shown that when those are provided, people can work on whatever mental or emotional or disease (ex. PTSD, substance abuse, etc) they are experiencing. Outcomes are better than the current system, and ... and total societal expenditures actually drop: less policing, less healthcare needed (not more), more get jobs when they have an address and tax revenues increase. Win-win-win.
WarGamer
(12,106 posts)LiberalFighter
(50,504 posts)And only those that voted in the last election.
And only those that voted in the last election can vote in the recall.
No second vote. If the recall succeeds then the Lt Gov replaces the Governor.
Buckeyeblue
(5,491 posts)Every 4 years there is a chance to vote for governor. If the people don't like the job the governor is doing, the can elect someone else. If the governor is violating the law, he/she can be impeached by the legislature.
tinrobot
(10,848 posts)If the Governor is recalled, the Lt. Governor takes office.
This alone would stop the power grabs.
Renew Deal
(81,802 posts)They are too costly, confusing, and disruptive. The person should serve out their term with the threat of impeachment. How is someone supposed to pick a replacement if they dont know the status of the office sitter? Also, the threshold to get on the ballot is so low that small groups of troublemakers can cause problems for popular officials.