Davis Recall: Someone please explain THIS to me...

[wyldwolf]

If Davis wins the recall election, the state constitution states: "a state officer who is not recalled shall be reimbursed by the state for the officer's recall election expenses legally and personally incurred."

So, Davis would get his expenses paid back, right? That is what it says, right?

Then why does The Board of Control say "nothing in the provision says specifically that campaign expenses have to be reimbursed?"

Did I miss something? Is The Board of Control employing some of that freeper logic or am I just not understanding something?

http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82%257E1865%257E1539694,00.html

[DianeK]

1. i need even further explanation than that...

i am not understanding how, when the people have had there say, that decision can be overturned by this so-called 'recall' process. i do understand there has been precedent, but it seems somehow undemocratic to me

[Bandit]

3. It is undemocratic and is what I would call a coup

The voters are being disenfranchised by this recall. They elected who they wanted and now for no stated reason their will is being disregarded. Very Un-democratic.

[stopthegop]

5. then they can just vote again...

pretty standard recall concept...dangerous to start doing it though except for VERY serious offenses

[Le Taz Hot]

2. I would love to be able to clarify this for you

but, no matter how much I read on this -- and I've read a LOT, there is so much I still don't understand. There are two words that discribe the California re-call: Cluster F**k.

[Dem2dend]

4. The way I see it

They get the opportunity to re-call any elected official who doesn't perform the way they hoped he would.
Don't you wish we could do that with *?