As if there were not enough reasons to be against the recall in California (which I am not going to state again), my comparison of future California politics to the Italian government in the 1990’s does not seem to be so far-fetched:
Elected officials, political analysts and professors say the upshot of this effort may unleash recalls against other candidates and spur more initiatives.
“That’s a danger here,” said state Attorney General Bill Lockyer, a Democrat who opposes the recall effort. “Once you use it, it could be likely to come back again.”
Some Democrats, in fact, have already issued the threat that they will try to recall any Republican who wins the Governor’s Office.
“The recall petition would be handed to that Republican at their swearing-in, absolutely,” said Bob Mulholland, a political adviser to the state Democratic Party.
The article notes that recall has been tried 31 times before, all unsuccessfully, but this certainly is not something I look forward to, and I live nowhere near California. If I owned a business I would probably look for a state with a more stable political climate, and all Californians should keep that in mind.
Robin Roberts
Bob Mulholland says a lot of things that don’t come true. Like that there would be no Democrats on the ballot.
TM Lutas
I believe the number of votes needed to launch a recall is a percentage of the most recent election’s vote totals. This sort of threat makes high turnout important in a way that it hasn’t been before. If predictions hold true, it looks like the recall drive is going to create a very high turnout. So where does that leave the people looking to recall the replacement governor? In a lot of trouble.
John Cole
That is an excellent point, TM.
Steve Malynn
The reason the 32d attempt at a recall for Cal. governor worked, where the first 31 attempts failed, is not that politicians are more venal or partisan, at least not directly. Davis played his strengths perfectly to get re-elected: he machined the process to get his preferred opponent, Simon, and then he dirty-politicked in a way that would make Nixon or LBJ blush. But the voting population got embarrassed by Davis’ immediate conduct after the election: they voted for a guy who said he now had a handle on the budget and energy problems, stay the course and see it through; within weeks of the elcection everything Davis said about the economy, the budget, and his admin was shown to be a lie. American voters still understand if you lose an election, the other side gets to effect their policy until the next election. Gore might have missed that point, but the California recall is not about a redo, it is about betrayal – Grey Davis pushed the voters over the edge. I predict that more will vote for recall than voted for Davis.
MommaBear
A great many businesses have already voted with their feet and wheels…right into other states. When last observed, CA was suffering a net loss in population, too.
Ken Hahn
What is often missed about the recall is its difficulty. It has never been tried statewide in 90 years because it is so hard to qualify. The Democrats cannot afford a recall against Davis’ sucessor. No party can afford a recall. The only reason this one qualified is that Davis irritated everyone in California beyond belief.
The recall is legitimate and will replace Davis. Had he ignored Simon’s deficit claims instead of lying, there would be no recall. He created this situation.
Like the second amendment, the recall is a reminder to corrupt politicians of who really runs things in this country.
Bill Quick
The government of California is more stable than that of the former Soviet Union. It’s been in complete thrall to the special interests and the corrupt politicians for more than thirty years.