Campaigns & Elections: Recall elections: democracy in action or populism run amok?

Gray Davis, Lynn Frazier and a host of state and local officials weren't living up to their constituents' desires. So voters removed them from office. Davis, governor of California from 1999 to late 2003, and Frazier, governor of North Dakota from 1917 to 1921, are the only two governors ever to be recalled.

In 1988 Arizona Gov. Evan Mecham (R) faced a serious recall threat but was impeached for obstruction and misuse of state funds before voters got to the polls. Eleven years later, a judge in Minnesota ruled that the reasons to recall Gov. Jesse Ventura were inadequate, and the recall didn't go to a vote.

Recall is not limited to governors. Eighteen states, as well as the District of Columbia, Guam and the Virgin Islands allow recalls of state officials. In fact, when Frazier was recalled in 1921, voters were so dissatisfied that they gave the boot to the state attorney general and commissioner of agriculture and labor.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

When Democrat Davis was recalled from the California governor's office in October, election offices across the country were flooded with queries of how to remove public officials. However, few officials were actually recalled.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

At least 36 states allow recalls of local officials, and voters have not been afraid to exercise their power. The requirements differ from state to state. Many require evidence of illegal activity, gross negligence or mismanagement. In California, all that is needed is 12 percent of the number of voters in the previous election. Montana has the lowest requirement of only 10 percent. Other states require signatures from at least 25 percent of voters in the previous election.

"There certainly was no tidal wave of recalls and there are good reasons for that, it is very difficult to pull off in places like that[states with higher requirements than California]," Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia said. "There is such a thing as too much democracy."

California's low signature requirement makes it not surprising that California has seen the most recalls of any state.

Since the recall provision was inserted into the California constitution in 1911, seven state legislators have faced recall elections, and four were removed. Until last year, all 31 efforts to recall a governor there failed.

Although recalls allow citizens to assert their power over elected officials, some recalls may go too far costing cities and counties thousands or even millions without any significant reward. Beyond the cost is the concern that the requirements for recalls, especially in California are too low and prompt unnecessary recalls that disrupt rather than preservedemocracy.

Reasons for Recalls

In official papers submitted for Davis' recall, sponsors cited "gross mismanagement of California finances by overspending taxpayers' money, threatening public safety by cutting funds to local governments, failing to account for the exorbitant cost of the energy fiasco, and failing to deal with the state's major problems until they get to the crisis stage."

In 2003, political opponents of Wisconsin state Sen. Gary George (D) started a recall effort against the veteran lawmaker after he voted to override Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's veto of Republican legislation that would have given lawmakers final say over tribal gambling compacts. Critics also accused George of not living in his district and ignoring his constituents. The effort worked. In October, Democratic state Rep. Spencer Coggs defeated George by a 30-point margin.

Although not cited as a reason for the recall, he was indicated for defrauding the state and taking money from a businessman in exchange for state contracts. George pled guiltyto a conspiracy charge in January and recently appealed the other four counts. As of press time, the appeals were pending.

George's recall is one of a handful that have taken place in Wisconsin. The first came in 1932, when a state senator survived a recall election. The first successful recall election happened in 1996 when state Sen. George Petak was ousted after he cast the deciding vote for a regional sales tax to pay for the Milwaukee Brewers' Miller Park. George was the second.

Despite bad policy and mismanagement of funds, some would argue recalls are never necessary. Sabato said there are other options to remove someone from office including pressure to resign, legal action or impeachment that make recall unnecessary.

The framers of the Constitution debated recalls in and Alexander Hamilton opposed recalls. He used the same logic commonly used today in opposition of recalls.

"[The recall] will render the senator a slave to all the capricious humors among the people," he said.

Sabato agrees.

"I certainly was sympathetic with them [recall supporters in California], but they elected [Davis]," he said. "It is a good lesson for people, elections matter, you need to cast your ballot carefully. It is not a bad thing to force people to live through the consequences."

Local Attempts

Recall attempts at the local level, where voters have more potential interaction with their elected officials, are more common. But they generally have low success rates. In Wisconsin, there are usually between 50 and 75 local officials about which recall is discussed but go nowhere, said Kevin Kennedy, executive director of the Wisconsin Elections Board

From 2003 to May 2004, there were recall attempts under way for local officials in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon and Ohio.

One of the more dramatic examples of a recall took place in the eastern Los Angeles County community of Covina, where voters recalled the entire city council. In July 1993, the council approved a 6 percent utility tax without voter approval. In response, voters ousted all five members. But the lack of revenue from the utility tax raised the possibility that the city would have to close a library and fire station, and lay off 42 city employees.

The council replacements, some of who had been critics of the tax, then adopted an 8.25 percent utility tax without voter approval.

"The funny part of it was it didn't really correct anything," said Mike Spence, a political activist in neighboring West Covina who consulted for one of two pro-recall groups. "They still have [the utility tax] today. One of the people who was thrown out is now back on the council."

Even successful recall elections might end up costing cities more than helping them in the end. In the case of Covina, the special election cost the city thousands of dollars, but citizens actually ended paying more under the new utility tax.

"The taxpayers who opposed the utility tax won the recall, but still lost," said Spence, a 12-year school board member in West Covina and president of the conservative California Republican Assembly. "They won the battle, but they lost the war."

In addition to fiscal expenditures, resources are diverted from other projects to complete a recall election.

"The drawbacks of recall include a contradiction with the essence of democracy," Sabato said. "They are very costly, not just in terms of money but in time and energy devoted to them instead of the solving of the problems."

Recall Costs

The California gubernatorial recall cost more than $50 million, according to Secretary of State Kevin Shelley. In Wisconsin, George's Milwaukee-based district absorbed the monetary costs for the special election. The recall also impacted the state, because staff had to be diverted from other state election activities to accommodate the special election.

"Out of pocket you are probably out less than $100,000 for that particular election [George's recall]," Kennedy said.

California's Davis took a common tact among recall targets in arguing the effort would be a waste of taxpayer money. "If you sign this petition, it may lead to a special election this summer costing us taxpayers an additional $20 to $40 million," he said in his official response to the recall effort.

On its face, the recall of an officeholder would likely mean the end of their political career. But a few recalled politicians have made comeback. A year after Lynn Frazier was recalled as governor of North Dakota, he was elected to the U.S. Senate and served for three terms.