Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
Citizens of Wisconsin are about to undertake an exercise in democracy that will arouse flickers of recognition among the 40 million or so residents of California: a spate of recall elections for as many as 16 members of the State Senate (nearly half of the 33 total senators).
Boasting (I suppose) a political system equally as influenced by turn-of-the-last-century progressivism as the Badger State, we here on the West Coast produced the nation’s most famous instance of citizen recall when we forcibly evicted Democrat Gray Davis from the governor’s mansion in 2003 and replaced him with Republican (I suppose) Arnold Schwarzenegger. Davis was both inept and disingenuous and Schwarzenegger – despite his myriad flaws – was an improvement. But it was still an idea that should have been resisted on principle.
One of the controlling rationales for organizing the United States as a republic instead of a democracy was that it would bind up the passions of the electorate by limiting the reach of the vote both temporally and substantively. For all the marvels produced by ancient Greece, one of the lessons of its system of relatively uninhibited democracy was that allowing popular passions to win the day eviscerated the capacity of lawmakers to act in the long-term interest of the public. Remember, these were people who put their military commanders to death for battlefield losses (and the unions think performance pay is a hardship).
Republicans in Wisconsin are betting that in the course of a normal election cycle, voters will come to see that Governor Walker’s union reforms aren’t going to bring the sky tumbling to earth. As has been noted elsewhere, that’s a similar rationale to the one national Democrats employed for Obamacare. While I think the former have a much better chance of being proven correct than the latter, both deserve a shot at the acid test of reality.
If Republicans in Wisconsin (eight of which are recall targets) are removed from office because of their vote for the bill only a few months after casting it, they will not be being punished for their performance so much as for their opinions. That’s no way to run a republic. Let these policies – and those of Obamacare at the national level – run their course long enough to get to a regularly prescribed election. Then, with more time for both reflection and empirical observation, judgment may be rendered. It need not be merciful, but it should at least be deliberate.
- Comment (14)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
During the recall election here in California, Troy, I heard argument after argument opposing the recall measure on principle. None struck me as sensible or coherent, let alone as convincing.
Yours does.
Mar '11
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
First off, I think Troy's moderation of the Law podcast is great: charming, smart, moves everything along beautifully. Well done!
However, re: recalls, I must offer another point. As a longtime CA resident, I want to put in a word for recalls and more direct democracy. If I remember my American AP History correctly, one of the reasons for representative democracy was that is was hard to get everybody together for a vote all the time, so let's just let the legislature sit for a few years before we both everybody with the idea of voting.
Needless to say, we could do straw votes daily now. Perhaps it would put legislatures in a more moderate mood, but then again, wouldn't more moderation have stopped ObamaCare?
Cheers and keep up the good work!
Aug '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
I'm not sure I get the point of comparison with Obamacare. While there's always someone trying to recall some politician for something, I haven't heard of any recall of someone who voted for Obamacare get on a ballot anywhere. We're trying to repeal it, or defund it, or otherwise subvert it, through Congressional action, using the new representatives we recently elected.
Second, while the Left is trying to recall some Wisconsin Republicans for having voted a particular way, our side is trying to recall some Democrats for something much more fundamental: bringing the democratic process to a halt by refusing to do their jobs, and leaving the state to render unenforceable the legal warrant compelling their return. Rather than being recalled, I think they should be impeached.
Jul '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
I wonder how close the left is to political violence. It refused to accept the results of the election in Wisconsin, sabotaged the legislative process, occupied the capitol building and threatened opponents with murder. The people circulating petitions to recall the fleebaggers report they are set upon and harassed by union thugs to the point that would-be signers are scared away. And now a Chicago professor has raised the philosophical question as to when violence is justified.
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
Dear lord, we'll recall legislators for voting, but not the ones who sidestep their duty with a paid vacation to another state courtesy of the taxpayers. Now I have truly fallen through the rabbit hole.
Dec '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
"a spate of recall elections for as many as 16 members of the State Senate...
If Republicans in Wisconsin (eight of which are recall targets)..."
If eight Republicans are threatened with recall for voting for the bill, then eight Democrats are threatened with recall for skipping the state to avoid voting at all on the bill.
On paper that looks like at worst a wash and at best advantage Republicans.
The risk I see is that the Dems almost always do propaganda better then the Rs. They are relentless in cranking it out and they always have the MSM on their side. The Wisconsin Rs must work diligently and continually to counter it.
Edited on Mar 15, 2011 at 8:21amMay '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
This recall effort by the left and their union friends is just a continuation of their disgusting thuggery, plain and simple. This is not about finding out the real will of the voters (that was decided in November after all!), but about punishing their enemies.
How will these recall elections go, if it gets to that point? Imagine the fraud, the ACORN-style voter registrations, the ballot boxes that will conveniently be found, the unions' intimidation of voters and manipulation of absentee ballots...
They will tear apart the state of Wisconsin to get their way. Scorched earth is their policy!
Dec '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
How successful are recalls in general? While I respect Troy's opinion, I question whether this particular theory is founded on a disbelief in the people's ability to contain their passions. We can see from Madison (and daily life in general) that those on the left cannot, but, statistically speaking, there are not enough of them to really have an effect. Even if the petitions for recall are successful, how likely is it that those voting in the election will be as passionate as those driving the recall? If the people at large are not informed and controlled enough to be trusted with a recall, how are they informed and controlled enough to be trusted with regular elections?
Mar '11
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
While I, like Mr. Senik, oppose the recall elections on the grounds that they subvert the purpose of a republic, I'm not at all concerned about the potential results in Wisconsin. The state shifted red only five months ago, and their representatives have just laid down a decidedly red vote. Recall elections could easily become a red tide and an overwhelming mandate for further reforms.
I'm not convinced that Democrat leadership in Wisconsin seriously wants recall elections. This "movement" looks like a bluff that was taken seriously by some and now they find themselves pressured into following through in order to save face.
Jun '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
This is off the top of my head.
I certainly would not do away with recall elections. But I would limit the grounds upon which they can be based. There is something anti-republican (with a small "r") in the idea that a legislator, because he or she voted in a way that has now become unpopular can be removed from office, for that act alone.
I haven't thought through where the dividing line should be, but it certainly should be allowed as a means of removing a legislator who has clearly violated ethics rules, taken bribes, and the like, on one end, and not removing a legislator who votes on a policy issue that, while it's controversial, is completely lawful (as the vote on collective bargaining was).
I could see a process that would require allegations, backed by hard evidence, that would convince a judge that there is probable cause to believe that ethics or criminal laws have been violated (e.g., Charles Rangel). If so, move ahead with the recall.
Dec '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
TR,
I think most governments already have mechanisms for removal in situations like the ones you point out. The problem is getting them to act on the authority already given. Recall is more of a backstop to a failure in that system. I still think (perhaps hope is a better word) that even if the recall gets to a vote that the people are level headed and rational enough to dismiss the attempt unless it truly is warranted like it was with Gray Davis.
Dec '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
I don't have a problem with recall in principle. It's the specific rules I might take issue with. According to Wisconsin recall laws:
Also. the recall can only apply to those elected in 2008, 16 in all.
The state Senate voting totals for 2008 reveals most of these elections were uncontested or not close. A successful recall looks feasible in only four, one D and three Rs. The three Rs -- Kapanke, Darling and Hopper -- won by margins of 2500, 1000, and 180 respectively, out of 83-87K votes cast. The D, Holperin, won by 2100.
The recall petition signatures required for these four are about 20K for Darling and 15K for the others.
However, remember the close elections where the R won were in 2008, the year of the nationwide D landslide. Also, a recall election would be in late summer or fall of 2011. They are all up for reelection in 2012 anyway.
Edited on Mar 15, 2011 at 11:37amMay '10
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
I think Troy is dead on. We have terms. If you don't like what they do, vote them out then. The whole point of a republic is to avoid the passions of the moment.
Even the Dems should not be recalled. Vote them out too. Change the law so that running in the future is a criminal act. That is the way to deal with it.
Re: Wisconsin and the Case Against Recall Elections
Exactly so. Remember that under Article IV of the Constitution, the federal government must guarantee a "republican" form of government for each state. In The Federalist Papers, it's clear that Madison distinguishes "republican" government from "democratic" government -- the latter being the Athenian model. There's an argument from an originalist perspective that state recall elections violate the the "Guarantee Clause" of Article IV.