I'm conflicted about the "Recall Scott Walker" movement in Wisconsin

Politics & Elections
1

I despise the guy. I disagree with about everything he stands for and everything he’s done since he’s become governor.

But he was elected legally, and as far as I know he hasn’t committed any crimes or anything that I would consider abuses of power. While it is true that he didn’t make union disenfranchisement an election issue, a lot of governors do things they didn’t mention while campaigning. And, if you were looking closely enough, you could tell he was the kind of prick who would pull shit like this if he ever got in office. I think the people who voted against him may have had a better idea of what to expect from him than his supporters did.

I’m not at all comfortable with the idea of overturning legitimate election results because you don’t like what the official is doing after getting in office, assuming they are exercising their power in a legal manner. In fact, I can imagine recalls like this could be a common tactic in the future, which I think is a very bad thing.

BUT, I am very much in favor of political initiatives that arise out of the community. And the citizens of Wisconsin certainly have the right to do this. Had the writers of Wisconsin’s constitution have intended that someone could only be removed for office due to some kind of malfeasance, they could certainly have written those terms into the rules for recall elections.

I would rather we had a system that would allow us to repeal the law, essentially spanking the politicians who voted for it – like what happened last week in Ohio. But Wisconsin doesn’t have a process like that.

So here I am. I believe that citizens should be able to directly put… things… on a ballot for a state-wide vote, and signing the petition supports that right, even though I personally don’t think Walker should be recalled for what he did. And a signature on the petition is not a vote against Walker.

And I am further conflicted. I voted against him in the last election, and in the normal course of events I would vote against him in the next. And I can’t bring myself to vote for him in a recall to demonstrate my opposition to the reason for the recall election. So I will very very tempted to sit out the recall election – assuming it happens. But then again, since I want him out of office, and the voice of the people speaks loudly enough to make the recall election happen, is there ant real difference between voting against him now, or voting against him a couple years down the road?

I swear I can tie myself up in knots thinking about this shit.

2

I don’t really see why the original election is “legitimate” but the recall isn’t. The recall process is detailed under the Wis constitution, presumably the same place that details election rules. Walker is governor because he got people to vote for him in the election, and he’ll stay governor if he can defeat the recall.

I actually am not a fan of recall votes or popular ballot measures in general. But whether I like them or not, I think its silly to ignore them in some sort of protest. If I were designing our government from the ground up, there’s probably a lot of ways I’d change how the system works. But I’m not, and I still have to live with the results of elections, so it’d be silly of me not to vote on ballot measures and the like.

So shorter answer: I’d vote according to how you feel about Walker, and not make it some sort of meta-vote on the process itself.

3

I think you’re mixing up the concepts of recall and impeachment. Impeachment is supposed to be used to get a criminal out of office (though of course in practice it ends up being largely political). Recall, though, isn’t designed that way: The people can recall a politician (if such is allowed for in the relevant rules) for whatever reason they choose. “He governed based on different policies than he ran on” is not good grounds for impeachment, but it’s perfectly fine for recall.

4

I’m not sure I understand your position. It’s not like the mob is forcibly deposing him with torches and pitchforks. They’re not even impeaching him. They’re using a mechanism designed specifically for the current situation – electing a guy and then getting buyer’s remorse.

Think of it this way: if the a company hires a CEO and he doesn’t pan out and the shareholders hate him and the board of directors don’t like him, do they let him finish out his contract? If the local ball team finishes DFL in the standings, do the owners of the team have any compunction about ousting the manager?

If Walker has a mandate, then he’ll stay in office. And, if he doesn’t, then there’s a mechanism to ease him out — “Sorry it didn’t work out, good luck in your future endeavors.”

5

I didn’t say it wasn’t legitimate. It certainly is legitimate in that it is certainly legal. And I believe that the citizenry does and should have the right to do it

I am conflicted about what I personally should do or not. I think the reason it’s being done is a bad one, and I fear both parties will resort to it as just another tactic in the future.

6

Well, since his career prospects in California (in ANY capacity) are not looking too rosy right about now, I hope Arnold Schwarzenegger will consider trying out for governor of Wisconsin, just to keep him off the streets…

7

I’m sure he’s working on Terminator 4: The Governator as we speak.

8

Ah-nold

Actually, he just finished work on a Sponge Bob episode and is working on the sequel to The Expendables…:rolleyes:

9

It’s supposed to be just another tactic. That’s what it’s meant for.

10

I think recalls are bad government, but if it’s in the State constitution and you want the guy out of office, voting for his recall is just as valid as any other vote. There’s nothing wrong with voting your conscience even if you are opposed to some element of the system.

Like maybe you’re a white guy in the 1940s and you think literacy tests and poll taxes are the worst thing ever, but if you refuse to vote because you detest the whole system you’re just making sure that the other people who are for poll taxes and literacy tests have even larger power than they would otherwise have.

It’s rarely the right move in any voting situation to abstain because of some ephemeral opposition to some mechanism of the voting process.

11

I think I understand your hesitation – that the tactic will be abused and tossed around like a political football. This is not unlike the frequent talk about impeaching a current president.

But in this case, the bar is set pretty high for the tactic to succeed. Getting 25% of the previous election’s voters to sign a petition seems impossible except in the most extreme circumstances. Those circumstances would certainly warrant a recall.

Or do you think 25% is too low? Would a higher percentage address your concerns?

I wouldn’t want to see a recall come up for every governor, but I do like the idea that a current governor can be held accountable in a very direct manner before their term expires.

12

I would be a bit more sympathetic to your concerns if the the requirements for a recall election were a bit easier to meet (signatures from over 25% of the total votes cast during the last election for governor (over 500,000 votes in this case)) and a recall election can only occur a year after the candidate takes office.

I might think senators should be elected by their state’s legislature and the president should be chosen by the electoral college because I think that it leads to less politicking and less gridlock but I still vote for senator and president when election day rolls around.

Instead we elect our president like we pick an American Idol.

13

Why do you think this would be a problem? if someone gets elected and is doing a horrible enough job that a recall is successful why is that ever a bad thing?

14

As I’ve said before, I’m waiting for his turn as Jorgen von Strangl in the live-action movie of The Fairly OddParents

15

In order for it to be successful, there has to be enormous discontent with his policies. He has not been governing like he said he would when was running.
Recalls are not easy. They have to gather an enormous amount of signatures in a very short time. They have to set up an organization to run against him. They have to raise money.
It will never be a tool to be used cavalierly when a gov. pisses off a segment of the state. He has to be governing against the interests of a great plurality for a recall to be possible.

16

I really would like someone to explain why a recall would be a bad thing. The OP says he opposes it, and says it is bad government. Why is that the case? What is bad about it?

That’s the only way to decide this. List the pros and cons for the position. You’ve listed mostly pros. Is the only con that it might not give the governor time to actually govern? Because that’s clearly not the case here: it’s his governance that people have a problem with.

17

The only thing needed for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.

Vote to recall Walker with a clear conscience, enthusiasm, and encouragement for others to do the same. I know I will.

18

The bad thing would be if both sides starting using recalls so frequently that actual governing became impossible: if it gets to where elections don’t resolve anything, if everyone is always striving for a do-over instead of going forward, the system breaks down.

However, I think that in this case the very high standards to create a recall serve as a break on that.

19

Where did I say I oppose it? I said a recall is not a good idea except in cases of crime or abuse of power – not for simply making unpopular decisions. And Yes, I’m concerned that it will become a common political tactic. You might even say it has already become one in Wisconsin, as there have been or are still to come, about 10 of them since the election last year (including state legislators).

20

I’ll need to do a little research to get an accurate count. But I think there have already been 6 recall election for Republican state legislators, 3 for Democrats, and IIRC the Dems also filed papers for recall of 2 more Pubs at the same time they filed the papers on Walker.

If I have that count right, that makes 12 total.