How come we can recall Governers, but not Presidents? I’m seriously interested in why this isn’t possible. I understand Presidents can be imeached, but what about recalled like Gray Davis?
Simple answer – eighteen state constitutions provide for a recall procedure, the federal constitution does not.
The idea of recall elections was part of the Progressive movement, along with the initiative, referenda and other direct democracy voting reforms. I don’t know if there was an effort to amend the Constitution to allow for recalls, but if so it (obviously) was not successful.
Since the President is not directly elected by the voters, any recall procedure would need to reflect this. Otherwise, a President elected by less than 50% of the voters could be recalled immediately, and it would become impossible to get a stable situation even with no one changing their mind because of the Presient’s performance.
Because the framers didn’t anticipate direct election of the President and overlooked the possibility that an incompetant prisident would be elected by the people.
If you look at the process defined in the Constitution for electing a President you will find no mention of an election by direct, popular vote. The President is elected by a set of electors selected by the legislature of each state. Each state has a number of electors equal to the number of its senators and representatives combined.
The President is still elected solely by the electors and it is still possible for them to vote contrary to the popular vote although it has never happened.
And so the framers assumed, I suppose, that the legislatures would select experienced and able people to be electors and they would at least assure themselves of the competence of the person they selected as President of the US.
I keep trying not to recall the fellow, but, like a bloated corpse insufficiently chained before being thown in the river, he keeps bobbing up in my attention.
What AHunter3 said, only much more eloquently than I could have. I tried to not recall Bush Sr from 1976 to 1980, and I’ve been trying to now recall Dubya for the past six years.
And why exactly was Bush Sr on your mind during the Carter Administration? I think you’re veering into phobia territory, there.
As others said: the Constitution was not originally geared for the direct election of the President, and therefore made no direct provisions for his “recall”; only his removal after impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The 25th Amendment further allows the President to be removed if the Vice-President and a majority of Cabinet members believe him to be “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”.
However, as of yet, no Amendment to the Constitution allows for the removal of a President because he belongs to a different political party than you.
And what a glaring weakness that has turned out to be. 
I don’t agree right now, but perhaps after 2008, you might get me to subscribe to your newsletter.
::takes note of which forum this is in::
Umm, no one has upbraided me so far, but 'twas probably inappropriate, my comment up there. Somehow I missed noticing this was in GQ the first time around.
Recall elections are costly and require large amounts of time to set up.
This San Francisco Chronicle article talks about the financial burden of the Davis recall:
And according to the state, that might be underestimating the cost.
Doing a recall on a national basis would probably take so long that it would run into the next election cycle in any case.
So the total effect of the need to amend the constitution, the difficulty of setting up a national election, the undermining of the electoral college, the fantastic cost, the endless animosity, and the fact that time would make such an election moot, means that national recall elections are not an answer to any national problem.
I just want to go back and look at flurb’s response. Eighteen state constitutions provide for recalling their governors.
That means 32 don’t. My state doesn’t. The next state over doesn’t, either.
This suggests to me that even recalling governors isn’t universally considered a good thing.
I was no fan of Gray Davis, but I can attest to the negative aspects of a recall process having lived thru the one in CA a few years ago. If anyone wants to increase the viciously partisan nature of presidential politics, adding a recall option will certainly do the trick!
While correct, I think this is putting the cart before the horse a bit – the simple answer is that there is no recall procedure for the president in the Constitution. The fact that the president isn’t directly elected isn’t directly relevant – members of the House are and have always been directly elected, and there’s no recall process for them either. It just isn’t anything we have at the federal level.
Now, the discussion of direct election vs. the electoral college and the history of the progressive movement (the recall being essentially a 20th century invention), etc., are interesting components of the answer to the second-level question as to why we don’t have a presidential recall. But as to the operational question, which I read to be the main question in the OP – the answer is that the president cannot be recalled because federal law simply does not contain any recall provision.
–Cliffy
Actually, the XXV Amendment provides for the President to be neutralized and the Vice-President to take over as Acting President. The President remains in office, and can attempt a counter-coup, to be referreed by Congress.
This is also the reason why we don’t have any provision for a vote of no confidence against the president. It wouldn’t accomplish anything except to make hard feelings even worse.
Does the thought of Dick Cheney in charge make you feel better ?