California has rarely seen a governor more deserving of being
thrown from office in a recall than Arnold Schwarzenegger. He’s
broken almost every promise he ever made; he’s demonstrated
steadfast ineptitude in managing state budget crises, and he has
yet to fix a single one of the major political problems that led to
his own election via the only recall of an American governor in the
last 80 years.
California has rarely seen a governor more deserving of being thrown from office in a recall than Arnold Schwarzenegger. He’s broken almost every promise he ever made; he’s demonstrated steadfast ineptitude in managing state budget crises, and he has yet to fix a single one of the major political problems that led to his own election via the only recall of an American governor in the last 80 years.
And yet, the idea of a new recall to rid Sacramento of its current leading man – now being actively floated by the ultra-wealthy and powerful state prison guards union – makes little sense.
Unless, that is, your motive is either vindictive revenge or a wish to somehow skew the outcome of the next scheduled run for governor, in 2010.
The prison guards, formally known as the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, do have some reasons to seek revenge against Schwarzenegger. Most important is the fact that he did not list the 30,000 prison guards among essential public workers who would be exempted from his so-far-thwarted executive order to temporarily reduce state employee salaries to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 per hour.
But it’s the timing that makes this recall notion stink. Even if petitions began circulating today, it would likely be February or March before the more than 1 million valid voter signatures needed to force a special recall election could be collected and verified. That means an actual vote would probably come no sooner than midsummer of next year.
This timetable would place any such election less than a year before the regularly scheduled June 2010 primary where voters will pick the two major party candidates for governor.
It would also come barely a year before Schwarzenegger will be forced out by term limits.
Which pretty much means there would be little point to the entire exercise. For those who want to rid the state of Arnold, he’s going to be gone soon anyway. Why spend approximately $50 million on a special recall election when the mere passage of time will accomplish the same task almost as quickly?
There’s also the issue of skewing that 2010 primary, at least on the Democratic side. Back in 2003, when voters threw out then-Gov. Gray Davis, only one major Democrat placed his name on the list of replacement candidates. Schwarzenegger was one of two big-name Republicans running.
Most Democrats stayed out for fear of alienating a sitting governor and the party’s entire establishment.
They would have no such compunctions in 2009. If an Arnold recall occurred, any Democrat who didn’t run in it would be virtually conceding the 2010 nomination to the recall winner, as no sitting California governor has lost a party primary in more than 100 years.
So a recall, if successful, would force the hands of prospective candidates like Attorney General Jerry Brown, state Treasurer Bill Lockyer, Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and other hopefuls like frustrated 2006 candidates Steve Westly and Phil Angelides. Not to mention veteran U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who would like another year or so to make up her mind about a second try for governor.
Republicans, likely to stay out of the recall race as most Democrats did in 2003, would also see their 2010 chances diminished, given the rarity of unseating an incumbent governor. Especially one still basking in the honeymoon period that usually lasts a year or two after a new face takes over.
Plus, the sheer number of Democrats on a recall ballot where the leading vote-getter wins, regardless of how small his or her percentage of the vote, could give the state a governor who won 20 percent of the vote or less. That kind of minority rule is always a bad idea.A recall next year also would send a message that California just might be ungovernable, with a populace that bounces top officials if they so much as annoy one or two powerful interest groups. No one knows what that might do to the state’s bond rating and to the possibilities of attracting qualified, solid candidates for high office in the future.
It would be foolish to say all this cannot happen, even though Schwarzenegger aides scoff at the notion in language very much like that used by Davis spokesmen back when his recall was just an idea.
But with a positive poll rating now ranging down into the low 30 percent range, this is something Schwarzenegger needs to take seriously. Voters also should think long and hard before signing another recall petition. The last one was clearly justified on grounds of corruption and incompetence, and this one plainly would be, too, and on the same grounds — if the timing were different.
But timing is everything here, and the timing is simply lousy for a new recall.
