12 total posts
I've got to be all for that and wouldn't mind
if there wasn't some clamoring to start the recall petitioning process just to turn up the heat even more.
Any idea how that would be done?
I don't have a clue how recalls work.
Probably rare and quite cumbersome
It would need to begin at some grassroots level within a representatives district. It would require some significant number of petition signatures, a validation process and a special election. There was news of such in Wisconsin recently but I didn't follow it. I'm fairly certain we are guaranteed rights to referendum on just about any piece of legislation and recall of any elected official.
Question to self.
Who gains from the perspective that congress, and government in general, can't do ANYTHING right and should be bankrupted?
Question: Who thinks that a 2% increase on an individuals income on ONLY OVER $250,000 per year is undoable? Nor should not be a part of the pain?
Answer: Those who think Starve The Beast is ripe!
I'd like an addition to our election process
Every race should have one position as "TBA" which would stand for "To Be Appointed". That way people could vote out the incumbents without being required to vote some new promise giver liar into office. Any TBA elected for a position in state government or federal govt would then be appointed by the governor of that state. The governor could remove and replace anyone in that position during the tenure of that current election cycle. At times of national distress or economic distress, when elected representatives had shown they were incapable of coming to decisions because of their worry about getting elected again back home, the only thing the office holder would have to worry about is if he pleased the governor of his home state. It would also allow governors more control during such times over the federal govt. If someone in Congress was there on a TBA, he'd know there would be no long recall election process to his removal if he failed to perform or found negligent in his duty, he could be removed and replaced quickly by his home state governor. Although in reality a TBA would probably have the same chances as most third party candidates do today, it might actually work if a few TBA were elected since the other office holders would realize they might lose their position to an appointment process the next election, even if they were more desireable candidate than whomever they ran against, simply because the voters decided to unite and let the position become a power position for the governor to control.
has a "None of the above" on their ballot. It's never won but has come in second a lot.
Unrestricted right to remove the TBA
would make him nothing but a puppet, you might as well let the governor phone in the vote on bills.
It could be moderated
where the governor nominates someone and it's approved by the legislature, or he appoints them and any dismissal must be approved by legislature. Diana's state practice of "None of the Above" is a good start, but you may not know who then appoints the person to that office, or may not want to vote that way because it will require a special election later. I can see some advantage where neither candidate is wanted by voters. Unfortunately in some states ballots that aren't fully voted aren't counted unless there's a close election and then they can be challenged, yet often there are races in an election where the voter either doesn't want either person or is unfamiliar with either of them and figures an appointment if he trusts the higher elected officials would be preferable above any of the office seekers. Also in situation like we have currently a governor can promise to appoint people who are willing to seek compromise rather than gridlock and since those appointed aren't subject to recall election, having been appointed for that term, especially if they don't intend to seek the office through election process next time around, the person may actually get more accomplished in the office than someone elected to the position.
Not the first time this has been suggested.
Tip O'Neill and Dan Rostenkowski were locked in the basement of Andrews AFB until they agreed to the Unified Budget. The ultimate smoke and mirrors. The dumbing down of the American voter.
A good reason it can't be done
Because if we did, who would ever want to let them back out?
Sure we would let them out
and then replace them all.