Nebraska State Senator Bill Avery has introduced LB 224. It would prevent future recall petitions, unless the official to be recalled has been convicted of a crime that involves dishonesty, or unless the official has committed malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance.
Translation: He wants to make it easier for corrupt politicians to stay in office.
One more ANTI-Democracy machination — done by an allegedly nonpartisan gerrymander monarch.
NO reason required for the sovereign voters to elect candidates.
NO reason needed for the sovereign voters to recall any arrogant EVIL incumbent gerrymander MONSTER.
What is the percentage of arrogant EVIL incumbent gerrymander MONSTERS in all of the gerrymander legislative bodies in the U.S.A. ???
More or less than 99 percent ???
I generally favor no-reason recalls. But I’ve seen an instance in my own home town of school-board members recalled for *non*-malfeasance.
A Native American parent made a complaint about the high-school team nickname of Redskins. With legal advice, mediation from the state civil-rights commission, and consultants and local residents working together, the district worked out a conciliation agreement to let the students pick a new name, which they did (Redhawks — which allowed for an adaptation of the logo, even). But this enraged a lot of long-time residents of the area, and there was a significant (though non-official and non-enforceable) petition to reject that agreement and hold a referendum on going back to Redskins.
The board got legal advice that said they couldn’t do that under state law — but that wasn’t good enough for the diehard Redskins preferrers. At the next election, they defeated the only member on the ballot who had voted for the change, and recalled the other four pro-agreement members (out of seven). The temporarily three-member board voted to go back to Redskins — before finding out that they couldn’t do that without agreement from the original complainers. Eventually there was another round of student renaming — which again yielded Redhawks as the new name.
So I might favor not allowing recalls that are futile because the replacements couldn’t legally act in any other way than the behavior that is the basis for the desired recall. What do others think?