4 needed reforms of California's recall election rules
1. Require more signatures
2. Toughen allowable reasons for a recall
3. Establish distributive partisan requirements for signatures
4. Increase filing requirements
Once the $276 million (in taxpayer funds) gubernatorial recall is mercifully over in September, the Democratically controlled Legislature needs to seriously address deficiencies in the recall process.
In the 92 years since the provision was added to the state Constitution and 2003, there had never been a recall attempt against a sitting governor that qualified for the ballot, despite dozens of attempts. Now, two of the last three Democratic governors will have been subjected to a recall within 18 years.
The main reason: California Republicans can’t win a gubernatorial election outright, so they are using the recall as a back-door alternative.
When they couldn’t defeat a very unpopular Gov. Gray Davis in the 2002 general election, Republicans came back for a re-do the next year via the recall. (The last time California Republicans defeated a sitting Democratic governor in a regular election was in 1966.) Democrat Gavin Newsom won the 2018 gubernatorial race with 62% of the vote — the largest margin of victory for a candidate of either party since 1950.
The recall provision was designed by early-20th-century Progressives as a tool to rid the state of politicians who exhibited shocking behavior, were abusing the public trust or mishandling public funds. It was not intended to be a political crowbar for a minority party to try to force its way into an office in special off-year elections.
https://calmatters.org/commentary/2021/07/4-needed-reforms-of-californias-recall-election-rules/
Only 19 states provide for recalls of governors, but most require signatures of 25% of the voters who voted in the last election. California has a ridiculously low 12%.
