Most people look at the California recall process and think, “There’s a mess I’d want to avoid.” I noticed, via Atrios, however, that some conservative activists in Nevada have seen their neighbors to their immediate west and thought, “What a great idea!”
Unfortunately, a new group has formed with committed activists (or is that, activists who should be committed?), intent on gathering signatures to force a recall on Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn (R). The group, named simply the Committee to Recall Governor Guinn, will file papers of their intent with the Secretary of State’s office today.
This does not appear to be a half-hearted effort. The group claims to have over 600 volunteers ready to gather petition signatures.
The Nevada recall, however, is different from the California endeavor. For one thing, Gray Davis is a Democrat facing a GOP-driven recall. In Nevada, it’s a conservative Republican dealing with the wrath of other conservatives. Both Davis and Guinn were re-elected to second gubernatorial terms just nine months ago, with over three years remaining in each of their final terms in office.
So, what did Guinn do to make Nevada’s rightwing so upset? What else? He raised taxes.
After boasting during the 2002 campaign that he never raised taxes during his first four years in the governor’s office, Guinn found Nevada facing the same fiscal crisis most states are currently dealing with. He unveiled a proposal for $800 million in tax increases over the next two years. After intense wrangling, the Nevada legislature passed Guinn’s plan.
Getting a Guinn recall on the ballot won’t be easy.
Generating a recall election in California isn’t too tough — Davis’ right-wing opponents needed only 12 percent of the total number of voters from the last gubernatorial election. In California, that may seem like a lot of people, but it’s a pretty low threshold. Moreover, in California’s recall rules, there is no time limit on gathering the necessary signatures to trigger a recall election. They can keep trying to acquire the requisite signatures indefinitely.
In Nevada, as in most states, the standards are far more difficult. The recall leaders need 25 percent of the total number of Nevadans who cast ballots in the 2002 election, not just those who voted in the governor’s race. And, instead of an open-ended schedule, signature gatherers have 90 days from the day papers are filed with the Secretary of State’s office.
While in California, a potential candidate needs only 65 signatures (and $3,500) to have his or her name appear on the recall ballot, Nevada’s process requires would-be governors to obtain the same number of signatures needed to generate a recall in the first place — 25 percent of those who voted in 2002, which in Nevada, would mean over 125,000 signatures. If no candidates qualify, and the recall vote is successful, the lieutenant governor gets promoted.
I’m not a fan of Guinn or his conservative policies, but the recall process mustn’t be abused in this fashion. As in California, it makes a mockery of the democratic process. Removing a governor from office must be reserved for the most flagrant examples of abuse and malfeasance, not just taking controversial stands on issues.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict that the Nevada recall effort will fail — miserably. Then again, I never though the California mess would get this far, so what do I know?