The Whole Concept of "Recall"

Romanoffia

Romanoffia

Garde à l'eau!
I see all the recalls and threats of recalls and rumors of recalls and it brings an interesting question to mine: Should there be some kind of legal threshold for holding a 'recall'?

The reason I say this is that from all appearances, the ability for unfettered recalls of officials is too prone to be used as a political tool rather than a means to enforce the legal requirements of a given government position.

I mean, anyone can call for a recall vote for purely political and downright silly reasons.

There should be a specific limitation of the practice.

Any thoughts on this?
 
I believe we should use the practice similar to the American process of impeachment. It should only be used if an elected official blatantly broke the law. After that, then they should be tried by the court.

For minor offenses or reasons that may not necessarily be illegal, perhaps we should consider some method of condemnation.
 
It's a hard one.

Recall is really the only means of enforcing accountability. Unless we allow censure motions - basically saying we don't approve of your act, get your shit together and sort it out. If they fail to do so, recall could be considered later.
 
Chasmanthe:
How about each member can do one recall every four months? Is that too limiting, or is it about right?
Click to expand...
:agree:
limited to the 4 months of office. If the first recall fails, then you should not be able to propose another one. If someone is really doing that poor a job, someone else will step up and propose a recall.

It seems a bit much to vote on a separate measure *before* a recall is called and voted on. Maybe up the number of people that need to agree before the recall is moved to being voted on?
 
I just meant that sometimes people consider a recall to be a little too extreme of a step - whereas a censure might be appropriate.

*shrugs*
 
(I realize my opinion probably doesn't matter too much- but I'll still say something)

I think a censure motion sounds like a good idea. Just to tell whoever that we don't approve of your action officially, but without a recall.
 
Romanoffia:
I see all the recalls and threats of recalls and rumors of recalls and it brings an interesting question to mine: Should there be some kind of legal threshold for holding a 'recall'?

The reason I say this is that from all appearances, the ability for unfettered recalls of officials is too prone to be used as a political tool rather than a means to enforce the legal requirements of a given government position.

I mean, anyone can call for a recall vote for purely political and downright silly reasons.

There should be a specific limitation of the practice.

Any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...
Basically, let's pull a Walker situation.

Let's make a rule that a certain amount of signatories need to be acquired before a recall can begin. For a censure, let's make that a slightly less amount.

Now the question remains, what should the numbers be?
 
One problem is that, at the moment, recall is the only thing you can do to express disapproval of an official. It is extreme, and overused at the moment, but it is all people have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top