I
think I agree with you, but as far as my own signing is concerned, I would
probably have been required to have a co-signer.
I
believe your comment that the recall process is "lunatic" is expecially
trenchant today, in that I note that Darrel Issa, the person who bankrolled the
signatrure gathering effort, has now called for a "no" vote. How much
crazier can this whole thing get anyway? Oh, wait, I forgot one of the cardinal
rules - never ask a question to which you do not know the
answer.
-----Original Message-----First, some shameless self-promotion:
From: Sanford Levinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Dysfunctionality in government
Levinson: Why I Did Not Sign the Constitution
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20030923_levinson.html
This provoked the following from Prof. Tung Yin of the University of Iowa Law School:
.... You note one of the structural deficiencies of the Constitution as being:
. . . the Constitution's provision for rigidly fixed terms of presidential office - which means that we can be saddled with patently deficient presidents until their time in office mercifully expires.
At the same time, on the list-serv, and indeed, even in the column, you criticize the California recall process. Now, I realize that many of your objections relate to the perceived problem of having the winner in part 2 take office while a lower percentage of votes than Gray Davis garners to keep his office -- in other words, to the way that the recall takes place, as opposed to the recall itself. These objections could be dealt with through a ranked voting (or single transferrable vote) system or Steve Bram's approval voting.
But does this mean that you support the principle of allowing voters to recall political leaders ahead of the conclusion of their terms in office?
__________________________________________
I responded as follows:
Yes, you are right: I'm not opposed to recalls per se. My view that the California procedure is "lunatic" relates to the mode by which the successor governor is selected. I also tend to support legislative votes of no-confidence (by, say, a 2/3 vote) over a popular referendum.
