Skip to main content

Functioning Democracy


So, the California Recall Election is over, and the effort to remove Governor Gavin Newsom from office was soundly defeated. Good. Perhaps it's the politician in me, but I think that the recall option is terrible. One aspect of assuming elected office is the ability to get your feet wet, learn the ropes, and then try and put forward your agenda. Most terms of office are for four years, and there's something that comes with the assurance that, hey, at least you have that long to try and get some stuff done.

The threat of a recall hanging over one's head is counter-productive to the confidence needed in order to push forward an agenda. I'm not saying that politicians should be free to do as they wish, without fear of reprimand or even removal, but 1) voters have the opportunity to dramatically weigh-in once someone's term of office is up, 2) recalls are, in my opinion, in danger of being abused, and 3) there are other options available to remove, say, a governor.

Regarding the 2021 California Recall, some folks on the left have noted that it was cooked-up by right-wing Trumpists, hell-bent on shaking things up in the Golden State. They didn't like (among other things) Newsom's strict handling of the Covid-19 pandemic, but it could be said that, in general, they just didn't like a liberal Democrat holding the state's highest office (and all that comes with it). Fair enough. I'm glad the recall effort failed, though one could argue that what happened there was just the same thing in reverse as to what when down in Wisconsin nine years ago. Like Democrat Gavin Newsom, Republican Scott Walker survived his recall fight, though on that occasion the slings & arrows were coming from Democrats.

I didn't like Walker, and am ok with Newsom (he's better than the alternatives that were offered), but this is what I meant earlier by the recall mechanism being in danger of becoming abused. Not everyone who holds elected office is going to be of the same political party as ours, or will hold the same views we have, or will support -- or push against -- the issues we approve of, or dislike. All of that isn't really a reason to try and remove them from office. Yes, it stings when candidates we detest gain power, but that's how elections work sometimes. If a politician is quite obviously breaking the law, however, then of course steps must be taken to look into their removal.

Not to stray too far afield, but this all kind of plays into what seems to be the trend for our presidential elections, of late. In 2016, when Trump defeated Hillary Clinton, there were Democrats -- people I know -- who were questioning the legitimacy of the outcomes in certain states. "Wisconsin was razor thin!" they'd exclaim, while rattling-off a few other states that were in the same boat. They would go on to speculate that, perhaps, the elections in those states had been rigged -- just enough votes had been tipped over into the Trump column, in order to secure him a victory. And, on the flip side, in 2020... well, we know how that all went.

Elections are important, whether they be recalls, or part of our regularly scheduled programming. They have consequences, and people's lives are affected -- some more than others. That said, we must be careful of making a mockery of our electoral system. After all, one person's Scott Walker is another person's Gavin Newsom. Of course, some folks would just like to watch the world burn, and for them, none of what's been written here will matter. And, if there gets to be enough of them, than all bets are off.

At least, when all's said and done, the results of the California Recall Election managed to piss off Randy Quaid, so that's something.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Yesterday's Restaurants

The local newspaper has a feature from one of Champaign-Urbana's most legendary restaurateur's, John Katsinas, on what his favorite area restaurants were that have now since closed (or will soon be closing).  It's a nice little read, and has made me stop and think about the restaurants that have come and gone that have left an indelible (and edible) impression on me throughout the years. Here we go....

31 Days of Horror Movies: Thir13en Ghosts

While not a scholar or even a purist, I am somewhat of a film snob. Not a big fan of remakes, specifically when the originals don't need updating. It is therefore an unusual position I find myself in, preferring a remake to an original, and by leaps and bounds. Let's take a look at today's feature...

31 Days of Horror Movies: The Woman In Black

Yesterday, we had a lady in white, and today we have.... The Woman In Black Just as Nosferatu was our oldest horror film to be reviewed this month, The Woman In Black is our most recent. Released earlier this year, the film stars Daniel Radcliffe in a more adult role than previously seen in his Harry Potter career. He plays a young lawyer whose wife died in childbirth, so he has been raising their son (mostly) on his own. With money tight, and his job on the line, the young attorney takes an assignment in a remote village, much to his dismay. The small, closed community Radcliffe's character finds himself in is apparently haunted by a woman dressed in all black. When she is seen, a child dies. She is seen quite a lot during the course of the film. The locals get edgy with the attorney, making him feel most unwelcome. And when he is doing his work, sorting through the papers of a deceased elderly woman, he discovers the secret of the woman in black. It doesn't