California Constitution Raises Questions About Davis Replacement

LOS ANGELES — If California voters decide to recall Gov. Gray Davis (search), most expect that they would also get the opportunity to decide who will replace him, but that may not be the case.

According to the state Constitution, once the recall qualifies, the lieutenant governor calls for a replacement election, and "if appropriate," a vote to elect a successor. Some say that gives Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante wiggle room to decide that if Davis is ousted, a replacement vote is not appropriate and he could keep the job for himself.

"Why should it be any different if the governor is recalled than if the governor were to become president or were to become ill or for some other reason couldn't serve?" said political consultant Susan Estrich.

Recall organizers say such a move would be a serious abuse of power, and clearly violates the will of more than 1.6 million Californians who have signed the recall petition (search).

more…
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92615,00.html

they never cease to amaze me...

They are getting in the habit of stealing elections after they are won by a democrat. Davis won the election fair and square, and they are trying to un-do it just like they did the Prsidential election.
If they are aided and abetted in doing this, then we might as well kiss democratic elections goodbye.

the recall petition"

How so? They are voting to remove Davis from office. Whether or not Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante takes his place is irrelevant. Davis will have been removed.

Even if they did so with a clothespin on their noses, they still voted for him. Isn't the recall essentially dismissing the will of the voters?

This is such bullshit. I hate repukes more and more every day.

Some of the 1.6 million who signed the petition ARE people who voted for Davis in the election.

The system is designed to accommodate the people changing their collective mind, and to keep elected officials on their toes.

If they only need 897,000 to recall the Gov in Cal, there is a reason they only need 897,000. That reason is that it is written in the law that they need a certain percentage of the last elections' number of voters. Soooooooooo, with just the same reasoning, if it says that Cruz "may" call for an election, the he "may" call for an election.

Then again, he may not. It does not say "must". So all of you whiners who want to recall the DULY ELECTED GOVENOR can fuck off.

...

There are 23 million Californians, even if all 1.6 million of the people who signed the recall petition had actually voted for Davis and really wanted him replaced, ( not a likely scenario! ) they are getting exactly what the law entitles them to, a replacement for Gray Davis! The rest of the majority get what we voted for, a DEMOCRAT for Governor!
Do you have a problem with that? :shrug:
Do you even live here?
The simple fact remains that if we all lived in Florida we wouldn't even have the option of a recall!
So again slacky, :wtf: is your point?

thanks for making my day kskiska.

now let's just hope Bustamante has some cojones.

"Recall organizers say such a move would be a serious abuse of power, and clearly violates the will of more than 1.6 million Californians who have signed the recall petition."

I always felt that the recall effort was a serious abuse of power and violated the wills of the MILLIONS of Californians who voted for Davis.

Silly me....

What does CA have population-wise -- 38 milllion or so? And they could only get 1.6 million signatures to gove Davis the boot?

"Recall organizers say such a move would be a serious abuse of power, and clearly violates the will of more than 1.6 million Californians who have signed the recall petition."

I always felt that the recall effort was a serious abuse of power and violated the will of the MILLIONS of Californians who voted for Davis.

Silly me....

What does CA have population-wise -- 38 milllion or so? And they could only get 1.6 million signatures to gove Davis the boot?

is Gov. Cruz Bustamante.

:toast:

What if Issa blew his millions and all he got was Davis gone but no chance for him to be governer! Kool!

Issa is a fool. He's already second-guessing how he might have paid for making an opportunity for Arnold to oppose him in a run-off. He'd have done better in a real primary where the wingnuts would have supported him, not Arnold...not in a winner take all replacement election.

What a fool.

I read somewhere that the California Republican Party was not so thrilled about the recall effort.

Seems they're a little concerned that they have set a new precedent in which to remove the elected governor from office by obtaining a small fraction of voters to sign off on a recall petition.

Even if the vote doesn't remove Davis, they've established a new way to do political business in the state of California.

One must wait before starting the next recall?

Because, really, it has to be done.

The recall of any Republican thief must be announced the day the other recall is complete.

I think there would be too little time between the recall and the regular election to install a completely new administration. It would be the fiscally responsible thing to allow the Lt. Gov. take over Davis's place if Davis is recalled.

plenty of time for a new administration.

frankly this would be a bad part on the move of the Dems. Let's let Ahhnold figure out how to fix the state, no way in hell will that work.

Also, just because the recall vote organizers didn't bother to read the entire consitution and lied to the people signing it about what would happen, doesn't mean you are violating the will of californians. I would, quite frankly, like nothing more than a recall vote that failed. that would be awesome.

Then letting the R's tie themselves in knots trying to fix California's problems might be a good D strategy. This isn't politics as usual. This is an attempt to grab the levers of power so as to steer California into the Republican column in '04, or at least turn California into a battleground state and put a drain on Democratic resources. I say, let the D's grab the office using the constitutional fine print and put the R's on notice that we're willing to play the same dirty game that they are because the stakes are too high not to.

You don't give up power in hopes that the folks you give your power to will mess everything up.

with certain disciples of a certain egomaniac, self-righteous politician.

What could possibly make it appropriate to bypass the normal way of doing business? When a Governor is replaced it is with their Lt Governor the same as a President is replaced with the Vice-president. There is no way an election would be appropriate. IMO anyway. The last laugh is going to be on the Freepers no matter how this turns out.

...receive EXACTLY WHAT THEY DESERVE for this little jaunt they're dragging millions of people on. May we all live to see them get the comeuppance they deserve.

Hey, why not demonstrate at Issa appearances with a sign that reads "Issa: The Most Happy Felon"?

(I hope Frank Loesser will forgive me)

seeing Cruz Bustemante (sp?) on the ticket rather than Davis. Davis on the ticket was why I sat and thought for five minutes before voting in the last election, and why I finally ended up voting for Camejo. The sad thing is that I've watched Davis for years, and he's never, ever impressed me. Just another hack. As for someone who could carry a great vote margin, why not Willie Brown or Cruz? I won't vote to retain Davis, but I'd be overjoyed to see Cruz get it.

...get exactly what they deserve for dragging millions of people on this little jaunt. May we live to see their comeuppance.

Hey, why not greet Issa at public events with a sign reading "Issa: The Most Happy Felon"?

(I hope Frank Loesser will forgive me for that)

Just out of curiosity I'd love to hear Kathryn Harris' interpretation of "if appropriate".

Democracy wins!

philosophically i agree, it would be an abuse of power. but i'd also say that after the FL election 2000 fiasco, and the numerous abuses of power displayed therein --- it'd serve the republicons right.

there has never been a recall election of a California governor before. so, there is no established precedent. in those circumstances, the obvious interpretation of "if appropriate" is to follow standard procedure for replacing that elected official upon removal. standard procedure for replacing the Governor is to appoint the Lt. Governor. the fact that the Republicans misunderstood the law does not make it an abuse to actually follow the law.

If the authors of the legislation wanted an automatic election they could have provided for it. The fact that they didn’t makes it perfectly clear that they wanted a check on the power of the recall. There is absolutely no abuse if the law is followed as written.

I always wondered WHY there was going to be this "snap" election along with the recall.

The line of sucession is Lt. Gov after the Gov. If the Gov is out of from office (for ANY reason) then I think it should be the Lt that takes over ...... PERIOD!!!

We discussed this in depth at our local Democratic E-Board meeting last night. Hang on all as this could get VERY complicated.

The state Constitution states that the Lt. Goveror, "if appropriate" can call an election -- or not. If he doesn't, he's the governor. However -- there are laws on the books that state we HAVE to have an election -- this was the brainchild of one of the California Legislative sessions some time ago. I don't even pretend to understand all the legal ins-and-outs and the best legal minds in the state are working on this as we speak. My guess is that it will go to the California Supreme Court -- and we all know what will happen if the decision doesn't go the way the Republicans want it to go. (Does Florida ring a bell?)

There's also some VERY interesting inside potical powerplays going on with the California Democratic Party -- let's just say Busamonte isn't going to be shedding any tears if Davis gets recalled.

This is going to get interesting.

The state Constitution states that the Lt. Goveror, "if appropriate" can call an election -- or not. If he doesn't, he's the governor.

according to this article in the sf chron,

Fall recall appears to be certain

``...
Another scenario has Bustamante blocking anyone from running against Davis on a recall ballot, since the law says replacement candidates are allowed "if appropriate. " Under the law, Bustamante decides whether it's appropriate.

Some legal experts said these two words were added to the law because some officials, such as judges, would be replaced through appointment, not an election. It would not be "appropriate" for Bustamante to allow for the elected replacement of judicial candidates.

The matter is under review by Shelley's office, and could be the source of a last-minute lawsuit to slow or sabotage the recall. If there are no replacement candidates on the ballot, and Davis is recalled, then Bustamante would replace him.

"I have already stated that I don't think there is that kind of option," Bustamante said. "Clearly, the duties of the lieutenant governor and succession are in the Constitution and it would take constitutional scholars to give that kind of advice and counsel."
...''

....as it is a STATE matter involving a STATE official. There is no NATIONAL interest or office at stake here! The Constitution leaves electoral matters to the STATES or so the theory goes. In 2000 the SCOTUS got involved illegally because of the NATIONAL interest. They can't even use the 2000 decision as precedent by virtue of their own decision!
The Republicans are truly FUCKED! :evilgrin:

the Republican redistricting mayhem in TX and CO?

Oh, that's right...it's only abuse of power if Dem's do it. Sorry. I forgot.

Now that is just not fair to the Republicans. After all, they always play fair.

above post was sarcasm