Petition to send California Recall Issue to CA Supreme Court

I just received an e-mail and thought I'd pass it on.

VOTERS ASK THAT CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT PROHIBIT ELECTION OF REPLACEMENT GOVERNOR ON RECALL BALLOT

July 23, 2003

California voters Scott Rafferty of Mountain View and Andrew Byrnes of Redwood City have filed a petition to initiate a Supreme Court determination that it is unconstitutional to elect a successor to Governor Gray Davis on the recall ballot. The California Constitution provides that Cruz Bustamante, as Lieutenant Governor, becomes Governor automatically if a recall removes the incumbent. The Constitution also requires that the Supreme Court, not the affected politicians, resolve any dispute as to succession. The petition asks Senate President John Burton and Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson, who head a Commission on the Governorship, to expedite Supreme Court review. A copy of the petition can be seen at www.dontrecall.com.

Rafferty stated: "California is not a banana republic. The purpose of the recall is to remove the unsatisfactory official, not to redo gubernatorial elections every six months. That's why 3.2 million voters decided 37 years ago to take the recall procedures out of the Constitution and let the normal constitutional rules apply to replace a recalled Governor."

I would hope all Californians would come together to agree that we should have a constitutional succession to the governorship, and that the Supreme Court should tell us how that works.

Told that Republican activists had denounced the petition as a "desperation move," Rafferty responded: "If the recall proponents had any confidence in their legal position, they would have been the ones asking the Supreme Court to make the decision. Instead, they've tried to bully Bustamante into stepping aside. But the Constitution doesn't permit that and the state can't afford it."

Byrnes added: "We decided to write this petition because the political circus surrounding the recall has distracted everyone from the fact that the Constitution specifies that the Lieutenant Governor fills a vacancy in the office of Governor. We didn't talk to Davis or Bustamante before we did this. I don't know what they think, but I do know what the Constitution says and the frenzy over potential replacement candidates doesn't change it. Darrell Issa should have made sure that his lawyers had a copy of the California Constitution before he bankrolled this effort to distract Californians with an incredibily expensive recall election. The California Constitution doesn't allow him, or anyone else, to make this sort of power grab."

I've often thought that this recall seemed far too convenient a way to bypass legal elections. It makes no sense that a well-heeled or well-connected agitator should be able to overturn an elected official with the possibility of being elected himself. And the idea of voting on the same ballot for whether or not to recall and who should be elected should the recall succeed seems uniquely designed to subvert the real will of the people. Cheers to these two for bringing this to light.

Because I think it's important that we keep up-to-date on this.

:kick: before this goes forever into obscurity.

one (or two) persons can make a difference