That's what the Correctional Officers are considering, according to Matier and Ross:
Well-placed Sacramento sources tell us the state's politically powerful and well-financed prison guards union has lawyers drawing up language for a recall initiative.
Word is, the union will decide within the next couple of weeks whether to hit the streets with petitions....
Asked about the recall rumor, union spokesman Lance Corcoran said, "I can't comment other than to say we are taking a very hard look at it."
I'm not surprised this is being considered - given that Arnold's governorship has been a complete failure, and that he still has over two years left in office, it makes sense that someone would try to replace failed leadership with something better.
On the merits alone Arnold deserves to be recalled. His failures as governor have caused the state worse pain than anything Gray Davis did. Arnold's tax cuts and borrowing to pay for core services have broken our budget. He was nearly AWOL on the budget this year, and when he did get involved, it was to petulantly refuse to sign any new bills, breaking government even further. He wanted to make state workers suffer instead of doing the hard but necessary work of pushing Republicans to agree to a budget.
But a recall is a political act and has political consequences and it's on those grounds that we need to assess it. A recall vote would likely take place sometime in 2009, with the next gubernatorial race taking place just one year later. That would entail a lot of campaigning and perhaps not so much governing.
A recall, as we saw in 2003, is unpredictable and even more personality-driven than normal. It also lacks a party primary, which is especially important for the Democrats. Given the number of big names showing interest in the 2010 nomination, a primary is the best way to not only choose from those candidates but to provide a referendum on the future of California Democrats - whether we'll embrace a progressive future or remain mired in a corporatist past.
The recall by contrast doesn't offer that opportunity. Because of the open field Dems would have to unite early around one candidate, who might not be the best Dem around. Democrats might well be better off waiting until 2010.
It's also not clear whether a recall alone would accomplish significant change. The 2003 recall clearly didn't solve California's problems - instead it brought into sharper view the real issue - the 2/3 rule and Republican exploitation of it for their far-right purposes. Getting rid of Arnold has its value, but it wouldn't necessarily make the 2009 or 2010 budget cycles any easier.
None of that is to say it's a bad idea to pursue a recall of Arnold. But neither does it deserve our knee-jerk support. I'd be more interested in constructing a coalition to fix our state government and help California weather the worsening economic crisis, through fundamental structural reforms. That needs to be our focus, and we should consider an Arnold recall if it will get us closer to those goals. |
