Two weeks ago, the Illinois Senate rejected a proposal to add a recall amendment provision to the state constitution. The provision had passed overwhelmingly in the House, but while gettting a majority vote in the Senate (33 votes) it fell three votes short of the super-majority of 36 it needed to pass.This is an interesting issue to consider. Should citizens have the power to recall their elected officials or could that have the effective of officials not be able to govern with hard decisions. Many argued that the integrity of Illinois government was at stake. How can you govern when at the whim of the people, your rightfully elected officers can be removed? With the help of the 2 Regular Guys at CBS2 School, here's a closer look:
Find out more.
A majority of state constitutions have recall provisions. More importantly, our founding fathers openly debated recall elections. A number of colonial governments had similar practices. Anti - Federalist 53 argued the merits of recall elections:
“For our own sakes we shall keep in power those persons whose conduct pleases us as long as we can, and shall perhaps sometimes wish (when we meet with a person of an extra worthy character and abilities) that we could keep him in power for life. On the other hand, we shall dismiss from our employ as soon as possible, such persons as do not consult our interest and will not follow our instructions.”
Though fearful of a tyranny of the majority, many founders understood that the best way to keep a democracy healthy is to infuse the system with more democracy. Many favored recall provisions as another means of holding elected officials accountable.Two hundred years later, the residents of Illinois will not even be given the chance to debate such an idea.
State Senator Bill Haine (D-Alton) who voted against the measure provided this rationale, “When an election is over, it’s time to govern.”And what if they don’t govern?
Frankly, in Illinois I can’t recall.
3 comments:
Recalls are excellent for getting rid of idiots like Blago. The integrity of the government would not be compromised because it takes a lot of votes to get rid of the official. At very high, national levels, enough is at stake that it's better to just wait until the next election and throw the bum out, but not as much is at stake at the state level. If government isn't governing, it is failing its foremost obligation. Blago, like Ryan before him, is clearly corrupt, in addition to being totally out of touch (he obviously thinks his title is "Governor of the State of Chicago"), and as such fails to live up to the demands of his office. Knowing a popular vote can throw them out of office at any time is a great way to keep officials a little more honest and focused on the task at hand. Stupid Chicago Democratic Machine!
I'm not sure that recalls are the way to go. Like Garrett said, they are a great way to get rid of governmental idiots, but I think they do compromise, at least to some extent, the integrity of the government. I've found that dissatisfaction is generally highest in the middle of a process. People get sick of the sacrifices needed to bring about a change. I think that we have elections at certain times in the year, and that should be enough for elected officials' accountability. A lot of times, people need to sit through the hard times and be patient for the more prosperous times that can result from hard times. Recalls throw the whole system into chaos - we have elections at set times for a reason, no need to mess that up.
I remember that one of the groups from another school tried to pass a recall bill. i didn't like it because like jean said, it throws the system into chaos
Post a Comment