Source: https://manifestinjustice.wordpress.com/category/state-officials/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 03:00:54+00:00

Document:
NOTE: The following is presented for informational purposes only. NCSL does not provide advice on how to conduct a recall campaign in any state. For the specific procedures to be followed in any state, please contact state election officials.
Recall is a procedure that allows citizens to remove and replace a public official before the end of a term of office. Historically, recall has been used most frequently at the local level. By some estimates, three-fourths of recall elections are at the city council or school board level. This brief, however, focuses on the recall only as it applies to state officials.
Recall differs from another method for removing officials from office–impeachment–in that it is a political device while impeachment is a legal process. Impeachment requires the House to bring specific charges, and the Senate to act as a jury. In most of the 19 recall states, specific grounds are not required, and the recall of a state official is held by an election.
Virginia has a process that is similar to a recall, but it is not listed here as a recall state because its process, while requiring citizen petitions, calls for a recall trial rather than an election. In Virginia, after sufficient petition signatures are gathered and verified, a circuit court decides whether a Virginia official will be removed from office. In the recall states, the voters decide through an election.
In at least 29 states (some sources place this number at 36), recall elections may be held in local jurisdictions.
History and Use of the Recall in the U.S.
The recall device began in the United States in a municipality–Los Angeles–in 1903. Michigan and Oregon, in 1908, were the first states to adopt recall procedures for state officials; Minnesota (1996) and New Jersey (1993) were the most recent.
Historically, recall attempts at the state level have been unsuccessful. The recall is used much more often, and with more success, at the local level.
There have been three gubernatorial recall elections held in U.S. history. In 2012, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker survived a recall attempt. In 2003, California voters successfully recalled Governor Gray Davis, and in North Dakota in 1921, voters removed from office not only Governor Lynn J. Frazier, but also the attorney general and the commissioner of agriculture. California voters have initiated 32 gubernatorial recall attempts since 1911, but the 2003 recall of Governor Gray Davis in 2003 was the first to ever reach the ballot. In 1988, Arizona voters filed enough signatures to trigger a recall election for Governor Evan Mecham, but he was impeached by the state’s House of Representatives before the date of the scheduled recall election.
Recall efforts against state legislators are more common, but still unusual. Recall attempts against legislators have gathered sufficient signatures to trigger an election just 38 times, and eleven of those occurred in a single year, 2011. Fifty-five percent of all legislative recall elections have succeeded in unseating a legislator, and additionally two legislators resigned after petitions with sufficient signatures were submitted. Seventeen recall attempts have failed, and the legislators subject to the recall remained in office. While there have been more legislative recall elections in recent years (45 percent have taken place in the years 2011-2013), they have been less successful than in the past: just eight of the 17 recalls attempted between 2011-2013 succeeded in unseating a legislator, a 47 percent success rate.
The list below represents all of the recall efforts against state legislators that led to elections between 1908 (when the first state to implement the recall, Oregon, did so) and the present.
Many more petitions are started and never make it to the election stage; either they are abandoned by their sponsors, or they fail to gather sufficient valid signatures to trigger an election. A recent example was in Colorado, in fall, 2013. Senator Evie Hudak faced a recall challenge; before the signatures were turned in, she resigned. By doing so, a recall election was not held, and her party was able to name her successor.
1913: California state senator Marshall Black was recalled.
1914: California state senator Edwin Grant was recalled.
1914: California state senator James Owens survived a recall election.
1932: Wisconsin state senator Otto Mueller survived a recall election.
1935: Oregon state representative Harry Merriam was recalled.
1971: Idaho state senator Fisher Ellsworth was recalled.
1971: Idaho state representative Aden Hyde was recalled.
1981: Washington state senator Peter von Reichbauer survived a recall election.
1983: Michigan state senator Phil Mastin was recalled.
1985: Oregon state representative Pat Gillis was recalled.
1988: Oregon state senator Bill Olson was recalled.
1990: Wisconsin state assembly member Jim Holperin survived a recall election.
1994: California state senator David Roberti survived a recall election.
1995: California assembly member Paul Horcher was recalled.
1995: California assembly member Michael Machado survived a recall election.
1995: California assembly member Doris Allen was recalled.
1996: Wisconsin state senator George Petak was recalled.
2003: Wisconsin state senator Gary George was recalled.
2008: California state senator Jeff Denham survived a recall election.
2008: Michigan house speaker Andy Dillon survived a recall election.
2011: Wisconsin state senators Robert Cowles, Alberta Darling, Dave Hansen, Sheila Harsdorf, Jim Holperin, Luther Olsen and Robert Wirch survived attempted recalls, while Senators Randy Hopper and Dan Kapanke were recalled.
2011: Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce was recalled on November 8.
2011: Michigan state representative Paul Scott was recalled on November 8.
2012: Wisconsin state senator Van Wanggaard was recalled. Senate Republican leader Scott Fitzgerald and senator Terry Moulton survived recall elections. Senator Pam Galloway resigned earlier in the year when sufficient signatures were gathered to trigger a recall election. Even though her name wasn’t on the ballot, a recall election was still held for her seat. All four senate seats in the recall election were held by Republicans; after the recall, three remain in Republican hands and one switched to the Democrats, giving control of the Senate to the Democratic party.
2013: Colorado Senate President John Morse and Senator Angela Giron were recalled on September 10.
Supporters of the recall maintain that it provides a way for citizens to retain control over elected officials who are not representing the best interests of their constituents, or who are unresponsive or incompetent. This view holds that an elected representative is an agent or a servant and not a master.
Opponents argue that it can lead to an excess of democracy, that the threat of a recall election lessens the independence of elected officials, that it undermines the principle of electing good officials and giving them a chance to govern until the next election, and that it can lead to abuses by well-financed special interest groups.
1. File an application to circulate a recall petition (some states allow petitions only if they meet certain grounds for recall).
2. Circulate a recall petition, gathering a specified number of signatures in a limited period of time (view the detailed petitioning requirements).
3. Submit petitions to election officials for verification of signatures.
4. If sufficient valid signatures are presented, a recall election is held.
In most states, any registered voter can begin a recall campaign for any reason. Often, the reasons are political. The 2011 recall efforts provide a good example for politically-motivated recalls. In Wisconsin, Republican senators faced recalls for their support of the governor’s effort to reduce the influence of public employee unions, while Democratic senators faced recall because voters disapproved when they left the state to delay a vote on the union issue. In Arizona, a senator faced recall for his sponsorship of a controversial immigration bill.
In 2012, Michigan passed a new requirement that a recall petition must state clearly and factually the reason(s) for the recall, which must be based on the the elected official’s conduct during his or her term of office (M.C.L. §168.951A). This doesn’t really compare to the types of grounds required in other states. Even with this new law in Michigan, politically-motivated recalls can continue. For instance, a voter could initiate a recall against a legislator on the grounds that he voted against an issue the voter supports. As long as that is stated clearly and factually, it would presumably meet this new criteria.
The recall process is similar to the initiative process in that citizen petitions are required. The number of signatures necessary to qualify a recall petition, however, is often significantly higher than for initiatives. Signature requirements are based on a formula, generally a percentage of the vote in the last election for the office in question, although some states base the formula on the number of eligible voters or other variants. Whatever the formula, the signature requirements are high: 25 percent in nine states; 25 percent for statewide offices and 35 percent for legislators in Washington; one-third in Louisiana; and 40 percent in Kansas. California’s requirements are 12 percent for statewide offices; 20 percent for legislators and appellate judges. Georgia requires 15 percent for statewide offices and 30 percent for all others. Idaho requires 20 percent for all offices. Montana has the lowest number of required signatures: 10 percent for statewide officials and 15 percent for state district offices such as legislative districts.
Also required are the signatures from at least 20 members of the House of Representatives and 10 members of the Senate, with no more than half the signatures of members of each chamber from the same political party.
In six states,the election for a successor is held simultaneously with the recall election. In California and Colorado, the first question on the ballot is whether the official should be recalled. Voters are then asked to vote for a candidate for the office; the official who is the subject of the recall may not be listed among these candidates. If a majority of voters votes “yes” on the recall question, then the incumbent is recalled and the successor is elected via the second part of the ballot. If a majority of voters votes “no” on the recall question, then the incumbent remains in office and the second portion of the ballot is moot.
In the other states using the simultaneous model, the submission and certification of the recall petition essentially triggers a special election for the office, and the recall ballot consists of a list of candidates for the office. The name of the official who is the subject of the recall may appear on the ballot along with other nominees. In fact, in Arizona and Wisconsin, the name of the official being recalled is automatically placed on the recall ballot for reelection unless the official resigns from office.
In the remaining 13 states, the recall ballot contains only the question of whether or not the official should be recalled. If the majority vote is “yes” for recall, the office is declared vacant and is filled at a special election or as otherwise provided by law, which in some states is by appointment for the remainder of the term. The chart below details how the recall election is conducted in each state.
1) In these states, the recall ballot consists of a list of candidates for the office held by the person against whom the recall petition was filed. The name of the officer against whom the recall was filed may appear on the ballot for reelection.
2) In these states, the recall ballot consists of two parts. The first asks whether the officer against whom the recall petition was filed should be recalled. The second part consists of a list of candidates who have qualified for the election. Note that courts in both states have ruled that a voter’s choice of candidate on the second part of the ballot must be counted regardless of whether or not the person cast a vote on the yes/no recall question first.
3) The governor appoints a successor who must be a member of the same political party as the officeholder recalled, and must be selected from a list submitted by a committee of the political party of the person recalled.
4) If vacancy occurs within 85 days of the general election in the second year of the term (terms are for four years), the county board of commissioners appoints a successor to serve until the election.
5) County board of commissioners appoints a person from a list submitted by a committee of the political party of the person recalled.
Georgia – Const. Art. 2, §2.4; Ga. Code §21-4-1 et seq.
Minnesota – Const. Art. 8, §6; Minn. Stat. Ann. §211C.01 et seq.
Washington – Const. Art. 1, Sec. 33-34; Wash. Rev. Code §29A.56-110 et seq.

References: §168
 Art. 2
 §2
 §21
 Art. 8
 §6
 §211
 Art. 1
 §29