Talk:Essay:Why Recall Elections Are Essential

Thanks for writing this

It clarified the issue quite a bit. --ChrisY 21:20, 21 March 2010 (EDT)

U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton

Wouldn't a state recall ability violate US Term Limits V Thornton, because it's establishing an additional qualification for membership in Congress, as well as Powell v. McCormack, because it would "result in a patchwork that would be inconsistent with the Framers' vision of a uniform National Legislature representing the people of the United States." In other words, allowing such a recall election would let voters in New Jersey recall its senators early, while the voters of New York wouldn't have that power. It would make Senate qualifications non-uniform throughout the various states. This, of course, doesn't limit the power to recall state officials, just ones whose election qualifications are specifically enumerated in the Constitution.--Whizkid 00:03, 22 March 2010 (EDT)

Your point is well-taken, Whizkid, except that a recall does not alter the qualifications. Menendez can even run for the same seat again as he is being recalled!

But thanks for the Powell. v. McCormack citation, which I do need to look at (and build an entry here for!).--Andy Schlafly 17:41, 22 March 2010 (EDT)

Seventeenth Amendment

To the best of my knowledge (which is, admittedly, limited in this area,) there's simply no legal grounds for arguing that the recall of Senators is a federal, rather than a state, issue. As I understand it, until the Seventeenth Amendment, the means by which Senators were chosen was left to the individual states, with some gradually moving away from appointment and towards direct election. The Seventeenth Amendment standardizes this process; well and good. However, nothing in the Seventeenth Amendment touches on the issue of whether a state has the right to recall its Senators, nor the mechanisms by which this may be accomplished. That being the case, it seems obvious that Andy is correct, and the issue clearly falls under the provisions of the Tenth Amendment--it is a power that is neither specifically granted to the Congress nor prohibited to the several states.

That being the case, why is there controversy about this at all? What legal justification is there for mounting such a challenge? --Benp 17:03, 22 March 2010 (EDT)

I agree with you completely, Ben, and particularly appreciate your historical knowledge of this. In fact, I may incorporate your historical point about states "gradually moving away from appointment and towards direct election" into a future brief on this. Further migration towards recall fits perfectly into the historical parttern!

In response to your question, even the WSJ claims a recall is unconstitutional, and others (especially Menendez!) claim likewise. I expect this issue will be appealed up to the U.S. Supreme Court.--Andy Schlafly

Essay?

This article is as encyclopedic as any within Conservapedia, and it represents a conservative POV, which is our mission. Why then is it placed in the Essay name space? I suggest it be moved to Main Space. --ṬK_/Admin^/Talk 17:22, 22 March 2010 (EDT)