{snip}
...Also, as required by ARS 19-22 (B), Secretary Brewer announced the following list of candidates for the office of United States Representatives in Congress who filed a statement on recall.
The following candidates filed a statement on recall agreeing to resign if not reelected on a recall vote...
This piqued my curiosity, so I looked up the ARS section cited in the article.
From ARS 19-22:
19-221. Statement on recall
A. Prior to a primary or any election, a candidate for the office of United States senator, or
representative in Congress, may file with the secretary of state a statement addressed to the people as follows: "If elected to the office (here name the office) I shall deem myself responsible to the people and under obligation to them to resign immediately if not re-elected on a recall vote", or: "If elected to the office (here name the office) I shall not deem myself under obligation to the people to resign if not re-elected by a recall vote."B. The secretary of state shall give the statement to the public press when made.
19-222. Pledge to resign subject to recall
A. A United States senator or representative in Congress who has pledged himself to the people and under obligation to them to resign immediately if not re-elected upon a recall vote shall be subject to the laws of the state relating to recall of public officers, and may be recalled and his successor elected in like manner as a state officer.B. The laws of the state relating to recall of state officers and recall elections are made applicable to the recall of a senator or representative.
My questions are thus -
1. Is this legally binding upon the candidates/incumbents? Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution provides that the states handle the elections of their representatives...
Section 4. The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof;
...but Section 5 of the same Article explicitly states that it takes a 2/3 vote of the body to remove a member.
Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.Nothing is mentioned about recall elections or granting the various states the authority to remove their representatives.
2. Has any district in AZ ever recalled its Congressman? If so, did the member resign? Was the AZ law able to survive a challenge in a federal court?
I'm not being my normal wonderfully sarcastic self here - I'm really curious. Is this an enforceable law, or is it just a quaint quirk, a bit of interesting but ultimately meaningless posturing on the part of whatever session of the Lege passed and whichever governor signed this law?
For the record, I don't have a problem with elected officials, even federal office-holders, being subject to recall. Nope, not at all.
Anyway, according to the article, most Congressional candidates did sign the pledge -
The following candidates filed a statement on recall agreeing to resign if not reelected on a recall vote: Frank Antenori, Mike Caccioppoli, Suchindran “Chat” Chatterjee, Ron Drake, Jeff Flake, Trent Franks, Susan Friedman, Glenn Fuller, Gabrielle Giffords, Randy Graf, Raul M. Grijalva, J.D. Hayworth, Mike Hellon, Steve Huffman, William “Bill” Johnson, Don Karg, Jeffrey Lynn “Jeff” Latas, Vic Mckerlie, Harry Mitchell, David F. Nolan, Herb Paine, Ed Pastor, Rick Renzi, Alex Rodriguez, Gene Scharer, David Schlosser, Francine Shacter, John Shadegg, Joseph Sweeney, Patty Weiss and Ken Woodward.
Libertarians Mark Yannone and Powell Gammill did not agree to resign, and 6 other candidates did not return the statement at all.
Anyway, any help filling in the blanks in my education on the nuances Arizona electoral law would be greatly appreciated.
3 comments:
The easiest way to understand your question would be to remember that federal Law supercedes state law. Only the congress can remove a member of the body.
As a candidate for CD8 I did not sign the pledge for a very simple reason. It would be a waste of time and money on the part of the constituents. Congress is elected every two years. By the time that it was realized that the person in office was the wrong person and the recall movement had gone to the ballot, it would be time for the next regular election and that person could be removed at that time.
That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure because this is the first I have heard of this statute.
Thanks Mike!
1. Legally binding. No. There was a recall movement on some Congressman in our state many years ago (probably within 4 years of the ballot inititive that put it into law).
A judge ruled that the citizens of AZ cannot remove their federal office holders despite the state constitution.
Someone asked the Congressman (or Senator) if he would willingly resign if a referendum were held and he lost. He declined.
From there the ballot inititive was launched. I vauguely remember some of the people I discussed it with said it was meaningless. As a Congresscritter could welch on his "pledge" and there was nothing that could be done about it.
The people I hung out with then had suggested the proponents of this "pledge" turn it into a small claims court contract, which would be binding, and would stipulate that if the Congressman broke his word he would owe $25 to each claimant. Multiply that in a class action by every citizen in the stte and you have an effective resignation incentive. But the sponsors of the referendum thought the concept too confusing. So they wasted their time and money on meaningless crap as a sop to the electorate.
I cannot speak for Mark, but I refused not on principle -- though I could -- but for the notoriety and publicity that hooks people ... ah, like you into asking 'what is this about?' Plus the press would be unlikely to bother reporting this "story" if there wasn't the controversy of the few who refused to sign. Thanks for the publicity Ms. Secretary of State ;-)
Powell Gammill, candidate
US Congressional, district 2 (AZ)
http://GammillForCOngress.com
Post a Comment