YES — Statistics Are Showing An Increase In Recalls
June 19, 2017
Voters in 36 states have the power to recall elected officials, bringing an early end to their term in office. Between January 1, 2017, and June 19, 2017, 134 recall efforts were initiated against 178 officials in 31 states. This was a decrease in recall frequency since our 2016 mid-year report, which counted 189 recall efforts, but it is more than the 97 recalls tracked in our 2015 mid-year report. This puts 2017 on track to surpass 2014’s 190 total recall efforts. Ballotpedia found that of the officials targeted for recall in 2017, 10.7 percent have been removed from office so far. This number is similar to the 10.9 percent recall rate in our 2016 mid-year report, but it is larger than the 6.6 percent figure in our 2015 mid-year report.
In the first half of 2017, 2.2 percent of recall efforts targeted state officials, compared to 1.4 percent in the first half of 2016 and 10.2 percent in the first half of 2015. Notable among these are Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R), targeted for recall over his signature on bills related to education and signature gathering on petitions, and Michigan state Sen. Bert Johnson (D), accused of hiring a fake employee to pay off a personal debt.
City council members were the target of 41 percent of recall efforts, an increase from 34.9 percent in the first half of 2016 and 7.3 percent in the first half of 2015. These include Providence Councilman Kevin Jackson in Rhode Island, who was recalled over embezzlement allegations, and three members of the city council of Homer, Alaska, who were targeted for recall after issuing formal resolutions supportive of cities in opposition to federal immigration law and critical of the Dakota Access Pipeline and President Donald Trump (R).
As in previous years, California was the state with the most officials targeted for recall. By June 19, 2017, Californians had initiated recall proceedings against 50 elected officials. This compares to 20 officials targeted in Colorado and 11 in Michigan, the next-highest states.
Note: Percentages below may total to more than 100 percent due to rounding.
From January 1, 2017, to June 19, 2017, Ballotpedia covered a total of 134 recall efforts against 178 officials. Efforts against 90 of those officials are still ongoing. Recall attempts targeting 42 officials did not make it to the ballot (marked “Unsuccessful” on chart). Of the 31 officials whose recalls made it to the ballot, 19 were recalled and 12 survived the attempt. Ten other officials resigned before their recalls could go to a vote. Recall efforts against two politicians remain unofficial, two officials have a recall election scheduled for the future, and one targeted official had their recall effort decided by a court order. A breakdown of the various recall outcomes is displayed in the chart. The chart displayed notes out of 178 they counted: 51% of recalls underway; 24% unsuccessful; 11% approved; 7% were defeated; and, 6% resigned.
City council officials drew the focus of more recall petitions than any other group in the first half of 2017. A total of 73 city council members faced recall campaigns while mayors faced the second-most with 32. Recalls were also sought for 27 school board leaders. Petitioners also targeted state-level officials, filing against three state legislators and one state executive.
Targets by state
The interactive map listed the following: California led the way in officials targeted for recall with 50 through June 19, 2017. Colorado followed with 20 officials facing recall.
Read the entire article HERE. It includes graphs, a map, and notable recalls so far.
Finally, it looks like–just from stats–that California IS getting on board. However, knowing the reasoning behind the recalls is just as important. Hopefully the conservatives are slowly chipping away at the far left Marxist base.
Every state needs to do the same, especially at the local level. This is where the liberals are concentrating because they realize the base doesn’t often vote in mass numbers nor are up on the means by which they are actually being hamstrung.
FIGHT at local level as if it counts. Frankly it does. What local does effects all up the ladder…..rulings by local, district, state, and federalcourts and laws passed DO impact the future.
Be alert. It could be the very vote needed to stop these Marxist from taking over your local government and our country as a result of local “apathetic” voters.
It’s your locality that is effected but legal beagles, skags, and barfs do use things at the local level to justify their cases. Make sure that EVERY candidate is a Local who has a reason to be engaged and “skin in th game”. When you see huge outside funds pouring in to the coffers – BEWARE and PROTEST. Just like in Georgia—why the heck did the state allow $30 million to pour into the campaign of a STATE district election? And notice the guy did NOT live within the district.
The whole premise of the constitution was that people who are elected answer to their neighbors for their decisions and look to the neighbors to know what to work on. It is NOT a one-way street where the elected official colludes behind closed doors and decides for or against the local citizenry wishes especially on “Marxist-based or Sharia-based lines.” PC is BS. At stake is far more than one single election in one single instance.