Chapter 10-I-e
Provisions for Recall
A crucial tool for accountability


In addition to the public pressure that can be directly brought to bear on representatives through Local Group forums, (and other forums provided for that express purpose), constitutional provisions for recall of representatives must be provided.

If a representative can be seen by those who voted for her or him to be acting and/or voting in a manner that is not consistent with the way she or he represented herself or himself when they stood for election, then that representative will bear the burden to prove to her or his constituents, (using the available channels of interactive communications), that her or his change of thinking and position is justified by developing events, and/or by deeper consideration of the relevant issues. If the citizen-members whose votes elected this representative remain unconvinced by her or his arguments for a shift in position, then the means must be provided to the citizen-members who elected that person to recall her or him from office, and to elect a new representative.

In our hypothetical Local Group of 345 citizen-members, let’s posit that a representative was elected with total vote count of 156. Assuming every citizen-member cast the 3 votes allotted to her or him, (according to our prototype formulary voting scheme as presented in chapter 10-I-b), a total of 1041 votes would have been cast, so this representative received 15% of the total ballots cast, but received votes from 156 people, (since our prototype scheme posits that each citizen-member can only cast one vote for any one candidate), so she or he received votes from 45% (156 / 345 = .452) of the group’s total membership.

A prototype recall provision might read that if a majority, (or possibly a super majority, say 60%), among those who voted for this representative, (with all votes being a matter of public record, so the names of those who voted for each candidate will be freely available to any who might want to undertake to lead a recall effort), should sign a petition of recall, then this representative would be relieved from office for the rest of the current term, and the 156 people who voted for her or him could then vote, casting one ballot each, to elect a new representative.

Recall is very different from impeachment. The latter is a consequence for wrongdoing. Changing one’s thinking or position on an issue is obviously not wrongdoing. Recall is a measure of accountability, not punishment for wrongdoing. Measures for impeachment will also need to be provided, but such measures would define a legal, rather than electoral, procedure. The crucial difference, (other than procedural), between recall and impeachment, is in the reasons for the action. One (impeachment) bears a stigma of dishonor, the other (recall) most definitely does not.


Previous Page..........................................Table of Contents..........................................Next Page