California must reform its recall election process. Here’s how to make it fair, effective

As the votes are officially tallied, an important question looms: How can California reform its recall laws so future recall elections are really about the will of voters and not a partisan tool?

The current recall process that targeted Gov. Gavin Newsom was clearly weaponized by California Republicans, who no longer have the ability to win statewide elections. That, in and of itself, is its own issue. But it is paramount that California removes the partisan toxins from the recall process so it is fair, constitutional and effective going forward.

There are four reforms that could do the trick.

First, increase the number of signatures required to trigger a recall. Under California law, petition campaigns need 12% of the total votes cast in the last gubernatorial election for a recall to qualify. For a state of 40 million people, this year’s special election only needed 1.5 million signatures.

Nineteen states allow recall elections for governors, and California has the lowest threshold for signatures. Several require 25%. Kansas requires 40%.

Second, there must be clear bipartisan support. Yes, Democrats signed the petition, but they accounted for a measly 9% of the final tally. That means only about 1.3% of the 10.2 million registered Democrats in California signed up. Given the makeup of voters in our state, setting a reasonable standard at the outset will help establish more consensus for whether citizens genuinely want to remove an official.

Third, the replacement candidate needs to earn a majority of votes, not a plurality. When polls earlier this summer suggested that the recall was closer than expected, we were faced with a reality where Newsom could be removed with nearly half of voters supporting him and the leading challenger, talk radio host Larry Elder, winning with less than 20% support. It’s absurd — and frankly, undemocratic — that our governor could be elected by such a small percentage.

Finally, strengthen the criteria for a recall. Other states require wrongdoing or conviction of a serious crime as the basis for a recall. Newsom certainly deserved the furor he caused last year when he attended a maskless birthday party at the French Laundry while everyone else followed the rules and canceled holiday plans. But gross hypocrisy is not enough to remove a sitting governor from office. Every other complaint Newsom faces is about policy, action or outcome. In a democracy, you address those in a general election.

If structured correctly, a recall can be an important check on our top elected official. But that’s not what we had in this recall election. Instead, we had a circus where the worst elements of our political process were on full display.

The recall came at a huge cost in taxpayer dollars — $276 million, to be precise. More than 40 people appeared on the ballot, many with little or no actual experience in governing. The recall came only months before Newsom would have been running for re-election anyway.

Considering the dire issues facing California — a pandemic, wildfires, a drought, a homeless crisis — governing the state has never been more important. Who will govern California is a serious decision that was cheapened by the recall election of 2021.

This editorial was updated Sept. 17 to correct the state’s number of registered Democrats and the percentage that signed recall petition.

This story was originally published September 15, 2021 at 5:00 AM with the headline "California must reform its recall election process. Here’s how to make it fair, effective."