- $1 billion Empire State Building IPO: why it won't be like Facebook IPO
- In surprise move, GOP leaders admit defeat in payroll tax battle
- More than 30,000 Germans turn out against anti-piracy treaty ACTA
- Does Obama blueprint reduce budget deficit fast enough? (+video)
- Pentagon budget: Does it pit active-duty forces against retirees? (+video)
- Murdoch media crisis deepens with five new arrests
- How Pinterest combines the best parts of Facebook, Tumblr, and Etsy
- US, China face 'trust deficit' as China's heir apparent visits
Emerging lessons of the recall
As Californians head to polls, observers say the unusual ballot has energized state politics.
(Page 2 of 2)
The past eight weeks, though, have provided other answers - and essentially established a whole new campaign mode stuck on fast-forward.
Although any formal primary was cast out in favor of the kitchen-sink ballot, the survival skills needed for such a sprint to the finish naturally pared the list of major candidates. In such a short election, the advantage went to the players who had the most money - or could raise it most quickly. Each poll became a pseudo primary, thinning the field so that in the most recent Field Poll, Schwarzenegger carried 40 percent of the vote.
The brevity changed the tone of the race, as well. Although the recall was ostensibly about the state budget crisis, candidates were able to avoid specifics, instead focusing on the day-to-day velocity of the campaign. Likewise, campaigns had less time to find weak links in their opponents' persona and platform. The result has been an unusually volatile campaign, as voters' first impressions were quickly and dramatically reshaped through debates and allegations.
"To assemble a dossier on an opponent takes a lot of time," says Derry Sragow, a Democratic consultant. Believing that voters have already made up their minds, he adds that the new charges against Schwarzenegger may have come "too late to have an impact."
Perhaps more than anything, though, the race's short span provided the tension and momentum necessary to keep Californians energized. To be sure, Schwarzenegger's entrance gave the race a Hollywood flair. "But I don't think it was just that," says Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in southern California. "This is the people's voice. There are [financial] costs to this, but the engagement of the electorate is a good thing."
On that point, Mr. Sragow would agree. But as a Democratic consultant, he also sees an inevitable reaction to the action of the recall. He says Democrats would try to recall Rep. Darrell Issa, the man who financially backed the recall signature-gathering effort, but there is no recall mechanism for recalling members of Congress. Still, he and others say political operatives now know the recall is a proven tool, and citizens might be less willing to let a foundering governor work though difficult times.
"Now, we are unwilling to live with the consequences of an election until the next election," he says. "We no longer abide by the terms of an election."
To many political analysts, it's a notion that undermines the foundations of American government. To some, though, it's simply the perpetual - and occasionally messy - evolution of democracy.
"The history of political development in this country, and in others, suggests that political systems based on popular sovereignty, like ours, become more democratic over time," says Howard Ernst, coauthor of "Dangerous Democracy? The Battle over Ballot Initiatives in America." "What the citizens have decided in California is that they have more confidence in the tools of direct democracy than the judgment of elected officials."
Page:
1 | 2



