Republish
Newest California trend: Recalling officeholders
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
Newest California trend: Recalling officeholders
Share this:
Geographically, economically, demographically, culturally and ideologically, San Francisco and Shasta County are polar opposites, but their voters have one thing in common: a willingness to throw out officeholders who displease them.
A few weeks ago, voters in Shasta County Supervisor Leonard Moty’s district voted to recall the Republican former police chief, who had been accused of being insufficiently critical of the state’s COVID-19 decrees. Recall leaders were tied to the right-wing militia movement.
Last week, San Francisco voters recalled three school board members accused of neglecting children’s education in their zeal to promote uber-progressive political causes, such as changing the names of schools to reflect current ideological dogma.
The power to recall officeholders, lodged in the state constitution more than a century as a hedge against corruption but rarely used over that span of time, has suddenly become trendy as the COVID-19 pandemic and rising crime rates increase cultural and political polarization.
By any rational standard, Shasta County’s Moty is a conservative Republican but ran afoul of the hard right’s intolerance of anything other than complete adherence to its demands that Shasta refuse to follow state pandemic directives.
Had it not been for the pandemic, the San Francisco school board’s flights of ideological fancy probably would have been tolerated, but parents became incensed about the slow reopening of schools and the board’s decision to stop merit-based enrollments at prestigious Lowell High School.
The school board recall was so popular that prominent local politicians, including Mayor London Breed, endorsed it. Breed will name successors to the ousted trio.
Although Gov. Gavin Newsom shrugged off a weak effort to recall him last year, most recall campaigns that gather enough signatures to make the ballot succeed, including that of Gov. Gray Davis in 2003 and the occasional drives to oust state legislators.
We are likely to see more recall elections soon, including one already qualified with San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin to target. He’s accused of refusing to vigorously prosecute criminal cases brought to him by local police.
Similar allegations are being hurled at a Boudin predecessor, George Gascón, who is now district attorney of Los Angeles County, and a petition drive to recall him is underway. Boudin, Gascón and several other blue county district attorneys have implemented less punitive prosecutorial policies but rising crime rates and increasing public concerns about crime have generated backlash.
In the wake of the Shasta County recall, there’s another campaign underway in another rural county, Nevada, with similar dynamics.
The Sacramento Bee reported, “In Nevada County, a group of activists allege that officials have overstepped their authority when it comes to COVID-19 contact tracing, lockdowns and other public health measures that ‘violated religious freedoms and individual liberty.’ They’re seeking to recall the five-member board for committing ‘crimes against humanity’.”
According to the Bee, recall proponents see county supervisors as “part of a corrupt system under Dr. Anthony Fauci that is forcing a dangerous and untested vaccine on the masses, refusing to treat patients with ivermectin, and stripping them of their liberties by monitoring them for contact tracing.”
Not surprisingly, the wavelet of recalls has generated suggestions in the state Legislature for changing the process, some to make it more difficult to qualify a recall for the ballot, others that would effectively negate the recall of a governor.
Perhaps the recall is being overly used or even misused at the moment, but it remains a valuable check on arrogant officeholders. Changing it could have unanticipated and negative consequences, so we shouldn’t be too eager to make radical reforms.
MORE FROM Dan Walters
California’s population is stagnating as immigration and birth rates decline
Medi-Cal cuts, tax increases loom as Capitol lawmakers dicker over the budget
What election night results mean in the race for California’s next governor
Dan WaltersOpinion Columnist
Dan Walters is one of most decorated and widely syndicated columnists in California history, authoring a column four times a week that offers his view and analysis of the state’s political, economic,... More by Dan Walters