California voters will face a pivotal decision this November on Proposition 5, a statewide ballot measure that would change the mechanics of recall elections. The proposal, authored by former state senator Josh Newman, aims to remove the second question that currently asks voters to name a successor if a recall succeeds. Instead, a replacement would be selected through the regular election process, a change Newman argues better protects majority rule.
Why the Change Is Being Proposed
Newman points to the 2021 recall attempt against Gov. Gavin Newsom, which he says would have installed Larry Elder with only 28% voter support. “Had it succeeded, his replacement would have been Larry Elder, who would have taken office as governor of the largest state in the union, the fourth largest economy in the world, with only 28% of voter support,” Newman explained. He contends that the current two‑question format can enable a minority to assume high office, undermining the principle that elected leaders should reflect the will of the majority.
How the Current System Works
Under existing rules, California recall ballots ask two questions: (1) whether the elected official should be recalled, and (2) who should replace them if the recall passes. Critics argue that the second question creates a loophole for a small, organized group to win a statewide office with a fraction of the electorate’s votes.
Supporters Emphasize Voter Trust and Cost Savings
State Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones praised the existing recall process, saying, “The process is working. The people know what they’re doing, the voters know what they’re doing. Let’s just trust the voters and not fix something that’s not broken.” However, he also acknowledged that Proposition 5 could simplify the ballot and potentially reduce costs associated with printing a separate successor question.
KQED political correspondent Guy Marzorati noted that the financial impact is uncertain. “You can think about it if it could potentially cost the state more money if the governor or an elected official is recalled and then there has to be a whole separate election to pick a successor rather than having a successor picked on the same ballot,” he said. “Or perhaps it’s a situation where the state ends up saving money, they don’t have to print the materials for that second successor question. Really, I think we’re looking at this measure as not really adding or subtracting from state funds that much.”
Critics Warn of Concentrating Power
Opponents argue that eliminating the successor question could concentrate decision‑making in a “supermajority institution,” effectively taking power away from the electorate. Jones, speaking for critics, warned, “To take this power away from the people and put it in place in the supermajority institution is really ridiculous, and the voters should be very cynical about it.” They contend that the change would strip voters of a direct say in who replaces a recalled official.
Historical Context
Since 1913, only 11 recall efforts have reached a November ballot in California, and six resulted in removal of the officeholder. This low frequency suggests that recalls are a rare tool, but when they do occur, the outcome can be consequential.
What Offices Would Be Affected?
Marzorati clarified that Proposition 5 would apply only to statewide constitutional offices – governor, attorney general, secretary of state, and the state legislature (senate and assembly). It would not affect local recalls of district attorneys, mayors, or other municipal officials.
What Voters Should Consider
California voters should weigh the desire for a streamlined ballot against the principle of direct voter choice in selecting successors. The measure promises a simpler voting process and potential cost savings, but critics fear it could diminish democratic participation. As the November election approaches, both sides urge voters to examine the details and consider how the change aligns with the foundational value of majority rule.
Original reporting: NBC4 Los Angeles — read the source article.
