Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Californians Scramble to Oust Gov. Davis
NewsMax email alert (sorry, no URL) | Feb 1, 2003

Posted on 02/01/2003 9:04:25 AM PST by John Jorsett

NewsMax's many California readers have been buzzing for more information about a brief UPI item we ran describing a bipartisan coalition to recall corrupt and extremely unpopular Gov. Gray Davis. Here's the inside scoop.

Melanie Morgan of radio station KSFO in San Francisco tells NewsMax that she got the ball rolling when, in a recent interview with California GOP chairman Shawn Steele, she suggested an effort to recall Davis.

"He investigated it, and discovered that with the low voter turnout, we need just 675,000 signatures for a recall. The law says that we can't officially begin until six months after Davis was inaugurated. June 1, we're off and running.

"Steele is going to introduce the recall effort at the California Republican convention next month. In the meantime, Steele has enlisted former Carter pollster Pat Caddell to handle a Dump Davis democrat petition drive. Right/Left Coalition is born!" Morgan writes.

Thousands of volunteers have already contacted Steele to participate, Morgan reveals.

All it takes is 675,000 fed-up Californians? Gray, you might want to start hunting for a new job. Perhaps the state tax collector is hiring bureaucrats to haul in the huge tax increases you're shoving down the people's throats.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: calgov2002; knife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

1 posted on 02/01/2003 9:04:25 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Ping. Too bad we have to put up with Davis until June. One thing I wonder though is whether we'll end up somebody even worse. If Democrats are signing on to this thing, that's a distinct possibility.
2 posted on 02/01/2003 9:06:25 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
bump
3 posted on 02/01/2003 9:07:14 AM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: American Preservative
ping
4 posted on 02/01/2003 9:11:02 AM PST by I_Love_My_Husband
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Where do I sign?
5 posted on 02/01/2003 9:13:51 AM PST by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
"The law says that we can't officially begin until six months after Davis was inaugurated. June 1, we're off and running."

Excuse me, but was Davis inaugurated on December 1?

6 posted on 02/01/2003 9:16:04 AM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Where do I sign?

Right below my signature. And, since we have to wait until June, we may as well spend the time registering to vote under a few dozen names. It'll come in handy during the recall election and subsequent choosing of a new governor.

7 posted on 02/01/2003 9:17:38 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
This is an exciting posibility, but before getting too excited we need to know where we're headed.

Most importantly, who will run on the Republican line if Davis is dumped? Will Shawn Steele have any input, or will Gerald Parsky control the party? Will there be an open primary in which California Republicans can choose the candidate, or will Parsky hand-pick the nominee?

Frankly, I'd rather leave the state in the hands of Gray Davis and let him deal with his self-inflicted budget problem than turn it over to the kind of pro-abort Country-Club RINO that Parsky will push. Better Davis than Riordan or some Riordan clone. With Davis in office, busy fixing the unfixable problems he has made, at least there would be a good chance to swing the state to the Republicans in 2006.

I think it needs to be made crystal clear before this goers forward that the conservative base will not turn out with any enthusiasm for Parsky and his RINO friends.
8 posted on 02/01/2003 9:19:53 AM PST by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
"Steele is going to introduce the recall effort at the California Republican convention next month.

Does anyone want to bet California Republicans will reject the idea...They're as much a problem as the liberals.

9 posted on 02/01/2003 9:20:15 AM PST by lewislynn (Vindicated once again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
I believe that Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamonte will immediately be sworn in upon the successful recall of Davis.
10 posted on 02/01/2003 9:23:29 AM PST by ambrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
You can Email them to encourage this effort:

Melanie Morgan

Shawn Steele

11 posted on 02/01/2003 9:25:25 AM PST by antaresequity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Good luck, Californians. I hope you do jettison that S.O.B.
12 posted on 02/01/2003 9:26:54 AM PST by LibKill (ColdWarrior. I stood the watch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibKill
Ping for signage! Help, trapped in the PRC...
13 posted on 02/01/2003 9:28:06 AM PST by dagar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Here's everything I can find in the California Constitution that talks about recall elections. I don't know where the six months comes from, although the Constitution talks about having to wait for 6 months after a recall election before you can have another recall election. Note the bold section: if Davis wins, we have to reimburse him for his expenses. Wouldn't that just burn yer butt?

SEC. 14. (a) Recall of a state officer is initiated by delivering to the Secretary of State a petition alleging reason for recall. Sufficiency of reason is not reviewable. Proponents have 160 days to file signed petitions.
(b) A petition to recall a statewide officer must be signed by electors equal in number to 12 percent of the last vote for the office, with signatures from each of 5 counties equal in number to 1 percent of the last vote for the office in the county. Signatures to recall Senators, members of the Assembly, members of the Board of Equalization, and judges of courts of appeal and trial courts must equal in number 20 percent of the last vote for the office.
(c) The Secretary of State shall maintain a continuous count of the signatures certified to that office.

SEC. 15. (a) An election to determine whether to recall an officer and, if appropriate, to elect a successor shall be called by the Governor and held not less than 60 days nor more than 80 days from the date of certification of sufficient signatures.
(b) A recall election may be conducted within 180 days from the date of certification of sufficient signatures in order that the election may be consolidated with the next regularly scheduled election occurring wholly or partially within the same jurisdiction in which the recall election is held, if the number of voters eligible to vote at that next regularly scheduled election equal at least 50 percent of all the voters eligible to vote at the recall election.
(c) If the majority vote on the question is to recall, the officer is removed and, if there is a candidate, the candidate who receives a plurality is the successor. The officer may not be a candidate, nor shall there be any candidacy for an office filled pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 16 of Article VI.

SEC. 17. If recall of the Governor or Secretary of State is initiated, the recall duties of that office shall be performed by the Lieutenant Governor or Controller, respectively.

SEC. 18. A state officer who is not recalled shall be reimbursed by the State for the officer's recall election expenses legally and personally incurred. Another recall may not be initiated against the officer until six months after the election.

SEC. 20. Terms of elective offices provided for by this Constitution, other than Members of the Legislature, commence on the Monday after January 1 following election. The election shall be held in the last even-numbered year before the term expires.

14 posted on 02/01/2003 9:35:00 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Poor Gray Davis -- the Catholic Church doesn't want him and neither do a lot of Californians.

He's going to get a complex.
15 posted on 02/01/2003 9:37:45 AM PST by ladylib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Sorry people. This will never happen. Davis has too much power. The powerbrokers like everyone else nowdays will not admit a mistake by participating with this recall.
16 posted on 02/01/2003 9:38:58 AM PST by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
I believe that Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamonte will immediately be sworn in upon the successful recall of Davis.

Reading the California Constitution, it appears that a recall election can have one or more candidates on the ballot, and Davis can't be among them.

17 posted on 02/01/2003 9:38:59 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Umm, wasn't the best opportunity to oust the fool the November elections? If Democrats really wanted him out, they could have taken him on in the primaries, or voted GOP (or simply stayed home) in November.
18 posted on 02/01/2003 9:40:19 AM PST by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigfootbob
Sorry people. This will never happen. Davis has too much power. The powerbrokers like everyone else nowdays will not admit a mistake by participating with this recall.

That's what they said about Proposition 13, the Defense of Marriage Act, and other measures that the elite didn't like. This will be a grass-roots effort and we won't need their participation.

19 posted on 02/01/2003 9:41:11 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
I believe that Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamonte will immediately be sworn in upon the successful recall of Davis.

He's the guy that used the N-word publicly, isn't he?

20 posted on 02/01/2003 9:42:01 AM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Then a recall effort would be worthwhile. Even if it doesn't succeed, it should certainly get Davis' attention and force him to "triangulate" against the liberal legislature while the recall is hanging over his head.
21 posted on 02/01/2003 9:42:58 AM PST by ambrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
An awful lot of RATs did stay home in November. In a recall election, maybe considerably more will.
22 posted on 02/01/2003 9:44:19 AM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
?Umm, wasn't the best opportunity to oust the fool the November elections? If Democrats really wanted him out, they could have taken him on in the primaries, or voted GOP (or simply stayed home) in November.

He barely squeeked by with a 5% margin against an inept candidate after spending tens of millions of dollars. Then after winning, he announces the budget deficit is twice as bad as he'd been saying, that taxes have to go up (Republicans hate that) and that spending has to be slashed (Democrats hate that). The California Teachers Association has been running radio attack ads against the guy because of his proposed cuts in school spending. I don't think many of his erstwhile donors would give him the time of day now, so he'd have a hard time campaigning. I believe a recall would win big. The big question is whether the Democrat candidate in the recall would be one of their more commie-like folks. Giving the governorship to Cruz Bustamante would be a Bad Thing.

23 posted on 02/01/2003 9:48:30 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: okie01
December 1 to June 1 is 6 months. He serves

1)December 2)January 3)February 4)March 5)April 6)May

June 1 he's toast

24 posted on 02/01/2003 9:48:46 AM PST by TX Bluebonnet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
"This will be a grass-roots effort and we won't need their participation."

I certainly hope you're right. Remember the story about Sisyphus?

25 posted on 02/01/2003 9:49:07 AM PST by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TwoStep; broomhilda
Ping
26 posted on 02/01/2003 9:52:55 AM PST by christie (The Clinton Legacy Cookbook is here!!!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Bttt...........
27 posted on 02/01/2003 9:53:20 AM PST by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
If the Democrats can't fix the economy in one state, how would they ever fix the economy in all fifty states?
28 posted on 02/01/2003 9:54:35 AM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
California Freepers get busy, PRONTO!!!!
29 posted on 02/01/2003 9:59:07 AM PST by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
A timely indictment of the governor would nicely complement the recall effort.
30 posted on 02/01/2003 10:02:25 AM PST by thinktwice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Consort
If the Democrats can't fix the economy in one state, how would they ever fix the economy in all fifty states?

They'll make it up in volume? (rimshot)

31 posted on 02/01/2003 10:02:39 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: thinktwice
A timely indictment of the governor would nicely complement the recall effort.

Unfortunately, it isn't yet a criminal act to be Gray Davis, although I'd certainly support a law to that effect.

32 posted on 02/01/2003 10:04:27 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Consort
If the Democrats can't fix the economy in one state, how would they ever fix the economy in all fifty states?

The everlasting problem under "democratic" communism -- that's what it is when you get to vote for your socialist dictatorship -- is that socialism impedes individualism.

Why work when everything you earn belongs to others?

33 posted on 02/01/2003 10:08:35 AM PST by thinktwice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
It is common knowledge that Gray Davis' influence brought in $78 million in "Pay to Play" campaign contributions.

Put me on the bribery trial jury and ... guess how I'd vote.

34 posted on 02/01/2003 10:12:55 AM PST by thinktwice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
I question the wisdom of all who support this recall.

Under California law the Lt. Governor replaces the recalled Governor.

While Davis is a predictable failure he represents much less of a potential threat to California's culture than does Bustamante.

Bustamante has a political history that is aligned with Mexican separatism.

For the record Bustamante has publically stated he is a "first generation" Californian (US citizen) but proof that he was born in the US has never been made public.

35 posted on 02/01/2003 10:17:12 AM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
A recall effort against Davis was initiated by Glenn Spencer and Barbara Coe of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform back in 1999, in the wake of his sham "arbitratrion" of the Prop. 187 appeal. That effort - which had only $70000 to work with - gathered something like 470,000 signatures (they needed about twice that), largely on the basis of the anger that people felt toward the man for destroying their vote.

A well funded recall effort - with the limp wristed California Republican Party finally on board - would be a cakewalk, if all we need are about 675000 signatures.

So when do we start?

36 posted on 02/01/2003 10:24:15 AM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
Davis was elected governor in November. As much as I hate the bastard, he should serve his term unless they can convict him of malfeasance or something equally serious and provable. Removing these slugs just because we don't like them is not the American way. My God, we lived through Clinton!
37 posted on 02/01/2003 10:25:51 AM PST by thegreatbeast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
You're points are well taken. I don't know the law on this (and I can't take time out this morning to research it), but would a new election have to be called, or would Bustamante remain governor until the next scheduled election?

It's apparent that Davis has an unexpected insurance policy in the form of Cruz "I didn't mean to say the N-word" Bustamante.

Or maybe not so unexpected...

38 posted on 02/01/2003 10:30:00 AM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
....let him cleanup his own mess
39 posted on 02/01/2003 10:31:23 AM PST by GrandMoM (Spare the rod, spoil the child!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
"Californians Scramble to Oust Gov. Davis "

Too bad this has to come after the damage is already done. It's sort of like deciding to paint the living room while the kitchen is engulfed in flames.

40 posted on 02/01/2003 10:36:33 AM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
I agree. Cooler heads need to prevail here.. or we are just one step closer to the Republic of Aztlan.

Cruz'in for a bruizin' .. BustinaMove with Bustamante .. Davi$ may be a goat on a rope, but at least, he is our goat, not La Raza's.

41 posted on 02/01/2003 10:39:09 AM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LibKill
The majority voted the A$$ in AGAIN let them deal with it.
If you make the bed lay in it.
42 posted on 02/01/2003 10:39:41 AM PST by squibs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
He's the guy that used the N-word publicly, isn't he?

Yep. Of course, since he isn't Trent Lott, he's still in line for Governor.

43 posted on 02/01/2003 10:50:17 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Kind of a pipe dream, don't you think? Californians re-elected him just three months ago. You may get the recall election held but you won't win the election.
44 posted on 02/01/2003 10:55:27 AM PST by 537 Votes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 537 Votes
>>You may get the recall election held but you won't win the election. <<

Exactly -- the discussion about Cruz Bust are probably right on (I need to read the Calif Constitution) -- but a recall effort would let the Dems here in Kalifornia know they can't take the conservative vote for granted.

Let Gray Panic-off-the-start Davis twist in the wind. Let's make his life as tough as possible.
45 posted on 02/01/2003 11:02:07 AM PST by freedumb2003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
Under California law the Lt. Governor replaces the recalled Governor.

Under the state Constitution (scroll up a few posts and you'll see it), it appears that the recall election can carry the name of one or more candidates who would be the replacement:

An election to determine whether to recall an officer and, if appropriate, to elect a successor shall be called by the Governor and held not less than 60 days nor more than 80 days from the date of certification of sufficient signatures.
So Bustamente wouldn't automatically be the new gov. He'd have to run for it.
46 posted on 02/01/2003 11:05:14 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: 537 Votes
Kind of a pipe dream, don't you think? Californians re-elected him just three months ago. You may get the recall election held but you won't win the election.

I think there's a whole lot of buyer's remorse on the part of those who voted for him last time. Plus, I think the Demmocrats are royally p.o.ed at him for wanting to cut their precious funds instead of jacking up taxes enough to keep spending at the existing levels, (evidence the Calif. Teacher's Association running attack ads against him).

47 posted on 02/01/2003 11:10:43 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
So, we need to be sure that somebody does the homework and checks all the constitutional implications. And I still think we need to have some confidence that a decent replacement will be put forward by the Republican party. Going through this whole process for the sake of Riordan would not appeal to many conservatives.
48 posted on 02/01/2003 11:14:18 AM PST by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
If I recall correctly, Davis needs a super-majority in both houses to increase or add any kind of tax (including income).

Any California Legislative analysts out there? I have been out of town for 3 years, just coming home on weekends, so I've lost touch of some of this kind of thing....
49 posted on 02/01/2003 11:14:28 AM PST by freedumb2003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Recalling Davis would provide two key benifits: Getting rid of Davis (and his machine), plus the dark stain this will put on the Democrats in California and the rest of the country.

Even though I received some joy after the election when it was revealed how big the California mess really was and how much trouble Davis just paid millions to wallow in, it would be much better if a Republican stepped in and fixed the problem.

50 posted on 02/01/2003 11:20:19 AM PST by Revolutionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson