response 232 of 264:

Sep 15 17:57 UTC 2003

I thought Georgia was heavy in goobers.

response 234 of 264:

Sep 16 02:53 UTC 2003

Might anyone know the amount of time that would elapse between the 
certification of the CA election results & the assumption of power by 
the newly elected governor - assuming Davis were to be recalled?

response 236 of 264:

Sep 16 15:44 UTC 2003

It would have to wait for the results to be certified, probably by a board
of canvassers.  We can expect the necessary people to be present at that
meeting.

response 238 of 264:

Sep 18 16:17 UTC 2003

Not so fast, please, Mr. gull:

Thanks to Best of the Web, Opinionjournal.com:

Disunity on the Angry Left
By ordering the cancellation of next month's California election, the 
Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has gone too far even for some 
members of the Angry Left. Bruce Ackerman of Yale Law School has an op-
ed in today's New York Times that distinguishes the case from Bush v. 
Gore, which the Ninth Circuiters mischievously cited as their chief 
precedent. 

"The present decision attacks states' rights at their very core," 
Ackerman writes. "The short election period is central to California's 
political integrity. Its constitution places a limit of six months on 
this extraordinary process. By extending the election beyond this 
period, the court condemns the state to an extended period of political 
paralysis." Ackerman even argues that the ruling is an infringement on 
political speech:

[It] disrupts the core First Amendment freedom to present a coherent 
political message to voters. Worse yet, the decision disrupts the First 
Amendment interests of the millions of Californians who have 
participated in the recall effort. State law promised them a quick 
election if they completed their petitions by an August deadline. Now 
their effort will have to compete in March with the candidates for the 
Democratic presidential nomination. A campaign focused on California 
issues may be swamped by national politics.

What makes this extraordinary is that Ackerman is one of academia's 
shrillest critics of Bush v. Gore; as we noted in April 2001, he went 
so far as to liken that ruling to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. 
His willingness to rise above partisanship stands in stark contrast 
with the New York Times editorial page . . . .

response 240 of 264:

Sep 19 13:55 UTC 2003

the cost and logistics of training people to use a new system?

response 242 of 264:

Sep 20 12:33 UTC 2003

Re: #240/241
Since the Chad-o-Matic voting stuff is in it's last days anyway,
they'll have to train folks on the new stuff soon regardless. 
Getting the Office of the Undersecretary of the Department of
Red Tape to speed up is often pretty easy when you can apply a
lot of heat and light. 

Voting machines spend 'most all their lives in storage, waiting
for an election day.  I'd bet that stuff could be borrowed if
really needed.

Yes, getting a move on will cost more somewhere.  But how high
is the cost to California's economy of having the uncertainty
hanging over everyone's heads for several extra months?  
Probably vastly more. 

response 244 of 264:

Sep 22 01:08 UTC 2003

Why, yes. There most certainly would be.  Risk averse capitalists will 
avoid establishing/expanding their CA businesses pending the outcome of 
the recall.

(The problem, Mr. rcurl, has been due to the fact the the legislator and 
governor have not been "doing their jobs."  Had they been, there would 
most certainly not have been a recall movement!)

response 246 of 264:

Sep 22 07:32 UTC 2003

  California spends a lot of time being the butt of the nation's jokes,
  particularly where politics is concerned.  I doubt they care about
  the affront to their dignity.

  And the recall campaign may have been begun by Darrell Issa but no
  matter how wealthy he happened to be there's no way one man could have
  moved the recall effort this far along without substantial public
  dissatisfaction with Gray Davis and the job he's done.

response 248 of 264:

Sep 22 18:21 UTC 2003

"Substantial public dissatisfaction" for causing a recall amounts to only
18% of the electorate. 

I didn't say the recall is unconstitutional, only that it did not have
a substantial basis for being initiated, even though it met the legal
requirement. 

response 250 of 264:

Sep 23 01:57 UTC 2003

Isn't that approximately the same percentage of the vote George Bush got 
in 2000 (and look what happened)?

response 252 of 264:

Sep 23 06:18 UTC 2003

The 18% I quoted is the fraction of the electorate that signed the
petition to create the recall. The fact alone that the recall was
initiated should not be put forward as strong support for the recall. In
fact, probably a significant fraction of that 18% voted to initiate the
recall on the grounds that popular political action should be supported,
whether one agrees with the objective or not. In addition, the approx 50%
poll support favoring recalling the governor is how it looks now, but this
is in the heat of expression of some dissatisfaction with the governor. It
might shift if more people come to their senses. 

response 254 of 264:

Sep 23 13:43 UTC 2003

With a threshold of only 18%, I expect all future California governors
to be the subject of recall campaigns.