Publisher's Synopsis
Zimmerman examines in detail the use of the recall by United States voters to remove elected state and local officials from office. The arguments of recall proponents and opponents are analyzed, and model constitutional and statutory provisions are developed to guide governments considering adoption of the recall or revision of current recall provisions.
This book is the first since 1912 devoted to a national evaluation of the recall. The recall currently is authorized by a constitutional or statutory provision in 26 states and by home rule charters in a number of additional states. Zimmerman examines in detail the use of the recall by United States voters to remove elected state and local officials from office. The arguments of recall proponents and opponents are analyzed, and model constitutional and statutory provisions are developed to guide governments considering adoption of the recall or revision of current recall provisions.
Recall attempts throughout the United States are reviewed to obtain evidence to evaluate the arguments of recall proponents and opponents. The evidence, Zimmerman suggests, generally supports the proponents. The recall has not produced a new era of public official responsibility, yet the device has not caused extensive disruption of state and local governments as feared by early opponents. In his conclusion, Zimmerman analyzes current constitutional and statutory recall provisions to develop model provisions to guide those considering adoption of the recall or revision of existing provisions. This analysis will be of particular interest to scholars and researchers of state and local government, American constitutional law, and public policy.
