Who Will Be the Next Victim of the Grand Bounce? A nonpartisan, nonjudgmental look at the “Hair-Trigger” Form of Government
Wednesday, August 21, 2019
Alaska: Governor rolls back most of spending cuts; still facing recall effort
Governor Mike Dunleavy (R) is still facing a recall effort after he signed a budget which got rid of many of his spending cuts aimed at the University of Alaska. Dunleavy refused to restore funding to a health program.
The article is extremely unfortunate because of its timing and placement in Alaska politics, to which you are clearly an outsider.
It is worthy of intense criticism because the Alaska Governor recall petitioners *were acutely aware of your points* and drafted recall terms intended to withstand judicial scrutiny. The very specific reasons the recall petition is brought forward concern illegal activity and concrete demonstrations of incompetence. You fail, utterly, to mention any of these reasons or provide a substantive review of the likelihood of success. Why would you opine on our recall petition process without a substantive analysis of the recall petition?
Your article amounts to an attempt to throw a wet blanket on the realest, most advanced, and most likely to succeed recall effort in the US.
Thanks for writing (and alerting me to the fact that the article ran!). I imagine that there is a great likelihood that the recall petitioners are aware of the challenges of a malfeasance standard recall law and drafted the petitions to surmount it. That doesn't mean they'll succeed (or fail). The point of my article was to highlight the issues of a malfeasance standard recall and the unique nature of Alaska's version. While I could have looked further into the policy issues, these op-eds have a fairly strict word limit and others can do that much better. What I discussed (no real opining) was how Alaska's recall works versus other states. Feel free to find others who are better able to discuss that. On your last point, this is likely the most advanced Gubernatorial recall in the country. However, there are quite a number of recalls occurring throughout the country.
This article, sir, is critically lacking.
ReplyDeleteThe article is extremely unfortunate because of its timing and placement in Alaska politics, to which you are clearly an outsider.
It is worthy of intense criticism because the Alaska Governor recall petitioners *were acutely aware of your points* and drafted recall terms intended to withstand judicial scrutiny. The very specific reasons the recall petition is brought forward concern illegal activity and concrete demonstrations of incompetence. You fail, utterly, to mention any of these reasons or provide a substantive review of the likelihood of success. Why would you opine on our recall petition process without a substantive analysis of the recall petition?
Your article amounts to an attempt to throw a wet blanket on the realest, most advanced, and most likely to succeed recall effort in the US.
Thanks for writing (and alerting me to the fact that the article ran!). I imagine that there is a great likelihood that the recall petitioners are aware of the challenges of a malfeasance standard recall law and drafted the petitions to surmount it. That doesn't mean they'll succeed (or fail). The point of my article was to highlight the issues of a malfeasance standard recall and the unique nature of Alaska's version. While I could have looked further into the policy issues, these op-eds have a fairly strict word limit and others can do that much better. What I discussed (no real opining) was how Alaska's recall works versus other states. Feel free to find others who are better able to discuss that.
DeleteOn your last point, this is likely the most advanced Gubernatorial recall in the country. However, there are quite a number of recalls occurring throughout the country.