Electionline Weekly on the cost of Special Elections

A look at the different ways that Louisiana and Massachusetts pay for the specials.

Michigan: School Board in Bloomfield Hills

Recall language has been approved for three school board members in Bloomfield Hills. This follows on a June decision approving language for the other four members. Issue is a consolidation of two high schools.

Arkansas: Talk of recall of Fort Smith Directors

Here

Wisconsin Polls

Gov. Walker and legislature are unpopular, the Recall as an idea is very popular, and voters are split on whether the current group of Senators should be recalled

Arizona: Phoenix City Council recall

Councilman discusses finances of effort against him, blaming firefighter unions.

Arizona: No clear challenger for Pearce

Usually, they have this down before making the effort for the recall

Good overview of yesterday's primary

Tom Tolan of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel notes the higher than expected primary turnout (between 16-25% of eligibles) and the surprisingly strong showing of one of the losers.

Michigan: Recall language approved in Senate recall

Targeting Freshman Republican John Proos. They will need over 20,000 signatures to get it on the ballot.

Wisconsin: Six "actual" Democrats advance

Story Here. I'd like to see the turnout figures.

Wisconsin recall updates

You can see the results of the six races here  (at the bottom of the page is a very close non-recall race for an Assembly seat). It looks like the regular Democratic candidates are leading and can be expected to win. There is one race that appears reasonably close -- District 10 (Sheila Harsdorf's seat). The Democratic challenger Shelly Moore is leading the Republican-backed challenger Isaac Weix 54-46 with 83% reporting. The Harsdorf seat is suppose to be close.

Arizona: Majority Leader Russell Pearce recall set for Election Day, Nov 8

Arizona Capital Times notes the huge hurdle for recall proponents. This will mean 10 recalls against state legislators this year. Compare that to the past 103 years, when there were a grand total of 20 combined.

Wisconsin -- Turnout, turnout, turnout

Of course, there is nothing to report yet, but turnout has been steady, with some mentioning higher than expected turnout. Because of the nature of these recalls (almost a state-wide referendum on the government), we should not expect our usual low-turnout recall election. The impact makes these recalls much harder to predict, and much more like a general election.

Nevada: Recall started against Nye County Assessor

Need 3600 signatures by October 4. Issue is racist comments about Hispanics.

Arizona: Pearce not allowed to accept Corporate donations

Taking a much different tack from the "anything goes " Wisconsin recall campaign finance rules, Arizona's state Solicitor General ruled that Majority Leader Russell Pearce cannot accept Corporate Donations in his race.

Tennessee: Nashville City Council Recall loser from two years ago running again

Nashville City Council race -- Pam Murray is running for her seat after losing it in a 2009 recall by two votes. Murray is still suing some of the recall backers

Michigan: Onondaga Township recall language approved

Onondaga Township recall language approved. It was rejected the first time. Recall is over approval of a drag strip.

Wisconsin -- Starting Gun starts tomorrow

Tomorrow will be the starting gun -- with the six Democratic primaries (for the Republican seats). There will be two Republican primaries next week, with one more recall to be decided. The other eight will go on to the full election on either August 9 (the Republican held seats) or August 16th (the Democratic ones).

Florida: North Bay Village Mayor petitions handed in

North Bay Village turn in signatures to start mayoral recall process. Complex procedure before this recall is going anywhere

Wisconsin: The unsurprising impact of Gerrymandering on the recall

No surprises her. Would have a very negative impact on Democratic winners.

Pennsylvania: Mount Holly Deputy Mayor Facing recall petitions

Requires about 1400 signatures

Arizona: Pearce recall is on!

Looks like it will be in November. And from the context of this story (and others), he is a heavy favorite to survive.

Wisconsin: Majority Leader approves of spoiler candidates

Senate Majority Leader Fitzgerald approves of spoiler candidates. Here's my different take on the tactics.

Wisconsin: Protest candidate claims recall laws to easy

La Crosse Tribune reports on one primary challenger's complaints; Piece has my comments noting that Wisconsin has some of the strictest recall laws in the country

Wisconsin: More on Fundraising

More on the unlimited donations issue

Recall Defenses: Does it matter if the recall proponents are viewed as a political party or as an interest group?

The nine Wisconsin recalls present an unusual comparison of tactical defenses. Is there an advantage if the recall is perceived to be launched by the opposing party or by a specific and well-defined interest group?

In Wisconsin, both parties have tried both tactics. The Republicans have claimed that the recalls were launched by the Democratic Party or they could have tried to tie the recall as being backed solely by a specific interest group -- labor unions. While the Democrats had less of a case to make, they could have used the interest group angle as well (and arguably did with the discussions of the Koch Brothers and other out of state backers).

As the following examples show, I believe that an official facing a recall would generally best be served by claiming it is an attack by a specific interest group, rather than claiming that it is a partisan battle.

Some major caveats: We are dealing with a very small sample size, so take this discussion with the requisite grain of salt. This is all about perception – people will always argue about the basis of a recall. This discussion is about the generally accepted popular perception.

Almost all recalls are claimed to be launched by unaffiliated concerned citizens, not by a party or interest group. But not all recalls are equal. Some are clearly opposition party backed. Others are from local groups of citizens, many with political axes to grind. Most of these are tied to a specific issue (taxes, pay raises for legislators, local school board initiative).

However, there are a few recalls that stand out as being interest group-directed. While the recalls are tied to an issue, the recall never appears to be more than a test of that interest group’s power. It is the latter group that we are looking at.  By interest group, I am talking about well-known groups (in these cases, labor unions and the NRA).

Partisan Recalls:

What we have seen is that voters have not been turned off by recalls undertaken for purely partisan purposes, especially if the district is right. The California recall wars of 1995 were straightforward political recalls, undertaken to gain or maintain power in the legislature. Two of the three succeeded (though both of the removed officials had voted against their party and helped the Democrats gain control of the legislature).  The California recall of 1914 against E.E. Grant also appears to be a successful partisan recall (albeit warring local factions). On the negative side of the ledger, the recall of California Senator Jeff Denham, which appeared to be undertaken to pick off a Republican seat and gain a two-thirds veto-overriding majority, did not succeed.

To these few, we can add some other high profile recalls. Despite all the hoopla, Gray Davis was arguably a fairly straightforward political recall. And the Michigan Senators who were recalled for tax increases in 1983 (which flipped the chamber from D to R) may also have been considered political (this one is certainly debatable). What we see from this small sample is that voters are not turned off by a nakedly political power grab.

Interest Group Recalls:

On the other hand, voters have rejected what appears to be pure interest group recalls.

Let’s look at the two best examples. This first, in 1913, was against California Senator James Owens. According to recall historians Fredrick Bird and Frances Ryan, it was launched by labor groups as a "test of the effectiveness of the recall against an unfaithful legislator who fails to live up to preelection promises and platform pledges.” But the Democratic Party backed Owens. As Bird and Ryan note, rather than proving labor’s strength,  "(t)he alignment of forces in the recall campaign was conclusive proof that labor planks in a party platform are not always to be taken too seriously....” Senator Owens managed to fight off the recall by the comfortable margin of 6,749 to 5,177.

The other interest group recall was against California Senate President Pro Tempore and Democratic leader David Roberti. Roberti was a leader in passing a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons in 1989, and was a major supporter of gun control initiatives. This angered anti-gun control forces, which decided to make a test case of Roberti. The Roberti recall drew national attention as a test of the strength of the gun lobby. Roberti easily defeated the recall on April 12, 1994, garnering fifty-nine percent of the vote.

There are plenty of other recalls, especially on the local levels, that could be seen as interest group recalls. But I don’t see any evidence that disputes the general theme that interest group recalls do not seem to succeed.

Why interest groups may be the best villain:

By necessity, interest groups are representing a smaller group of constituents than one of the two major political parties. There are plenty of voters in both parties that dislike a specific interest group, even if they are tied into their own party’s base, and these voters may be especially turned off by the belief that an interest group is flexing its muscle in such a direct manner.

Of course, there are advantages to claiming that the recall is partisan-based. It is more likely to turn out your base (though at the risk of turning out the other side’s base as well). It is also more likely to lead to a campaign donation bonanza (as has been the case in Wisconsin). However, on the whole, a specific, easily defined interest group is probably the best villain for a recall defense.

Massachusetts: Lawrence recall moves forward

Recall against mayor of Lawrence set to move to petitioning stage; Some backstory on how difficult it was to get the signatures in

South Dakota: Huron recall attempt falls short

Attempt to recall Huron's mayor falls short. Though the backers handed in enough signatures, 344 were declared invalid, pushing them 139 below the limit.

Oregon: Attempt to recall Cornelius Mayor, City Councilmembers begins

Petition gathering stage starts; Issue is of removal of tax/attempted firing of former City Manager; Elected officials claim proponent disgruntled by recent loss.

Massachusetts: Editorial Against Chelmsford recalls

Boston Globe comes out strongly against Chelmsford recalls on August 2, claiming it is a private grudge

Australia: More thoughts on adopting the recall

Here

Idaho: Klamath Falls recall petition gathering starts

Recall petitions out on two Klamath Falls City Council members, need 3,474 signatures to get on the ballot

Wisconsin: Fund raising and cash on hand numbers out

Republicans lead in fund-raising, Democrats lead in cash-on hand

Wisconsin: Rep. Nygren will not run as write-in

One of the stranger stories in Wisconsin is that an Aseembly Rep running for one of the Democratic state Senate seats failed to make the ballot because of an insufficient number of signatures. Nygren has now announced that he will not run as a write-in. This should mean that at least one of the nine recalls will not involve a primary.

Florida: New Miami-Dade Mayor chosen in recall runoff

Conspiracy theories abound; 16.5% turnout

Texas: La Marque fills recently recalled Mayor Slot

La Marque, Texas elected a new mayor, with 72% of the vote, to fill in the last 10 months of recalled Mayor Geraldine Sam's term. Sam ran for the office (as is allowed under Texas law) but received only 461 votes.

California: Recall effort launched against Mayor, City Council

Recall effort announced against Fontana, California Mayor and City Council.

Louisiana: Gov recall effort fails

Effort to recall Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal fails, turning in 55 signatures out of a needed 908,000. Louisiana has one of the highest recall hurdles out there.

South Dakota: petitions handed in to recall Huron mayor

South Dakota: Petitions have been handed in to recall mayor over police chief departure and illegal immigrants issue; Law requires an opponent otherwise no recall is held

Texas: Galveston mayor facing petitions

Texas: Petitions have been taken out to recall the mayor of Galveston; They need about 3,000 signatures. Issue is the use of Hurricane recovery funds.

Michigan: Language issues plaguing Senate recalls

Michigan: petitions against three senators rejected due to questions over language. Sounds like it will go to the courts soon enough

California: Recall petitioning gets testy

California: recall petitioning in Lincoln against three councilmembers brings out testy feelings

Wisconsin: Election procedures and the GAB Chief

New Law prompts new procedures; Interview with the GAB Chief

Washington: Campaign Finance issues plague recall

From the Election Law Blog, op-ed and Institute for Justice press release claims Washington State law handcuffs recall proponents by limiting donations (including legal time) to $800. Piece makes a strong argument, especially since Washington requires judicial approval of the recall.

Michigan: Shelby Township recall fails to meet petitions

Michigan: Shelby Township recall fails, falling short by 501 signatures (turned in 7275, needed 6,318). The recall was facing challenges due to timing issues -- the recall proponents turned in the signatures on a Monday, two days later than statutorily required, because the building was closed on Saturday.

Michigan: Second time around on state Senate recall petitions

After petition language rejected, group is now putting forth new petitions for state Senate recall. Township supervisor races to be first to hit Goodwin's law.

Texas: Pushed off date for Killeen recall results in lawsuit

Lawsuit filed over date of Killeen recall

Wisconsin: Runoffs happening, primarycandidates pulled

Two Republicans approved to face off in runoff primary for the Holprein recall; Recall campaign pushes one targeted Republican to begin accepting PAC funds; Democrats remove "fake" primary candidates, while list of primary candidates finalized

North Dakota: Petitions approved for Valley City Mayor, City Commissioner

New York Times and Los Angeles Times on recalls

New York Times and Los Angeles Times both write about recalls (with my comments included). The NYT piece is focused on Pearce, the LAT is a more global piece.

Michigan State Senate recall language rejected

Recall wording was rejected for lack of clarity

Australian State Looking at Recall

NSW is still considering adding a recall provision.

You have selected Regicide -- the poor showing of recalls against Legislative leaders

With the signatures still being counted on the recall campaign against Arizona Majority Leader Russell Pearce, it is a good time to note that of the 20 state legislative recalls in US History, only two have been against legislative leaders.

Overthrowing a legislative leader is a major undertaking, In his great book The Ambition and The Power, John Barry compares it to regicide. While legislative leaders (especially Democrats)  do loses races, or are overthrown in palace coups, there is usually a reason they are in charge of the chamber -- they generally have the stronger than average political skills. Additionally, despite recent electoral surprises, like US Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, the legislative leaders are frequently selected from extremely one-party safe districts.

In this article in the Arizona Capitol Times, I looked at both of the recalls against legislative leaders.
I found a comment to the piece very instructive. The commentator argues that the point of the recall against Pearce may not be to defeat him (which frankly seems like a longshot in that district and with the issues they are using), but instead to knock him down a peg, and serve as a warning shot against anyone backing the issues that Pearce supports (such as his stand on immigration).

Both of the former legislative leader recalls followed a similar line of arguments. The first one, against California Senator David Roberti in May 1994, was a clear interest-group recall. He was targeted specifically because of his stance in favor of gun control legislative, and gun rights supporters were very clear that they wanted Roberti to serve as an example. Due to other factors, specifically the Republican wave that came later that year, gun control has never recovered as an issue. Hard to give to much credit to the recall of Roberti.

From another perspective the Roberti recall served as a strong warning. Roberti was nearing the end of his tenure in the Senate, and he decided to run for state Treasurer. His run failed. He has good claims in saying that the recall damaged his chances of success -- it tied him down to his district and he had to raise and spend money for the defense. However, he lost to a deep-pocketed candidate with the support of both US Senators.

The second recall was against Michigan Speaker Andy Dillon in 2008. Dillon was targeted by anti-Tax groups. The recall involved numerous court battles, questions over whether the backers actually collected enough signatures, and a debate over the date. In the end, the recall was set for Election Day, which, as I've mentioned before, is a great benefit for elected official. Dillon was actually on the ballot twice that day, once for the recall and once for the reelection. Dillon survived the vote, garnering 64%, and kept his Speakership.

Hard to say that there was any real impact of the Dillon recall. Two years later, Dillon ran for the Democratic nomination for Governor, which he lost. The recall did not seem to have any impact on the primary campaign, and as an issue, taxes were no less or more important because of the recall.

Pearce already appears to be a lightening rod for criticism. The recall backers are certainly hoping that targeting Pearce will serve as a warning for others. On the other hand, if Pearce scores a strong victory, it could embolden his supporters and serve as an argument in favor of his core positions.

Recall Review: Wisconsin, Arizona, New Jersey and Texas

Wisconsin: "fake" primaries to cost over $400,000 ;Some more on Wisconsin

Arizona: Pearce recall nearing approval

New Jersey: good history of the state's recall provisions

Texas: Court may be forced to call recall if Council won't

Not directly recall related, but here's my article in Politico on Rep. Weiner's predicament. It is focused on the difference between federal and state law in forcing someone out of office.

Wisconsin's Three Democratic recalls set, with spoiler candidates jumping in

While acknowledging some claims of petition fraud, the GAB has certified all three Democratic recalls. Hard to say serious the fraud was -- the stories are unclear, but at first glance, it doesn't seem that serious.

Long-time Republicans are running in the Democratic primaries (for the Republican held senate seats) as spoilers, apparently hoping to give the Republican candidates more time to fundraise (and I would bet, also to push the election to the less hospitable grounds of August). Some commentators are getting worked up by this tactic, but spoiler candidates are nothing new. However, the Democrats are right to hammer away here (from a tactical point of view). Allegations of unfair play and underhanded tactics will undermine the Republicans claims against the recall and benefit the party. As such, the blatant use of spoiler candidates could be a poor decision.

The Republicans may also be shooting themselves in the foot by having every race have a primary. As I mentioned,  it may be beneficial for the Republicans to have two separate votes -- the first being recalls of Republicans, the other a month later being the Democratic recalls. Apparently, the Republicans disagree.

Hercules, California recalls and removes two Council members, one of the replacements already pressured to resign

Hercules, California recalled two members of its City Council, with 87% and 80% voting to remove. One of the replacement officials is being pressured to resign because he lied on his resume.

Recall Review: Hercules, California recall, Colorado and Wisconsin mayor resigns, vote still to be held

California: Hercules City Council recall candidate accused of padding resume

Colorado: Recall petitions circulate against two school board members

Wisconsin: Thorp Mayor resigns ahead of recall, recall vote will still be held

Recall Review: Hercules, Cali faces recall; NJ, Wisconsin, Colorado, Texas, Arizona and more

Wisconsin: GOP leaders encourage spoiler candidates in two Republican races.

Arizona: Pearce petition counting ahead of schedule, may preempt the botched advice problem that could have pushed the vote to March of next year; Tom Tancerdo raising funds for Pearce

California: Hercules City Council facing two recall votes on Tuesday. Cost will be $42,000; Proponents drop Hacienda recall attempt against school board members for instituting a Chinese-government funded culture program. One sentence worth excerpting: "Board members were served with intent to recall notices alleging that they made an agreement with the Chinese government to "extend China's influence in the U.S." and "manipulate students to serve China's government."

New Jersey: Threat to recall Trenton Mayor

Colorado: Recall threat of Colorado Springs school district board member

Texas: Recall proponent looking at hiring a lawyer to force city to put recall on the ballot

Philippines: Recall threats seem to be regular part of life

Historical perspective on Wisconsin Democrats Going after Governor Walker

News today that Democrats are going to try and recall Gov. Walker next year. They are riding a strong wave, but some perspective is in order. There have only been two Governors to ever face a recall -- North Dakota's Lynn Frazier in 1921 and California's Gray Davis in 2003. Additionally, a recall was set to be scheduled for Arizona Governor Evan Meacham, but he was removed by impeachment before the recall was held.

There have been plenty of failed attempts to recall Governors throughout the country. California had 31 attempts before Gray Davis got on the ballot.

The big problem for recall proponents in Wisconsin is that the state has a very high hurdle for the recalls to get on the ballot. The state has only a 60 day window for signatures. California has 160 days. The proponents need 25% of the vote in the last election. California needed only 12%.

Recall Review: NY, Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin

New York: State Senator introduces recall provisions, not the first bill out there on recalls, but the first one that includes judges

Arizona: Pearce supporters start hitting back; Pearce puts out statement; Focus of Pearce defenders appears to be attack on non-district (or non-state) actors.

Michigan: Buena Vista School Board Members resign in the face of August 2nd recall over Superintendent contract; Shelby Township supervisor calls for dismissal of recall campaign because petitions handed in late. The petitions were due on a Saturday, but the date was extended to Monday based on a Michigan law. The Supervisor argues that the more lenient law is not applicable to the recall.

Wisconsin: Registration statement filed in campaign to recall Ashland Mayor

Wisconsin Battles: Legitimate complaints, regular political tactic or working the ref?

The GAB's decision to sign off on the six Republican recalls, while delaying approval on the Democratic recalls has led to a chorus of complaints from Republicans. I don't know the details,and while they may be valid, the complaints do sound like standard-issue political tactics, the same type that both sides of the aisle use all the time. Whenever there is a ruling that seems to starkly benefit one side, it pays to call in to question the fairness of the referees. The "we wuz robbed" feeling motivates your side and gives credence to the argument that the process is political and unfair. The "working the ref" angle is also in play. I don't know the degree of interpretation is involved in the signature validation stage, but by claiming that the refs have been unfair, the Republicans can hope that the GAB will bend over backwards to get the Democrats on the ballot as well. Again, nothing special, just standard political battles.

Two other developments of interest: One of the most endangered Republicans, Senator Dan Kapanke, was caught on a secret recording saying that he hopes government workers sleep in on the recall. An embarrassing gaffe, though one that pushes a central part of the Republicans plank -- this is a small interest group pushing the recall. The other fact to come out of the recording is that the Republicans were looking for a spoiler candidate to run against the Democratic opponent of Kapanke. Spoilers are a time-honored traditions, helping to bloody the opponent before a race. But there is a different benefit here. As I mentioned before, having a divided electoral calendar may help the Republicans regain the moment of any seats lost on the first electoral day. By splitting off one election, they could keep the same result. Kapanke  also might realize the benefit of having his vote held on a different day than the rest of his colleagues. By then, the Republicans might have lost their majority, and the Democrats might not be as motivated to kick Kapanke out.

Recall: Texas Replacement Vote, Seattle, California, Arizona, Initiative

Texas: Interesting development in the replacement election for La Marque mayor. Two candidates have dropped out, leaving only two left, one of whom is the recently recalled mayor Geraldine Sam

Washington: Talk of recall against Seattle Mayor

California: Petitions taken out to recall three Lincoln Councilmembers

Arizona: Petitions out to recall Oro Valley Vice Mayor and councilmember

Odawa Indians: Definition of "calendar year" could prevent recall of Chairman and Vice Chairman of Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians

Initiatives: California's really like having the initiative; Also worth checking out is this series of posts by Professor Rick Hasen of the Election Law Blog and John Matsusaka on judges striking down initiatives

Two unrealted articles that I wrote: One on VPs and the presidency and the other on Kucinich and moving to a new state

Petitions handed in for Arizona Majority Leader Pearce recall

Petitions have been handed in for the recall of Arizona Majority Leader Russell Pearce. The organizers claim that they have more than double the amount of signatures need. The tried, and apparently succeeded, in gathering more signatures for the recall, 18,315, than votes Pearce received in the last election, 17,552.
I don't think this should be read as a statement on Pearce's chances. For reason I'll get to once my op-ed in the Arizona Capitol Times comes out, I think the Pearce recall is much different than the Wisconsin ones, in ways that are very beneficial to Pearce.

Recall Review: Arizona, South Carolina, Texas, Wisconsin, Nebraska and Nevada

Arizona: Overview of the Pearce recall -- petition's due on Tuesday.

South Carolina: Editorial attacks state-wide recall bill, which doesn't much of a chance t passing

Texas: La Marque's recently recalled Mayor looking to run to replace herself in replacement vote; Killen Council members dispute legality of recall

Wisconsin: Petition gathering starts for recall of Ashland Mayor; Petitions handed in for Clark County Board Member recall, no reason given for the effort

Nebraska: Omaha World Herald wins award for recall coverage

Nevada: Recall rules for Homeowners Association Board

Recall Review: Remorse edition -- Wisconsin's possible delay, Michigan, N.M. Arizona's Gov, Tennessee, Texas and California

Wisconsin: GAB slowed down in reviewing petitions against three Democrats and one Republican, calling into doubt the July 12 recall date; Primer on recalls; 

New Mexico: Judge rules against recall of 9 of 11 Kit Carson Electric Co-Operative trustees. Decision holds that recall must be for cause

Michigan: Petitions taken out against Republican state Senator over tax reform issue; New petition language need for Speaker recall

Arizona: Gov. Brewer recall attempt falls way, way short

Tennessee: Attempt to recall Nashville School Board members over transfer of popular program director

Texas: Killeen recall has signatures for 6 of the 7 members

California: Leader of recall effort against Lake Elsinore Councilman faces campaign finance fraud charges

California: Recall remorse over Schwarzenegger -- The article hits on the big four points of explaining why the Davis recall happened. Also Miami Herald looks at the cost of recalls

Arizona's Election Director's Blunder: Will the Pearce Recall be Pushed Off Five Months Due to Election Director's error

Recalls laws vary greatly between each state, with some focused on quick resolutions and reducing costs (like California's recall vote and replacement election on the same day), and others actually holding extremely expensive recalls (like Miami-Dade, with a recall, replacement vote and potential rerun vote). Arizona is on the extreme of cost savings -- they do not provide for a special election. Instead, the recall is pushed off till the next consolidated election date. As I've mentioned before, this probably benefits incumbents. But Arizona's laws are even more complicated, as the Senate Majority Leader Russell Pearce recall is showing.


Arizona's Election Director gave organizers erroneous information of the drop-dead date to hand in recall petitions to trigger a November recall (while she was contrite, her "it is what it is" comment might not endear her to recall proponents) The signature checking requirements, the need for a Governor's sign off, and a statutory delay, all mean that the petitions had to be handed in several weeks earlier than they were told.


The result is fairly monumental. Instead of a November recall, the recall vote would be pushed off till March, giving Pearce almost an entire legislative session to continue his service. Pearce obviously has good reason to want to push it off. Not only for the more time, but then the election would be held the same day as a presidential primary, drawing out all of Pearce's supporters, and negating the low voter turnout advantage that help propel recalls. The recall proponents have already lawyered up. I'll have more to say about the likely success of the Pearce recall and some historical antecedents after the article I wrote for Arizona Capitol Times runs. But this is certainly one to watch.

Shh! Ruling in Miami-Dade Council Race will prevent the winner from being revealed for at least a week

Bizarre ruling in the Miami-Dade Council recall. The judge has suppressed the results of the vote for a week until he rules on a suit filed by a third party candidate who claimed that the county did not give candidates enough time to qualify for the ballot.

Poll Find Majority of Voters Favor Wisconsin Gov. Recall

Public Policy Poll finds that a majority of voters (50%) in favor of a recall of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

Recall Review: Miami-Dade Replacement going to a run-off; Michigan, Mass and Texas

Florida: Miami-Dade replacement vote narrows down to a two-person runoff. Luther Campbell from 2 Live Crew came in fourth; Voter turnout dropped from 209,312 for the recall to 186,639 for the replacement vote; The cost is believed to be $12-15 million for the three elections

Michigan: Working for petition against State Rep approved; Taylor Mayor facing 2nd recall attempt since 2009; Petitions for recall of Shelby Township Supervisor submitted

Massachusetes: Recall date set for three Chelmsford selectmen

Texas: Killen recall petition submitted, six councilmembers have five days to decide whether to resign

For the Republicans, separate's always better when there's (partisan) feelings involved

An update on Wisconsin -- it now looks as if all three proposed recall attempts against Democratic Senators will sport a Republican primary. As I mentioned before, this means that there will be two separate recall election dates -- one for the six Republican seats on July 12 (with Republican primaries for the three Democratic seats on that date), and three recalls for the Democratic seats on August 9th.

One of what should be the ironclad rules of politics is that, despite protests to the contrary, party leaders invariably hate primaries. So, I doubt this is an intentional move. But this can definitely be very beneficial for the Republicans. After seeing the results of their defensive efforts on July 12, they get to adjust and go on the offensive. More importantly, voter turnout will be high for the big July 12 battle. But a month later, anger will probably have crested, the GOTV operation may need some R&R time, and turnout will probably drop.

By having a separate date, the Republicans could get the the anger and motivation shifting to their voters, especially if the lose control of the Senate in July. Since voter turnout is critical to recalls (with low voter turnout frequently helping the pro-recall side), this fact, plus a dog days of August date to depress turnout even further, could help prove very helpful for the three Republican challengers.

As with any primary, a bad candidate or bruising battle could devastate the party's chances of success. But the separate election date could be a difference-maker for the Republicans.

Recall Review: Wisconsin's primaries; Texas, Michigan Fundraising and Arizona

Wisconsin: Wise, if unintended, tactical move? Two of the three recalls scheduled to take place against Democratic Senators look like they will have multiple Republican challengers, which will result in a primary. This changes the timing of those elections -- the primary would take place on July 12 and the General Election on August 9th. This could prove very fortuitous for the Republicans. Voter turnout will probably be high for what will almost feel like a state-wide vote on July 12. But a month later the anger will have already crested, and turnout will probably drop. Furthermore, if the Democrats take control of the Senate, the anger and motivation may shift to the Republican voters. Lower turnout frequently helps out the pro-recall side. Of course, a terrible candidate winning the primary or bruising primary battle could hurt the party, but there are clear potential benefits for the Republicans in the primary.

Wisconsin: Costs of Recall weighing on County Clerks

Texas: Saturday's recall (and removal) of 3 Cleveland council members still being fought over

Michigan: Republican Party already starting fundraising to defend Snyder from a recall

Arizona: More on the Pearce Recall Attempt -- I should have an op-ed out about that soon

Recall Review: Nebraska's charges, Seattle's Mayor, Michigan and Wisconsin

Nebraska: Prosecutors file charges against two (one on each side) for violations during Omaha's Suttle recall

Michigan: Recall confirmed for Tribal Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians

Washington: Facebook Page started to recall Seattle Mayor

Wisconsin: Decision expected this week by the GAB on first three senatorial recalls

Recall Review: Split decision in Belchertown, MA; Big sustained victory in Texas for Mayor, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Canada and Sweden

Massachusetts: Belchertown recall results -- one councilman loses (by 27 votes), the other two survive: Holden voters reject recall

Texas: College Station voters overwhelming retain mayor, councilmembers (74% of the vote)

Michigan: Governor, Senate Recalls are a longshot, analysts say -- always a good bet when talking about a recall, but the article does not consider the technological changes that have occured since the groundbreaking 1983 recalls in the Michigan state Senate

Wisconsin: The fights are shaping up. Check out the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and Wisconsin Recall Blogger for some detailed analysis

Wisconsin: Thorp Mayor faces recall charges after domestic dispute allegations

Canada: British Columbia also has its peculiar (or completely unknown) campaign finance rules for recalls. Wonder how many states, like Wisconsin, have different rules for recalls and regular elections

Florida: Avon Park recall against Deputy Mayor, Councilmembers handed in

Sweden: Victories in two recall elections for Social Democrats

Recall Review: Towns in N.M. and Texas kick out mayors; Florida, Arizona, Mass

Wisconsin: Looks like the remaining recalls will not get the signatures

New Mexico: Socorro City Mayor removed in recall (70% of vote against) following public corruption investigation.

Massachusetts: Chelmsford recall petitions certified; date for recall to be set at next meeting

Texas: La Marque Mayor removed in recall, follows two councilmember recalls in Nov.

Florida: Recall campaign launched against Hall County Commissioner

Arizona: Campaign finance complaints filed against recall proponents in city council recall efforts; Recall campaign launched against Fountain Hill Council Members

Recall Review: Wisconsin, Arizona on pace; Ohio, Washington, Texas and NC

Wisconsin: Four recalls (all Republicans) appear to be certified; Some history of the argument against the recall; Republicans fast-tracking Voter ID laws amid accusations that they are moving fast on a number of fronts (including redistricing) before the recall;

Arizona: Senate Majority Leader Russell Pearce within 500 signatures of advancing to the Ballot according to recall proponents. I'll have something on legislative leaders and recalls soon enough.

Ohio: City of Elyira looks to tighten up recall requirements in wake of failed campaign against mayor.

Washington: Cost of recall of Pierce County Assessor-Treasurer estimated at $350-900K. Investigators have found that he created a hostile workplace and retaliated against employees.

Texas: Campaign to Recall Galveston Mayor starts

North Carolina: Recall in Pender County Bill passes Senate committee

Nebraska: Wymore City Councilman losses recall vote (70-60)

Going over the Top: Phoenix, Wisconsin and the Signature Requirement

I've received a number of questions about signature gathering. Many people (obviously not from NY) seem to wonder why the Wisconsin parties are gathering thousands more signatures than necessary. This recall campaign in Phoenix shows why. More than 4,000 signatures were handed in. They only needed 2,329. But the City Clerk's office must have invalidated close to half of the signatures, as the recall failed.  It could be that the signatures were highly suspect, or it could be that Phoenix has a much more stringent signature requirement than Wisconsin. But it does show why you want to be get plenty of signatures.

Wisconsin unlimited donations law for recalls

The non-partisan Wisconsin Democracy Campaign is featured in this story on one of the more unusual aspects of Wisconsin's  recall law -- there is no limit on donations (normally its $1,000). As the story notes, the GAB claims it's not a loophole, though that is clearly a generous interpretation. The legislature itself wrote the law, and, as the targets of recalls, they are the prime beneficiaries.

Due to the heightened interest in the recall, it might not make that much of a difference in these races, which have become state-wide (if not national) battles, I have to imagine that the money would come in through third party spending. In other, less exciting races, it might make all the difference in the world. At least we get to see exactly where the money is coming from.

Recall Review: Wisconsin, Florida, Nebraska, Michigan, Arizona, Colorado

Wisconsin: Races heating up, with Democrats charging that Republicans are racing to pass their agenda in case they lose

Florida: Miami-Dade Replacement race heating up, early voting starts today

Nebraska: Wymore City Council recall tomorrow

Michigan: Campaign to recall Gov Snyder forced to change name; Senatorial recall campaign begins, with emergency financial manager appointment votes, and naturally, taxes leading the complaints

Arizona: The recall against Phoenix City Councilman Michael Nowakowski recall campaign fails. Lesson for everyone asking about the Wisconsin signatures -- in this race, 5000 signatures were handed in, 4000 signatures were reviewed, but it still did not meet the 2,329 valids needed.(They missed by 24).

Colorado: Pubelo Councilman who was recalled for backing a smoking ban in 2003 looking to run again

Point-Counterpoint on recalls in US News

Recall Review: More on Wisconsin, Michigan state Reps targeted, Arizona, N.M. and Mass

Wisconsin: Democrats allege fraud in petition-gathering and challenge the three recall campaigns, Republicans challenge one; Some analysis of the special election; Tea Party leader to run against Democrat Holperin -- two assembly members bow out, which has to be a good sign for the Democrat;

Michigan: Recall petitions taken out against governor and nine Republican legislators (all in the House)

Michigan: Two Bertrand Township Supervisors removed in recall vote, one survives; Recall Campaign launched against three Portage School Board members, complaints over expensive buyout of Superintendent; Recall against Shelby Township Supervisors fizzles; Flushing Township recall 75% there. according to gatherers

Arizona: One of two Senate Majority Leader Russell Pearce recall gathering efforts has stopped, but reports suggest the other is on track to meet the petition requirement

Arizona: Recall campaign against Pima County Sheriff over remarks made after the Rep. Gifford shooting is floundering

New Mexico: Recall effort to replace majority of Kit Carson Electric Cooperative Board of Trustees in Taos has filed signatures; Appropo of nothing, big recommendation for Hampton Sides' Blood & Thunder, which explains Carson. It's a great read

Massachusetts: Auburn voting on whether to approve recall procedures

Wisconsin Assembly Special Election result: Voter Turnout numbers as precursor?

The Wisconsin Democrats got some good news in yesterday's special election, as they captured a long-held  Republican assembly seat (the other two seats up for election were strongly Republican). Democrats see this as a very good sign for their recall campaigns. Unquestionably, it is a positive, but how much of a good sign?

As I've mentioned before, one of the advantages of the recall is that it is a special election, which historically have much lower voter turnout. The result is that the angry party (the recall proponents) have an easier time motivating their base and getting people to go out to the ballot box for one race. For a particularly Wisconsin-focused example, in the last Senate recall, Gary George in 2003, turnout was very low (can't find a link, but I have a contemporary AP story that cites 8%).

However, there are exceptions to the lower vote turnout rule. Gray Davis was one (voter turnout much higher in the recall than in 2002 general election), Scott Brown arguably another. No guarantees, but there is a good chance that due to the atmosphere surrounding the Wisconsin recalls, we will see a higher voter turnout than in the 2010 general elections.

Let's look at the turnout results from the special election. Turnout was much lower for the special than in general election in November 2010 (23,747 people voted for the seat in November versus 15,588 in the special). However, equally unsurprisingly, the one contested seat saw much higher turnout than the two safe Republican seats (11,208 and 9,688). So, people are motivated, but the assembly seat (which also mattered a great deal less, as the Republicans still maintain a formidable majority in the Assembly), didn't see a massive vote. So, a good sign for the Democrats, but I wouldn't read too much either way.

Recall Review: Wisconsin, Michigan Gov, Tennesse, Mass, NM and the Philippines

Wisconsin: Two of the three outstanding recall efforts seem to sputter to a close; Losing Democratic Gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett making noises about running in a recall against Gov. Walker; Editorial on Recall Costs; Lower house members are considering taking the free shot and running in recall campaigns;  Refusal to combine petitions with scandal-tarred petitioner prevented minority leader recall from hitting the signature bar; Some more thoughts on the recalls with fundraising data

Michigan: Long story on approval of language for Gov. Snyder recall petitions; Group would need more than 800K signatures to get on the ballot

Tennessee: Defamation suit from successful 2009 Nashville City Council recall

Massachusetts: Winchendon Board Selectman loses bid to regain seat lost in December recall

New Mexico: State Supreme Court tosses out recall attempt against School Board Member due to insufficient evidence

Philippines: Mayor Killed, suspicion focused on role in possible recall race for Governor

Recall Review: Police Chief battles edition, more on Wisconsin, Michigan county reports 340 recall filings over two decades

Wisconsin: Nine petitions handed in already, as Election Board looking to consolidate recalls into one day (July 12)

Michigan: Debate over ease of local recalls, as Berrien County reports 340+ recall filings over the last 20 years

South Dakota: Petitions out against Huron mayor, over police chief retirement

California: Three Councilmembers facing recall in Point Arena

Arizona: Water rate hike, budget deficit behind attempt to recall San Luis Mayor/3 Council members

Alaska: Mayor of Houston facing recall over police chief firing

New Mexico: Indicted Socorro Mayor facing what is believed to be the first recall in El Paso County history

Michigan: Ogden County Township recall petitions handed in

Massachusetts: Chelmsford looks to increase signature requirements for recalls (and increase time needed for collection)

North Carolina: Bill to allow Oak Island the right to recall signed into law, now moves to referendum

9th Recall Petition filed in Wisconsin/Previous two time recall participants

The Democrats have gotten signatures in against the 6th Republican Senator, versus three Democrats. The Democrats also appear to have a head start on fundraising.

Just for some perspective on how unusual this event is, the only time one legislative session has had as many as three recalls was California in 1995. Nationwide, there has not even been a decade that saw more than six recalls of state legislators (that was the 1990s).

And, if it gets on the ballot Jim Holperin will be the first legislator to face two recalls as a state legislator. However, there is some precedent that might comfort Holperin. California Senator James Owens, the second state legislator to face recall way back in 1913 (and the first to survive a vote), previously survived a recall when he was serving as a city councilman. 

Recall Review: Wisconsin (and Milwaukee), California, Texas, Arizona and Colorado

I will be out again for a few days, though I'll get into the historic nature of Wisconsin once I get back -- here's some links:

Wisconsin: Continues to dominate the news, with costs an issue, a state rep announcing that he's running for one seat. Here's talk of a 2012 Gubernatorial recall 

Wisconsin: Recall of Milwaukee Alderman Witkowiak might be off, as the board struck 13 names from petitions, leaving the proponents 8 short. Looks like this one will go to the courts.

California: Forum on City Council recall in Hercules

California: $240K spent on recalls by Montebello in the last three years

Texas: Former Mayors release letter opposing mayoral/city council recall in College Station

Arizona: Chairman of the Hualapai Tribe removed by recall, issue was profit-sharing payments

Arizona: Proposed recall of US Senator Kyl fizzles

Colorado: Recall date set for Williamsburg Mayor

Recall Review: Wisconsin moving to the mattresses, Michigan, Arizona and Mass

Wisconsin: So far, recall petitions have been filed against 3 Republicans and 4 Democrats; Here's a rundown of the districts 

Wisconsin: Milwaukee Alderman battles recall petitions -- great subhead "no one is sure why Witkowiak is being recalled." The Board had previously found that they had five more signatures than needed.

Arizona: Lots of recall petitions out there

Michigan: More on social media and the recall, this time talking about Gov. Snyder

Mass: Recall of four Chelmsford Selectmen is moving to signature gathering stage

Michigan: Recall language approved against Riga Township Treasurer

Recall Review: Out of Office addition + NPR, American City & County article and Michigan Gov

The Recall Elections Blog will be out the next two days. Here's some links to tide you over:

Here's an interview with Mayor Suttle from Omaha and myself on NPR's Tell Me More with Michel Martin

An article of mine on the cost of municipal recalls in American City & County

Attempt to recall Michigan Governor Rick Snyder gets going

Recall Review: Arizona, Wisconsin, Cali, Indiana and Global

Arizona: Three Phoenix Council members are facing recall threats, two over traffic debates

Wisconsin: Break-in at recall headquarters, Kapanke challenges recall, Claim that Harsdorf (Republican) recall has enough signatures

California: Hughson voters appear happy with results of August recall

Indiana: Niles Township recall language for four township supervisors rejected again

Nigeria: Apparently has the recall

India: Activists call on Prime Minister to allow recalls for MPs and MLAs, Chief Judge denies effectiveness of a judicial recall

Recall Review: Conference of Mayors, Arizona Senate Majority Leader, Rerun in Wisconsin and ND, news in Colorado and Michigan

US Conference of Mayors Campaign: Here's my interview with on WNYC's Takeaway, with the Conference's CEO and Executive Director Tom Cochran; More here as well

Arizona: Controversial Senate Majority Leader Russell Pearce recall getting close to reality

Wisconsin: Oshkosh Common Councilor Jessica King is the first major challenger in Hooper recall; She ran against Hooper in 2008. See this post for details on the rarity of recall reruns

Colorado: Attempt to recall Denver Public Schools Superintendent fails -- not enough signatures

North Dakota: Walsh County Sheriff survives recall vote, race was also a rerun of the November election

North Dakota: Emerado Mayor, City Council member may be facing recall

Michigan: Township Supervisor recall falls short

Michigan: Role of Meijer Inc. in funding township recalls questioned

Recall Fever: US Conference of Mayors tin-eared campaign against the recall

After the Miami-Dade and Omaha recalls, the US Conference of Mayors has responded with a limited war on the recall. On Tuesday, they are kicking off an education campaign by putting out a documentary called Recall Fever: Stop the Madness. 

Whatever the merits of their argument, the Conference does itself no favors with its passive challenge against the recall. Specifically, it notes that the recall has targeted local leaders “who have done nothing illegal” and that voters are “expressing their feelings -- often times in destructive ways.”  This seems to be a fruitless attempt to shift the blame to the voters for "expressing their feelings" rather than political grievances. Even worse, by stressing the illegality red herring, the Conference ignores the fact that recalls are, at least in most states and localities, inherently political devices, intentionally not subject to judicial review for motives. Most recalls are not based around illegal action, and a study of the history of the recall shows that it was not intended to flush out corruption. Voters have shown they like recalls and this line of attack ignores that basic fact.

This is a shame, as the mayors should be calling attention to the cost of recalls. As I’ve mentioned before, arguing that a recall is expensive does not work that well as a campaign defense. However, it is pretty much the only time that the recall’s price tag comes up. The mayors are right to shine a spotlight on cost, and try to present a reasoned explanation for why voters should limit the recall in order to save money. But the Mayors have to walk a tightrope – which their initial press release did not do – and show that they are looking out for the voters best interest, and not seeking to protect themselves and limit options for deploying the recall.

I actually have an article coming out this week in American City and County that makes several suggestions about what municipal officials could do to limit the cost of recalls (one of which would clearly curtail recalls).The two options that I think should be considered are raising the signature requirement and making a same day recall and replacement vote (which I believe would help elected officials). The signature requirement can be raised in a number of different ways, such as by counting a percentage of total registered voters rather than voter turnout in the last election. Since the mayoral vote is usually in non-presidential year, this would increase the amount of signatures needed. The small signature requirement is a problem-- Akron needed less than 4,000 signatures to get a recall on the ballot.

The mayors can make a broad-based attack on the entire philosophy surrounding the political nature of the recall, and try to limit the recall, as some states such as Minnesota. There are plenty of arguments against the recall. But I don't think the Conference wants to go down that rabbit hole.

One other point: The release notes that recalls are on the rise, and blames the challenging economic times. Though Ballotpedia may not be the most trusted name in news, undoubtedly they are right -- recalls are on the rise. And for a variety of reasons, local officials are more likely to face a recall that state ones. The economic downturn and high unemployment numbers play a large role in the growth of voter anger, which fuels recalls (and incumbent defeats in general elections). But by limiting the discussion of the growth of the recall to the last few years, the mayors are ignoring a longer term trend and failing to recognize the more important reasons for the growth of the recall, namely technological innovation. The recall is not going away.  

Recall Review: Recall Fever -- Catch it! Plus, Idaho, Texas, Mass and Miami-Dade

US Mayor Conference releases Recall Documentary  -- I'll have a post on this

Idaho: Steep hurdle for Education Superintendent

Texas: Killen city council recall faces basic legal hurdles

Mass: Lawrence mayor facing petitions

Miami-Dade Set May 24 for the second race

Recall Review: Wisconsin, Arizona Senate President facing trouble and more

Wisconsin: Kapanke recall estimated to cost $110,000 -- if there is no primary. County pleading poverty 

Wisconsin: signatures submitted for Second Senate against a Republican, Randy Hooper.

Arizona: recall petitions taken out against Senate President Russell Pearce, who was caught up in Fiesta Bowl scandal.

Arizona: Recall papers filed against Phoenix councilwoman

Nebraska: City Council recall date set -- recall is over councilman walking out of meetings to deprive council of a quorum

Ohio: Recall bill submitted for state officers

Michigan: Southwest portion of the state enjoying a spate of recall attempts

Indiana: Official facing recall arrested for writing bad checks 

Massachusetts: Recall attempts on four selectmen

Impact of Prosser's late victory

As I mentioned below, the judicial election could have a big impact on the recalls. A close race seems to lead to charges of election theft in almost any election, which would motivate the losing side. However, losing big could have served to sap motivation. Wasn't expecting this result. While it is a win for the Republican side, it is a potentially disastrous outcome from their recall campaign perspective. The optics are terrible, their donors have lost a little bit of the fear of losing, plus they've seen that they have their work cut out for them in the key districts.

How Will the Judicial Election Impact the Recall? Is there a Recall "Damper Effect?"

One of the tactical arguments against using a recall is that it could operate to soak up the proponents’ voter anger and damper a bigger election victory down the road. As we see practically every two years, a presidential victory is followed by a backlash against the party in power. What occurs, at least partially, is that the victors get overconfident in their message and their success, and the out party gets to hone their pitch. Perhaps, and I have no good evidence one way or the other, the recall acts as a breaker on the winner’s high and let’s them get their eye back on the ball for the next election.

From this tactical point of view, I’ve wondered if the two sides in Wisconsin would have been better off letting the hurt feelings from the budget battle fester and using it to their advantage in the much more important electoral fight in 2012. Obviously, that wasn’t going to happen. The political system is thankfully too decentralized to allow that type of top-down thinking to occur – too many players are involved that would benefit from the immediate impact of a recall.

Given that, how will the brutal Wisconsin Supreme Court election race, which is going into overtime, impact the recall fight? The two parties and outside groups have already dropped $3.5 million on this race – and now we got the lawyers coming in, so that figure is going way up. This should give us an idea of the money that will be spent on the recall battles, where there is going to be a much longer fight. Some other basic question -- Is there an electoral benefit to winning or even to losing the judicial race?

Did the big turnaround in vote (the putative Republican candidate Prosser crushed the competition in the earlier primary round) get the Republicans to the battle posts earlier than they would have for the recall fight?

Since one side will undoubtedly feel they got cheated out of a victory (unfortunately, that’s it how it works with every close race – hell, I know a guy who still complains that strike three was high in Don Larsen’s perfect game), will losing actually prove more of a motivation and benefit than winning?

Will the recall battle result in a boomerang effect against the winner come 2012? 

No answers, only questions. 

Recall Review: Wisconsin, Canada, Idaho, Florida

Wisconsin: Group claims they have enough signatures to get one Democratic Senator (Wirch) on the ballot

Wisconsin: Parties won't say who will run if the recall is successful -- for good reason. It gives the official someone to run against

Wisconsin: State's Judicial election battle is a boon for signature gatherers

Canada: Recall attempt fails

Idaho: Democratic Chairman calls for School Superintendent recal

Florida: Bill to allow recall for state officials 

Recall Review: Split the Ticket in Wisconsin, Miami threats and Marathon Labor Unions and Recall comes to Maine county

Wisconsin: State Officials are unsure if a Gubernatorial recall would also knock out the Lt. Gov; but another reason that states should split the ticket

Wisconsin: Two more recalls (both Republicans) are getting close to the ballot; Nice financial data in here

Wisconsin: Labor unions considering recall against Marathon County Board of Supervisors 

Miami: Braman threatens more recalls

Louisiana: Mayoral replacement elected from November recall

Maine: County approves recall

Wisconsin Signature Requirement -- Kapanke recall

Among the 18 states with a recall, Wisconsin has one of the hardest signature requirements to get a recall on the ballot.

First, it requires a fairly high number of signatures (25% of the vote for the governor's office in the last election). It could be higher -- for example, Louisiana requires the signatures of 33 1/3 of all the eligible voters in the district -- but it is clearly a healthy amount. Most states appear to use voter turnout, rather than the much higher eligible voter requirement.

I should be a huge caveat to that number, though. Any eligible voter can sign the petition, not just any registered voter. This gives petitioners a larger base to choose from, and also makes challenges to signatures harder to win (petition challenges would be more expensive, as they have to search beyond the voter rolls).

However, the signature requirement is combined with an extremely tight deadline to hand them -- 60 day. Only four states limit the gathering period to 60 days. Most of the others fall between 90 and 180. That the Democrats were able to get the signatures (presumably they feel confident that the signatures are valid, and since they don't live in NY, there are probably less hurdles) to recall Senator Dan Kapanke in half the compressed time frame is clearly a strong sign for them.

Here is a list of next steps on Wisconsin

New Business: Wisconsin is ON, plus news from ND, NM and Maine

Wisconsin: First group of signatures to be handed in against a Senator -- this one is against a Republican

North Dakota: Recall campaign against state Senator accused of domestic abuse fails; Petition would have needed less than 2000 signatures

New Mexico: School board recall shot down by judge due to lack of evidence

Maine: Democratic lawmaker wants a statewide recall