Opponents of recall elections usually cite the cost of putting on an election and the danger that the process will be used as a quick way to remove incumbents who pursue unpopular policies from office, as opposed to waiting for the next general election.
While I am no advocate of having a revolving chair in the governor’s mansion, I believe that recall should be available under a very specific set of circumstances: such as a crime being committed in office because the impeachment procedures on the books in many states are frankly often as burdensome and politicized as the notion of holding another election.
Any politician facing recall has erred from the will of the people on some level. It is through the people alone that you serve.
I don’t think that if you’ve lost the will of the people two years in, that the people should be forced to deal with two more years of actions contrary to the will of the people, even though this flies directly in the face of my previous comment about not having a revolving chair for politicians.
Recall elections are complicated ethical excerises that begile even our brightest political minds.