Today, voters in Omaha, Nebraska, vote on whether Mayor Jim Suttle should keep his job:
Polls open at 8 a.m. in the city's first mayoral recall election since 1987. The first returns are expected as voting ends at 8 p.m. Suttle is a Democratic former city councilman and public works director who took over the city's top job in spring 2009.
In seeking his ouster, the recall group cites "excessive taxes, broken promises and union deals that cost taxpayers millions and threaten Omaha's economic future." But Suttle says he has turned the city's finances around, eliminating a projected $12.4 million shortfall in last year's budget to end 2010 with a $3.3 million surplus.
If I were making a list of things to repeal by fiat, "recall" provisions would be in the top 5. An "innovation" of the original Progressives, recall provisions were adopted nationwide at the beginning of the 20th century to fight cronyism and lawbreaking among local and state politicians. Seattle Mayor Hiram C. Gill, to use an early example, was recalled in 1911 over his toleration of prostitution, alcohol, and gambling, as well as his general tolerance for corruption.
On paper, a mechanism to remove elected officials for lawbreaking is a great idea. In practice, however, it becomes an excuse to refight policy battles and thwart the will of a full electorate. In the case of Jim Suttle, Omaha conservatives are angry with his decision to fill the budget shortfall with higher taxes on property, restaurants, and commuter vehicles. Suttle's policies have left Omaha with a budget surplus, AAA bond rating, and the space to improve its infrastructure, but his critics have accused him of "financial mismanagement."
Suttle hasn't broken any laws or mismanaged the city into oblivion; he has simply angered a subset of voters who oppose his budget policies. In most places, this would be cause to organize an opposition for the next election, since Omaha voters have entrusted the mayor with a four-year term to implement his agenda. But the presence of a recall provision allows this minority to circumvent a full electorate -- of Democrats and Republicans -- in favor of one dominated by conservatives. Recall advocates call this "direct democracy," but it's really an attack on democratic legitimacy; they don't like the winner, so now they want him gone.
-- Jamelle Bouie
