Report Recall of State Officials

Introduction

NOTE:  The following is presented for informational purposes only. NCSL does not provide advice on how to conduct a recall campaign in any state. For the specific procedures to be followed in any state, please contact your state's election officials.

In the 19 states that allow recall elections, citizens can attempt to remove an elected official from office at any time. Typically, the recall process consists of gathering a certain amount of signatures on a petition in a certain amount of time. Beyond this, details of the recall process vary by state. The following information explains these processes and provides a list of each state's laws governing the recall of state officials.

Overview

Recall is a procedure that allows citizens to remove and replace a public official before the official’s term of office ends. Historically, recall has been used most frequently at the local level. By some estimates, three-fourths of recall elections are at the city council or school board level. This webpage, however, focuses on the recall only as it applies to state officials. For more information on state laws on local recalls, see Local Recalls.

Recall differs from another method for removing officials from office—impeachment—in that it is a political device while impeachment is a legal process. Impeachment typically requires a state legislature’s lower chamber to bring specific charges, and the upper chamber to act as the jury in an impeachment trial. In contrast, in most of the 19 recall states specific grounds for recall are not required, and the recall of a state official is accomplished through an election.

Nineteen states plus the District of Columbia permit the recall of state officials:

Source: National Conference of State Legislatures

All these states lay out the right to recall elected officials in their constitutions, with the exception of Montana, where the right to recall is found only in state statutes. Additionally, each recall state except Illinois and Rhode Island further explains its recall processes in state statutes. A full citation list of these laws is below.

Currently, only these 19 states allow recall elections of statewide elected officials, but other states have recently considered establishing recall procedures. Between 2015 and 2019, legislatures in several states considered bills that would allow for recall elections of state and local officials. For example, in 2017 and 2018, recall election legislation failed to pass the New York and West Virginia legislatures, and legislation that would have allowed recall of state legislators failed to pass the Illinois General Assembly. In 2019, legislation that would have provided for recall of any elected official in Connecticut failed to pass the General Assembly. Also in 2019, the Oklahoma House of Representatives introduced a bill that would allow citizens to petition for the recall of any elected official in the state.

Virginia has a process that is similar to recall, but it is not listed here as a recall state because its process, while requiring citizen petitions, calls for a recall trial rather than an election. In Virginia, after a petition containing the required number of signatures is verified, a circuit court decides whether a Virginia official will be removed from office. In the recall states, the voters decide in an election.

Recall of Local Officials

In at least 30 states (some sources place this number at 38), recall elections may be held in local jurisdictions.

History

History and Use of the Recall in the U.S.

The recall device began in the United States in a municipality—Los Angeles—in 1903. Michigan and Oregon, in 1908, were the first states to adopt recall procedures for state officials. Minnesota (1996) and New Jersey (1993) were the most recent.

Historically, recall attempts at the state level have been largely unsuccessful. The recall is used much more often, and with more success, at the local level.

There have been many attempts to recall governors throughout U.S. history, but only four have gathered enough petition signatures to trigger recall elections. In 2021, California Governor Gavin Newsom survived a recall election. In 2012, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker survived a recall election. In 2003, California voters successfully recalled Governor Gray Davis, and in North Dakota in 1921, voters successfully recalled not only Governor Lynn J. Frazier, but also the attorney general and the commissioner of agriculture. In 1988, Arizona voters submitted enough signatures to trigger a recall election for Governor Evan Mecham, but he was impeached by the state's House of Representatives before the scheduled recall election.

Recall efforts against state legislators are more common, but still unusual. Recall attempts against legislators have gathered enough signatures to trigger an election just 39 times. Eleven of those occurred in a single year, 2011. Forty-five percent of all legislative recall elections that have ever occurred were held between 2011 and 2013. However, only eight of those 17 elections succeeded in unseating a legislator. Overall, 55% of legislative recall elections have succeeded in unseating a legislator. Additionally, two legislators resigned after petitions with sufficient signatures to force recall elections against them were submitted. Many more recall efforts are started and never make it to the election stage; either they are abandoned by their sponsors, or they fail to gather enough valid petition signatures to trigger an election. For example, in 2019 in Colorado, a petition to recall Representative Rochelle Galindo was approved for circulation, but Galindo resigned from office before the petitions were turned in. Because she resigned, a recall election was not held and a vacancy committee from Galindo’s party selected her successor.

All Recall Elections Held in the U.S. for State Legislators

The following is a list of every recall election of a state legislator throughout U.S. history. The fact that these elections occurred means that, in each of the following cases, enough signatures were gathered on petitions to trigger a recall election. Officials on this list who "survived recall election" are people who were not voted out of office in the subsequent recall election. Officials who were "successfully recalled" on this list are people who were voted out of office in that election.

• 1913 – California State Senator Marshall Black: successfully recalled.
• 1914 – California State Senator Edwin Grant: successfully recalled.
• 1914 – California State Senator James Owens: survived recall election.
• 1932 – Wisconsin State Senator Otto Mueller: survived recall election.
• 1935 – Oregon State Representative Harry Merriam: successfully recalled.
• 1971 – Idaho State Senator Fisher Ellsworth: successfully recalled.
• 1971 – Idaho State Representative Aden Hyde: successfully recalled.
• 1981 – Washington State Senator Peter von Reichbauer: survived recall election.
• 1983 – Michigan State Senator Phil Mastin: successfully recalled.
• 1983 – Michigan State Senator David Serotkin: successfully recalled. (Technically he resigned from office before the results of the recall election were certified, but the results were sufficient to recall him.)
• 1985 – Oregon State Representative Pat Gillis: successfully recalled.
• 1988 – Oregon State Senator Bill Olson: successfully recalled.
• 1990 – Wisconsin Assembly member Jim Holperin: survived recall election.
• 1994 – California State Senator David Roberti: survived recall election.
• 1995 – California Assembly member Paul Horcher: successfully recalled.
• 1995 – California Assembly member Michael Machado: survived recall election.
• 1995 – California Assembly member Doris Allen: successfully recalled.
• 1996 – Wisconsin State Senator George Petak: successfully recalled.
• 2003 – Wisconsin State Senator Gary George: successfully recalled.
• 2008 – California State Senator Jeff Denham: survived recall election.
• 2008 – Michigan House Speaker Andy Dillon: survived recall election.
• 2011 – Wisconsin State Senators Robert Cowles, Alberta Darling, Dave Hansen, Sheila Harsdorf, Jim Holperin, Luther Olsen and Robert Wirch: survived recall elections.
• 2011 –: Wisconsin State Senators Randy Hopper and Dan Kapanke: successfully recalled.
• 2011 – Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce: successfully recalled.
• 2011 – Michigan State Representative Paul Scott: successfully recalled.
• 2012 – Wisconsin State Senators Van Wanggaard and Pam Galloway: successfully recalled. (Senator Pam Galloway resigned earlier in the year when enough signatures were gathered to trigger a recall election against her. Even though her name wasn't on the ballot, a recall election was still held for her seat.)
• 2012 – Wisconsin Senate Republican leader Scott Fitzgerald and Senator Terry Moulton: survived recall elections.
• 2013 – Colorado Senate President John Morse and Senator Angela Giron: successfully recalled.
• 2018 – California State Senator Josh Newman: successfully recalled.

Process

How the Recall Process Works

The recall process varies in its details from one state to another, but in general, recall campaigns follow these steps:

1. File an application to circulate a recall petition (some states allow petitions only if they contain certain grounds for recall).
2. Circulate a recall petition and gather a specified number of signatures in a specified period of time (view the detailed petitioning requirements).
3. Submit petitions to election officials for verification of signatures.
4. If enough valid signatures are presented, hold a recall election.

Grounds for Recall

In most of the recall states, any registered voter can begin a recall campaign for any reason. The language in Michigan's constitution is typical of most states: “The sufficiency of any statement of reasons or grounds ... shall be a political rather than a judicial question.” (Const. Art. II §8) Indeed, recall campaigns are often politically motivated. For example, in 2011, Republican senators in Wisconsin faced recalls for supporting the governor's effort to reduce the influence of public employee unions, and in Arizona, a senator faced recall for sponsoring a controversial immigration bill.

Specific grounds for recall are required in only eight states:

Alaska:  Lack of fitness, incompetence, neglect of duties or corruption (AS §15.45.510)

Georgia:  Act of malfeasance or misconduct while in office; violation of oath of office; failure to perform duties prescribed by law; willfully misused, converted, or misappropriated, without authority, public property or public funds entrusted to or associated with the elective office to which the official has been elected or appointed. Discretionary performance of a lawful act or a prescribed duty shall not constitute a ground for recall of an elected public official. (Ga. Code §21-4-3(7) and 21-4-4(c))

Kansas: Conviction for a felony, misconduct in office, incompetence, or failure to perform duties prescribed by law. No recall submitted to the voters shall be held void because of the insufficiency of the grounds, application, or petition by which the submission was procured. (KS Stat. §25-4301)

Minnesota:  Serious malfeasance or nonfeasance during the term of office in the performance of the duties of the office or conviction during the term of office of a serious crime (Const. Art. VIII §6)

Montana:  Physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, conviction of certain felony offenses (enumerated in Title 45). No person may be recalled for performing a mandatory duty of the office he holds or for not performing any act that, if performed, would subject him to prosecution for official misconduct. (Mont. Code §2-16-603)

Rhode Island:  Authorized in the case of a general officer who has been indicted or informed against for a felony, convicted of a misdemeanor, or against whom a finding of probable cause of violation of the code of ethics has been made by the ethics commission (Const. Art. IV §1)

Virginia:  Neglect of duty, misuse of office, or incompetence in the performance of duties when that neglect of duty, misuse of office, or incompetence in the performance of duties has a material adverse effect upon the conduct of the office, or upon conviction of a drug-related misdemeanor or a misdemeanor involving a "hate crime" (§24.2-233)

Washington:  Commission of some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violation of oath of office (Const. Art. I §33)

Source: National Conference of State Legislatures, May 2019

In 2012, Michigan passed a law requiring that a recall petition must clearly and factually state the reason(s) for the recall, which must be based on the elected official's conduct during his or her term of office (M.C.L. §168.951A). This differs from the specific grounds required in some other states, as Michigan’s new requirement will not necessarily eliminate politically-motivated recalls. For example, under this Michigan law a voter could initiate a recall against a legislator on the political grounds that the legislator voted against an issue the voter supports. As long as that allegation is stated clearly and factually, it would presumably meet this new criteria.

Circulating a Recall Petition

The recall process is similar to the ballot initiative process in that it requires the submission of citizen petitions. The number of signatures necessary to trigger a recall election, however, is often significantly higher than the number required for ballot initiatives. The required number of signatures is generally equal to a percentage of the vote in the last election for the office in question, although some states base the formula on the number of eligible voters or other numbers. These requirements can be demanding and are listed in the table below.

Source: National Conference of State Legislatures, May 2019

The Recall Election

In seven states, the election for a successor is held simultaneously with the recall election.

In California and Colorado, the ballot includes two questions. The first question is whether the official should be recalled. Voters are then asked to vote for a candidate for the office. The official who is the subject of the recall may not be among the listed candidates. If a majority votes "yes" on the recall question, then the incumbent is recalled and the successor is elected via the second part of the ballot. If a majority votes "no" on the recall question, the incumbent remains in office and the second portion of the ballot is moot.

In the other states using the simultaneous model (Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Dakota and Wisconsin), the submission and certification of the recall petition essentially triggers a special election for the office, and the recall ballot consists of a list of candidates for the office. The name of the official who is the subject of the recall may appear on the ballot along with other nominees. In fact, in Arizona, Michigan, North Dakota and Wisconsin, the name of the official being recalled is automatically placed on the recall ballot for reelection unless the official resigns from office.

In the remaining 12 states, the recall ballot contains only the question of whether the official should be recalled. If the majority votes for recall, the office is declared vacant and is filled at a special election or as otherwise provided by law, which in some states is by appointment for the remainder of the term. The chart below details how the recall election is conducted in each state.

1) In these states, the recall ballot consists of a list of candidates for the office held by the person against whom the recall petition was filed. The name of the officer against whom the recall was filed may appear on the ballot for re-election.

2) In these states, the recall ballot consists of two parts. The first asks whether the officer against whom the recall petition was filed should be recalled. The second part consists of a list of candidates who have qualified for the election. Note that courts in both states have ruled that a voter's choice of candidate on the second part of the ballot must be counted regardless of whether the person cast a vote on the recall question first.

3) The governor appoints a successor who must be a member of the same political party as the recalled officeholder, and must be selected from a list submitted by a committee of the political party of the person recalled.

4) If vacancy occurs within 85 days of the general election in the second year of the term (terms are four years), the county board of commissioners appoints a successor to serve until the election.

5) County board of commissioners appoints a person from a list submitted by a committee of the political party of the person recalled.

Laws

Recall Provisions in State Constitutions and Statutes

• Alaska – Const. Art. 11, §8; AS §15.45.470-710, 15.80.010, 29.26.240-350
• Arizona - Const. Art. 8, §1-6; Ariz. Rev. Stat. §19-201 – 19-234
• California – Const. Art. 2, §13-19; CA Election Code §11000-11386
• Colorado – Const. Art. 21; Colo. Rev. Stat. §1-12-101 – 1-12-123, 31-4-501 – 31-4-505, 32-1-906 – 32-1-915
• Georgia – Const. Art. 2, §2.4; Ga. Code §21-4-1 et seq.
• Idaho – Const. Art. 6, §6; Idaho Code §34-1701 – 34-1715
• Illinois - Const. Art. 3. §7
• Kansas – Const. Art. 4, §3; KSA §25-4301 – 25-4331
• Louisiana – Const. Art. 10, §26; La. Stats. Ann. §18:1300.1 – 18:1300.17
• Michigan – Const. Art. 2, §8; Mich. Election Law §168.951 – 168.977
• Minnesota – Const. Art. 8, §6; Minn. Stat. Ann. §211C.01 et seq.
• Montana – Mont. Code § 2-16-601 – 2-16-635
• Nevada – Const. Art. 2, §9; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ch. 294A.006, Ch. 306, Ch. 539.163 – 539.185
• New Jersey – Const. Art. 1, §2(b); NJ Rev. Stat. Ann. § 19:27A-1 – 19:27A-18
• North Dakota – Const. Art. 3, §1 and 10; ND Century Code Ann. §16.1-01-09.1, 44-08-21
• Oregon – Const. Art. 2, §18; Or. Rev. Stat. Ch. 249.865 – 249.877
• Rhode Island – Const. Art. 4, §1
• Virginia - Va. Code §24.2-233 – 24.2.238
• Washington – Const. Art. 1, Sec. 33-34; Wash. Rev. Code §29A.56.110 – 29A.56.270
• Wisconsin – Const. Art. 13, §12; Wis. Stat. Ann. §9.10