Las Vegas Sun

March 28, 2024

Sun editorial:

Nevada has a loophole to close after flippant use of election recall system

Recall laws are great when they’re used to oust elected officials who are grossly incompetent or have committed some type of malfeasance, like accepting kickbacks or stealing taxpayer money.

But the recall attempts that have been making the news in Southern Nevada in the past couple of years are another matter entirely.

They’re examples of irresponsible and opportunistic political players using the state’s loose recall laws in a kind of political piracy against elected leaders and a show of utter contempt toward voters. These attacks, launched by political opponents of the officeholders, are designed to thwart the will of voters by either leveraging leaders out of their seats or, short of that, harassing them into a “go along to get along” attitude.

Las Vegas City Councilman Steve Seroka is the latest to be targeted, while state Sens. Joyce Woodhouse, Nicole Cannizzaro and Patricia Farley faced recall attempts beginning in late 2017.

These recalls share a thread in that not one of them is based on official misconduct. And in the efforts against Cannizzaro and Seroka, a commonality is that former Assemblywoman Victoria Seaman is connected.

Seaman signed onto the Cannizzaro recall after having been defeated by Cannizzaro for a state Senate seat. Now she’s a principal supporter of recalling Seroka, whose seat she’s admitted to wanting.

Seaman’s camp says the two recalls are apples and oranges — that the Cannizzaro effort was purely about politics while the Seroka recall is about his performance as a councilman — but her support of them clearly shows one thing: She’s willing to run end-arounds on the will of the voters.

Let’s be clear about what’s happening here: Seaman signed on to a recall effort against someone who defeated her after voters sent her packing, and she is spearheading a recall effort against someone whose seat she wants. This is an example of the worst kind of politics, and every voter should reject her. She’s shown she cares nothing about the voters.

In Seroka’s case, he was elected in a race defined largely by one issue — a controversial redevelopment plan for the Badlands golf course. Seroka was a staunch opponent of the plan, and voters in his district signaled their stance on it by sending him to the council.

Seroka hasn’t changed direction, either, which makes the recall smell even worse. He was absolutely right when he made this remark to Las Vegas Sun reporter Chris Kudialis: “I campaigned on this very issue, being the voice of the people. Now they’re recalling me for doing exactly what I said I would do. I’ve been resolute in being the voice of the people in representing their personal desires, not my personal views.”

The good news here is that Nevadans haven’t been fooled by these attacks. The efforts against the senators all fizzled after failing to draw enough support, which is exactly what should happen in the Seroka recall.

Our guess is that voters see the supporters of the recalls for what they are — political hacks who are acting in the interests of themselves or their parties, as opposed to the benefit of the public.

But whatever the reason, it’s good that the recalls haven’t found any traction. If groundless recalls were to start succeeding, the potential ramifications would be ugly.

It could literally result in recalls being filed every time seats change hands, causing elections to happen not in cycles but constantly. There would be no continuity in leadership, and even less motivation for good candidates to come forward. Why bother getting elected if a vote that rubbed someone the wrong way could get you recalled?

So with Seaman and other recall supporters showing no sign of slowing down, it’s up to Nevada lawmakers to close the door on them by beefing up the state’s recall statutes.

As is, recalls in Nevada can be filed for no reason whatsoever. That opens the door to machine politics at their ugliest — recalls being used not as a tool to protect the public from bad actors but rather as a crowbar to either remove or beat up officials for purely political reasons.

That being the case, Nevada needs to add grounds to the state’s recall laws. That’s not unprecedented; eight states have beaten us to it, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Some of the grounds in those states are vague, but Georgia’s would be a good starting point for debate among Nevada lawmakers. A key element of that state’s law dictates that “discretionary performance of a lawful act or a prescribed duty shall not constitute a ground for recall of an elected public official.”

That’s as it should be.

It’s one thing if leaders are clearly incompetent, either mentally unfit or grossly unqualified for the positions they’re seeking. That’s a real threat in Nevada, where the lack of a provision for write-in candidates leaves voters with no way to derail unopposed candidates who are incompetent. In those cases, recall is a legitimate option.

But the targets of these recent recalls have all been thoroughly competent. Seroka served 30 years in the Air Force as a fighter pilot, strategist and commander, for goodness sake. His character and leadership experience are unassailable, and he’s served diligently and ably on the council.

So it’s deeply troubling that he’s being hit with a recall effort simply because of his stance on one single matter.

Elected leaders are never going to please everybody, especially those from a competing party or on the other side of a prickly issue.

But disagreeing isn’t a legitimate reason for a recall. Not even close.