Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Constitutional Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House rejects constitutional resolution to permit recalls, 42–31
Summary
A proposed constitutional resolution (H.J.R. 7) to allow recall elections failed in the Utah House after advocates argued it would give citizens more control and opponents warned it would invite frequent, costly recalls; the resolution failed 31–42 and will not advance.
A resolution to ask voters whether the state constitution should permit recall elections, H.J.R. 7, failed in the Utah House on Feb. 20 after a floor debate about whether recalls would strengthen public accountability or encourage impulsive, costly removals of officials.
Rep. Hendrickson argued the people should be allowed to decide whether recall should be available in modern Utah, saying the constitution’s prohibition dates back more than a century and that citizens might benefit from the option. "The constitution in this state has served its people long and well since its adoption in 1898," he said, framing the debate as one of caution but democratic choice.
Opponents, including Representative Stylor and Representative Cox, warned that recall provisions can be abused by transient anger or small factions and pointed to Idaho as an example where frequent recall activity had burdened government and taxpayers. Representative Stylor said the regular election process provides a proper remedy and cautioned against making recall too easy.
The resolution failed on final consideration with 31 votes in favor and 42 against; H.J.R. 7 was filed and will not proceed further this session.
