Unfortunately, it’s constitutional in Wisconsin. Doesn’t make it right, but perhaps recall elections could be made more difficult.
Republicans tried very hard to recall the Wisconsin Fleebaggers once upon a time, and are still trying to do so in the case of people like Bob Jauch. But if I remember correctly (and perhaps I don’t), current law calls for a recall based on a percentage of previous ballots cast.
In parliamentary procedure, a Motion to Reconsider may only be made by a member of the winning side in a vote. Therefore, I wouldn’t be averse to requiring those who wish to recall a candidate to gather more valid petition signatures than the number of votes cast for the election winner.
And yes, I know it could work both ways. But recall elections every two years is no way to run a government.
It would be an interesting argument to determine what the threshold for demanding a recall should be. Both a "majority of those voting" and "a number exceeding the incumbent's vote-total" seem to my first glance to be an unduly high bar to jump. That is, the campaign itself is where the real argument gets made--it seems unrealistic to persuade that many without the chance for focused persuasion, which a campaign provides.
How does 40% sound? For example (although one far removed), the nine-member Supreme Court requires the votes of just four justices to authorize hearing a case. At least with that many you avoid the problem of too-few petition signers and every-other-year recalls.
Your thoughts?