I read a column yesterday where the author speculated that the recall was "too democratic." The fact is, the laws of California allow for direct initiatives and this recall effort is fully within the law. If the petition carriers collect enough signatures (and it looks like they will), then the voters will be asked if they want to recall Gray Davis and, if so, who they want for governor in his place. What could be more democratic than that?

And yet more than 1 million Californians have now signed the petitions, and the only question is whether the recall election will be held this fall or delayed until March and combined with the presidential primary already scheduled.

Is the recall anti-democratic, as some have alleged? Hardly. If anything, it's too democratic, forcing elected leaders to pander non-stop to voters and interest groups or else risk having to defend themselves in an interim election.

But the irony is that in California, a place famous for direct democracy through the ballot initiative, our candidate elections have suffered from a distinct lack of voter engagement.

Here's an article from the League of Women Voters on the direct initiative process, specifically for Washington state. The first page shows how many states have the direct initiative process. While we live in a representative republic instead of a democracy, the initiative process is a means to bypass the state legislature when it isn't responsive to the wishes of the electorate. For better or worse (and I generally think it's for the better), this is the way things happen in many states.

As for Arnold himself, I don't follow him or California politics very closely. I understand he was the driving force last year behind some statewide initiative that passed. If memory serves, it had something to do with early childhood education but I'm not certain.