Shutterstock
Statewide — California voters will decide this November whether to change how the state replaces elected officials who are removed from office through a recall election.
Proposition (Prop) 5 would eliminate the current system in which voters simultaneously decide whether to recall a state official and choose that official’s potential replacement.
Instead, the recall ballot would contain only the yes-or-no question about removing the official. If the recall succeeds, the vacancy would be filled later under procedures established by the California Constitution and state law.
Under the current system, voters answer two questions on the same ballot. The first asks whether the targeted official should be recalled. The second asks voters to select a successor who would take office if the recall passes. The replacement candidate who receives the most votes wins, even without support from a majority of voters.
Prop 5 would remove that second question from the recall ballot. Depending on the office, the vacancy would be filled by appointment, succession or a subsequent special election.
The proposed constitutional amendment would also allow a recalled official to run for the same office in a later special election. However, that person could not be appointed to fill the vacancy created by the recall.
The Legislature placed the measure on the ballot after approving Senate Constitutional Amendment (SCA) 1, authored by former state Sen. Josh Newman and co-authored by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan (D-Ladera Heights).
California voters established the state’s recall process in 1911. Since 1913, there have been 182 attempts to recall state elected officials, according to the California Secretary of State’s Office. Eleven collected enough signatures to qualify for the ballot, and six resulted in an official’s removal.
The most recent statewide recall election targeted Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021. Nearly 62% of voters opposed removing him. The last successful recall of a state official occurred in 2018, when voters removed Newman from the state Senate and elected Republican Ling Ling Chang to replace him.
Prop 5 contains specific provisions governing a gubernatorial recall. If a governor were recalled, the lieutenant governor generally would become governor for the remainder of the term.
However, if the recall occurs before the close of the nomination period for the next statewide election during the first two years of the governor’s term, a special election would be consolidated with the next statewide primary. The candidate who receives a majority of the vote would serve the rest of the term. If no candidate wins a majority, the two candidates receiving the most votes would advance to a runoff at the following statewide general election.
The measure would also transfer responsibility for carrying out a gubernatorial recall from the lieutenant governor to the secretary of state. If the governor and secretary of state faced recalls at the same time, the state controller would oversee their recall-related duties.
Supporters include Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, Bryan and Newman. The California Democratic Party, California Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of California also support the measure.
Newman and Bryan argue that the existing process could allow a replacement candidate with less than majority support to take office.
“The system in its current form offers bad actors an incentive to target an elected official with whom they disagree and to have the official replaced by someone who otherwise would not enjoy the support of a majority of voters,” they said in a statement supporting SCA 1.
“SCA 1 will ensure that statewide and legislative recalls in California are democratic, fair, and not subject to political gamesmanship,” the statement reads.
California Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of California have also argued that the current two-question ballot can confuse voters.
“Voters have expressed deep confusion as to whether they are permitted to vote for a replacement candidate if they vote ‘no’ on the first question,” the organizations said. “The perplexing system can cause people to refrain from answering the second question, thereby disenfranchising voters and contributing to an undervote for replacement candidates.”
The organizations said the amendment would preserve voters’ ability to recall officials while making recall outcomes more representative of majority support.
Election Integrity Project California opposes the proposal. The organization argues that allowing the lieutenant governor to assume the governorship after a successful recall could undermine voters’ intention to change the state’s leadership because the governor and lieutenant governor often share similar political views and policy priorities.
“The proposal of SCA 1 that the lieutenant governor simply assume the governorship in the event of a successful recall would make a gubernatorial recall effort a ‘frying pan vs. the fire’ situation,” the organization stated.
It also argued that the change would diminish voters’ control over who replaces a recalled governor and it would discourage participation in the political process.
A “yes” vote on Prop 5 would amend the California Constitution to eliminate successor contests from recall elections involving state officials. Vacancies would instead be filled under existing constitutional and statutory procedures.
A “no” vote would preserve the current system, under which voters decide whether to remove a state official and choose a potential successor during the same recall election.
Prop 5 will appear on the ballot in California’s Nov. 3, 2026, general election. The measure is one of 14 statewide propositions voters will consider.
______
Article By: Austin Gage, CBM
