Prodding public opinion

People like to say public opinion is fickle. Well, people are right. Less than two years after Sept. 11, Afghanistan and airport security have dropped from public discourse, replaced by Iraq and Kobe Bryant. Shifting opinions is as American as apple pie (wait, no it isn't).\nSuch shifts of public focus are understandable, though, because in the United States we elect people (and pay them) to focus on all the issues, all the time. Can you imagine if we didn't elect people to direct public policy? That's a whole lot of studying up on intricate and important issues that, frankly, we wouldn't do.\nWe elect leaders to deal with important issues, and when their terms expire, they must put their record up to public scrutiny as voters head to the polls. But, a few people in California don't seem to like this concept. Some Californians are displeased with their governor, Gray Davis, so they have gathered enough signatures to force a recall election against the governor.\nIn California, the state Constitution allows that citizens can gather signatures (about 900,000 in a state of 34.5 million) to force an immediate election on whether or not to kick the governor out of office. The entire idea sounds benign enough; letting the people decide certainly can't be that bad, especially since we live in a democracy.\nHowever, such direct and knee-jerk democracy is not what the founding fathers intended. As I said, issues are complicated. You and I could certainly understand them, but to do so we would have to invest a large amount of time that could be better spent working or doing any number of things we enjoy.\nThis is why the United States is a republic, not a direct democracy. If we recalled unpopular public officials, then politicians would govern by polls, not by what is right. For example, the Clinton tax hike of 1993 certainly wasn't popular, but it led to eight years of unprecedented prosperity. We elect and pay politicians to make tough choices. Sometimes these choices are right and sometimes they are wrong.\nBut, imagine the chaos of constantly kicking unpopular politicians out of office. Government consistency would be a thing of the past. In times of crisis, when such stability is so crucial, we would have political friction and instability.\nThis brings us to California. California's economy is in the tank. California's governor, Davis, has approval ratings below 30 percent. I do not belong to the Gray Davis fan club, but the solution to California's problems is not to kick him out and change ship mid-stream. The solution is not for critics of the governor to tear him down while offering no positive alternative of their own. The solution is a combination of teamwork, good will and fresh ideas.\nIf Davis is replaced by a Republican, that person will have to deal with a Democrat-dominated legislature. I don't see that as a recipe for economic recovery. But, worse, a successful recall in California would set a hideous precedent. It would tell those who enjoy tearing down others in politics that they can gather a few signatures and kick out elected officials whenever they are unpopular (thankfully, we don't have a recall in Indiana).\nThis isn't what our founding fathers envisioned and thank goodness they didn't. Our republican form of government is a great thing, and this greatness shines the brightest at election time. But, as fickle as public opinion is, if California's recall-whenever-you-want phenomenon catches fire, political stability (and politicians who govern by facts instead of polls) will be a thing of the past.