As it presently stands, those who have been indicted in the bribery scandal in Jackson can stay in office unless they are convicted of the felonies for which they have been charged, lose their next elections or voluntarily step down.
In many other states, there would be another option — a recall election.
Mississippi, however, only has a recall election in theory, and it applies only to county officials, not to state or municipal ones.
Thus, the three officeholders charged last week with accepting a total of at least $175,000 in bribes — Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba, Councilman Aaron Banks and Hinds County District Attorney Jody Owens — may have a lot of worries, but facing a recall election is not one of them.
In the case of Lumumba and Banks, they will be looking at a referendum of sorts anyway next year, when both are up for reelection. But Owens doesn’t have to face voters again until 2027, potentially three long years in which the state prosecutor could continue to try to put people in jail for crimes less serious than the ones he is accused of committing.
Two improvements should be made to Mississippi’s current recall law. It should apply to all state and local elected officials, not just county ones. And, just as importantly, it should be achievable. The state’s convoluted current law isn’t.
It has an exceedingly high threshold of petitioners — at least 30% of registered voters, even higher for law enforcement positions — and must go through several potential gatekeepers before the question of removing an officeholder gets on the ballot.
The petition would first go to the governor, who would have the ultimate say as to whether enough qualified signatures had been gathered. If the governor determines they were, he would then be required to convene a panel of three chancery judges to decide whether there is enough evidence to justify the elected official’s removal. If the judges find against the official, a special election would be held. A majority of the qualified voters, not just a majority who turned out, would have to vote for removal in order to kick the official out of office.
Further complicating the process is the reason for which an official could be recalled: “failing, neglecting or refusing to perform any of the duties required of such officer by law.” It is not clear whether being credibly accused of bribery or other felonious crimes would count.
It should not be easy for voters to remove an elected official during the person’s term, but it should not be impossible either.
Lawmakers have considered rewriting and expanding the recall law, largely because of the dysfunction and corruption that appears to pervade Jackson’s government. The latest scandal should provide renewed interest in doing so.
