As it is with just about anything, there are both pros and cons associated with the possible introduction of a recall amendment. One of the many positives associated with such an amendment would certainly be the ability to hold politicians accountable for the pledges and promises that they make during their campaign for election. Today it seems that politicians will pledge anything just for election purposes, yet often choose to forget all about those promises once elected into office. (“They Made A Promise”, 2012). With a recall amendment, this allows for the ability to monitor the most important promises and make sure they are not ignored until the next election. The recall amendment would help Americans hold politicians accountable for their inaction and broken pledges. Another aspect of the possibility of a recall amendment is the formation of a Democracy by the people. Because the recall is a process by which the people seek to remove an elected official from office, this would ultimately result in the formation of a democracy. This form of direct democracy fails to exist in the U.S. Federal Constitution. This sort of formation has been used selectively in some countries as well as on a limited basis in a few states here in the United States. Needless to say, this initiative process would open the doors for a Democracy by the people.

In addition to the positives associated with the recall amendment, there are negative aspects that come along with it as well. In the event that the recall amendment was implemented and enforced, the costs associated with such would be high and would therefore negatively impact the taxpayer. For example, there would not only be the expense of a primary election, but also the additional costs associated with that of a special election. (Altman, 2012). In order to secure a replacement candidate, two very costly, separate