U.S. Amended Statement of Defense

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

U.S. Amended Statement of Defense IN THE ARBITRATION UNDER CHAPTER ELEVEN OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES BETWEEN METHANEX CORPORATION, Claimant/Investor, -and- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent/Party. AMENDED STATEMENT OF DEFENSE OF RESPONDENT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Mark A. Clodfelter Assistant Legal Adviser for International Claims and Investment Disputes Barton Legum Chief, NAFTA Arbitration Division, Office of International Claims and Investment Disputes Andrea J. Menaker David A. Pawlak Jennifer I. Toole CarrieLyn D. Guymon Mark S. McNeill Attorney-Advisers, Office of International Claims and Investment Disputes UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE Washington, D.C. 20520 December 5, 2003 CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ...................................................................................... 1 FACTS ........................................................................................................................ 7 MTBE.......................................................................................................................................7 The California Market For MTBE .........................................................................................10 MTBE’s Effects On Public Health And The Environment....................................................12 California’s Actions Regarding MTBE .................................................................................18 Senate Bill 521...................................................................................................................18 The University of California Report ..................................................................................19 The 1999 Executive Order.................................................................................................22 California’s Request For A Waiver Of The Federal Oxygenate Requirement ..................23 Senate Bill 989...................................................................................................................25 The CaRFG3 Regulations ..................................................................................................26 The 2002 Executive Order And The Amended CaRFG3 Regulations ..............................27 Methanex’s Business..............................................................................................................28 Methanex And Its U.S. Investments ..................................................................................28 The Global Methanol Market.............................................................................................31 Methanex’s Participation In The California Market ..........................................................36 Methanex’s Recent Economic Performance......................................................................37 POINTS AT ISSUE ..................................................................................................... 40 I. THE TRIBUNAL LACKS JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE MEASURES AT ISSUE DO NOT “RELATE TO” METHANEX OR ITS INVESTMENTS ....................................................................43 A. The Measures At Issue Do Not, And Were Not Intended To, Address Methanol Producers Or Methanex .........................................................................................................45 1. The Record In No Way Supports Methanex’s Assertion That The Measures Were Intended To Harm Methanol Producers.............................................................................48 2. To The Contrary, The Record Shows That California Harbors No Ill Will Toward Methanex............................................................................................................................53 B. Methanex’s Attempt To Conflate Methanol With MTBE Is Without Support .............55 -ii- 1. Gasoline Distributors Do Not Have An Option Of Buying Methanol....................56 2. Merchant Oxygenate Producers Do Not Face A Choice Between Methanol And Ethanol ...............................................................................................................................63 3. Gasoline Refiners Do Not Have A Choice Between Methanol And Ethanol........65 C. In Any Event, Methanex’s Suggestion That The Measures’ Purpose Was To Benefit Ethanol Is Without Merit .......................................................................................................67 1. California’s Request For A Waiver And The 2002 Executive Order ....................69 2. Campaign Contributions From And Contacts With ADM ....................................71 3. Supposed Reaction To “Public Hysteria” Over MTBE .........................................74 4. Lobbying By Ethanol Supporters...........................................................................76 5. The Best Available Scientific Information Amply Supported The California Measures, And Continues To Do So..................................................................................78 6. Ethanol Was And Remains As “Foreign” To California As Methanol .....................84 II. METHANEX HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH ANY LOSS PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY A SUPPOSED BREACH....................................................................................................................87 A. The Chain Of Causation Is Far Too Attenuated Here To Establish Proximate Causation................................................................................................................................87 1. Articles 1116(1) And 1117(1) Incorporate The Established Standard Of Proximate Causation............................................................................................................................88 2. The Effect Of The Ban On Suppliers To Suppliers To The Persons Regulated Is Far Too Remote To Be Cognizable..........................................................................................92 B. Each Of Methanex’s Alleged Categories Of Damages Fails As A Matter Of Law And Fact To Establish Proximate Causation .................................................................................96 1. Alleged Deprivation Of Methanex US’s Customer Base, Goodwill And Market.....96 2. Continued Idling Of Methanex Fortier ....................................................................102 3. Decreased Exports From Methanex’s Overseas Plants............................................106 4. Alleged Deprivation Of Methanex’s Customer Base, Goodwill, And Market........110 5. Reduced Return On, And Value Of, Investments And Increased Cost Of Capital..111 6. Downward Pressure On Methanol Price..................................................................113 7. MTBE Bans By Other States ...................................................................................115 8. Drop In Stock Price..................................................................................................116 III. METHANEX AND ITS INVESTMENTS RECEIVED TREATMENT NO LESS FAVORABLE THAN THAT ACCORDED THEIR U.S. COUNTERPARTS...........................................................118 -iii- A. Methanex And Its Investments Received The Same Treatment As U.S. Investors And Their Investments In Precisely The Same Circumstances ...................................................119 1. Methanex Fortier......................................................................................................120 2. Methanex US ...........................................................................................................122 3. Methanex Corporation .............................................................................................123 B. Methanex’s Argument That It Should Be Compared To Investors And Investments In Other Industries Is Without Legal Or Factual Merit ............................................................124 1. Neither Article 1102 Nor The Record Supports Methanex’s Contention That It Is In Like Circumstances With ADM ......................................................................................125 2. The Record Does Not Support Methanex’s Claim That Methanol And Ethanol Are “Like Products” Even If Such A Test Were Relevant .....................................................130 (a) The Property, Nature And Qualities Of Methanol And Ethanol Are Dissimilar.....................................................................................................................130 (b) Methanol And Ethanol Have Different End Uses............................................132 (c) Consumer Tastes And Habits Are Not A Factor Because Methanol And Ethanol Do Not Compete With One Another ...........................................................................135 (d) Methanol And Ethanol Have Different Tariff Classifications .........................135 3. Methanex’s Assertion That MTBE And Ethanol Are “Like Products” Is Similarly Without Support...............................................................................................................136 (a) MTBE And Ethanol Are Not Like Products Because Their Nature, Properties And Qualities Are Different.........................................................................................137 (b) Consumer Tastes And Preferences Demonstrate That MTBE And Ethanol Are Not Like Products ........................................................................................................140 (c) MTBE And Ethanol Have Different Tariff Classifications .............................144 IV.
Recommended publications
  • Exhibit 6 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711
    Exhibit 6 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711 AUG 102001 OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Emissions from Large and Small MWC Units at MACT Compliance FROM: Walt Stevenson c4f OAQPS/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) TO: Large MWC Docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0117) This memorandum presents information on the overall emissions reductions achieved by large and small municipal waste combustion (MWC) units following retrofit of Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT). This memorandum is a companion to the memorandum titled "Emissions from Large MWC Units at MACT Compliance (note a). Consistent with Clean Air Act (CAA) section 129, large and small MWC units completed MACT retrofits by December 2000 and December 2005, respectively. The performance of the MACT retrofits has been outstanding. Emission reductions achieved for all CAA section 129 pollutants are shown below. Of particular interest are dioxinlfuran and mercury emissions. Since 1990 (pre-MACT conditions), dioxinlfuran emissions from large and small MWCs have been reduced by more than 99 percent, and mercury emissions have been reduced by more than 96 percent. Dioxinlfuran emissions have been reduced to 15 grams per year* and mercury emissions reduced to 2.3 tons/year. Emissions From Large and Small MWC Units Pollutant 1990 Emissions (!PY) 20Q5 E,:!1issions (tpy) Percent Reduction ----------_. ----_. .._-------- ._---- ... CDD/CDF, TEQ basis* 4400 15 99+% --f--- -- Mercury 57 2.3 96% Cadmium 9.6 0.4 96% Lead 170 5.5 97% Particulate Matter 18,600 780 96% HC] 57,400 3,200 94% SO} 38,300 4,600 88 % f-- NO, 64,900 49,500 24% (*) dioxinlfuran emissions are in units of grams per year toxic equivalent quantity (TEQ), using 1989 NATO toxicity factors; all other pollutant emissions are in units of tons per year.
    [Show full text]
  • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE September 4, 2001
    September 4, 2001 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE 16335 ORDERS FOR WEDNESDAY, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE IN THE MEDICAL CORPS (MC) UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTION 624: SEPTEMBER 5, 2001 THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF AND To be major Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask APPOINTMENT TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE AS- JEFFREY S. CAIN, 0000 MC unanimous consent that when the Sen- SIGNED TO A POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSI- RYUNG SUH, 0000 MC BILITY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 601 AND 152: ate completes its business today, it ad- IN THE MARINE CORPS To be general journ until the hour of 10 a.m. tomor- THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT row, Wednesday, September 5. I further GEN. RICHARD B. MYERS, 0000 TO THE GRADE INDICATED IN THE UNITED STATES MA- THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT RINE CORPS UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTION 624: ask unanimous consent that on AS THE VICE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF To be colonel Wednesday, immediately following the AND APPOINTMENT TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPON- RICHARD W. BRITTON, 0000 prayer and the pledge, the Journal of SIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 601 AND 152: THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT proceedings be approved to date, the To be general TO THE GRADE INDICATED IN THE UNITED STATES MA- RINE CORPS UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTION 624: morning hour be deemed expired, the GEN.
    [Show full text]
  • Changemakers: Biographies of African Americans in San Francisco Who Made a Difference
    The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and McCarthy Center Student Scholarship the Common Good 2020 Changemakers: Biographies of African Americans in San Francisco Who Made a Difference David Donahue Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.usfca.edu/mccarthy_stu Part of the History Commons CHANGEMAKERS AFRICAN AMERICANS IN SAN FRANCISCO WHO MADE A DIFFERENCE Biographies inspired by San Francisco’s Ella Hill Hutch Community Center murals researched, written, and edited by the University of San Francisco’s Martín-Baró Scholars and Esther Madríz Diversity Scholars CHANGEMAKERS: AFRICAN AMERICANS IN SAN FRANCISCO WHO MADE A DIFFERENCE © 2020 First edition, second printing University of San Francisco 2130 Fulton Street San Francisco, CA 94117 Published with the generous support of the Walter and Elise Haas Fund, Engage San Francisco, The Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and the Common Good, The University of San Francisco College of Arts and Sciences, University of San Francisco Student Housing and Residential Education The front cover features a 1992 portrait of Ella Hill Hutch, painted by Eugene E. White The Inspiration Murals were painted in 1999 by Josef Norris, curated by Leonard ‘Lefty’ Gordon and Wendy Nelder, and supported by the San Francisco Arts Commission and the Mayor’s Offi ce Neighborhood Beautifi cation Project Grateful acknowledgment is made to the many contributors who made this book possible. Please see the back pages for more acknowledgments. The opinions expressed herein represent the voices of students at the University of San Francisco and do not necessarily refl ect the opinions of the University or our sponsors.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010-2011 Course Listings
    A n n u a l R e p o r t 2 0 1 UCLA 0 Institute - for Research 2 0 on Labor and 1 Employment 1 Table of Contents Letter from the Director.....................................................................................................................1 About IRLE.........................................................................................................................................2 History................................................................................................................................................3 Governance.........................................................................................................................................5 Governance Structure.......................................................................................................6 IRLE Leadership................................................................................................................8 Department Organization Chart.....................................................................................9 Staff Awards .......................................................................................................................10 Financial Issues .................................................................................................................11 Extramural Support..........................................................................................................12 Academic Activities...........................................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • California Government
    330673_fm.qxd 02/02/05 1:04 PM Page i California Government CengageNot for Learning Reprint 330673_fm.qxd 02/02/05 1:04 PM Page ii CengageNot for Learning Reprint 330673_fm.qxd 02/02/05 1:04 PM Page iii ######## California Government Fourth Edition John L. Korey California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CengageNot for Learning Reprint Houghton Mifflin Company Boston New York 330673_fm.qxd 02/02/05 1:04 PM Page iv DEDICATION To Mary, always and to the newest family members— Welcome to California Publisher: Charles Hartford Sponsoring Editor: Katherine Meisenheimer Assistant Editor: Christina Lembo Editorial Assistant: Kristen Craib Associate Project Editor: Teresa Huang Editorial Assistant: Jake Perry Senior Art and Design Coordinator: Jill Haber Senior Photo Editor: Jennifer Meyer Dare Senior Composition Buyer: Sarah Ambrose Manufacturing Coordinator: Carrie Wagner Executive Marketing Manager: Nicola Poser Marketing Associate: Kathleen Mellon Cover image: Primary California Photography, © Harold Burch, New York City. California State Bear Photo © Bob Rowan, Progressive Image/CORBIS. Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system without the prior written permission of Houghton Mifflin Company unless such copying is expressly permitted by federal copyright law. Address inquiries to College Permissions, Houghton Mifflin
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of the April 2004 NEJAC Meeting in New Orleans, LA
    NATIO NAL ENVIRONM ENTAL JUS TICE ADVISO RY C OUN CIL New Orleans, Louisiana April 13 through 16, 2004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This summary presents highlights of the 20th meeting of the National Environm ental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), held April 13 through 16, 2004 in New Orleans, Louisiana at the Sheraton New Orleans Hotel. On April 13 and 14, 2004, the NEJAC hosted public comment periods during which representatives of community organizations presented their concerns about pollution, health risks, unaddressed issues involving pollution from Federal facilities, and other issues of environmental justice. Six of the seven subcommittees of the NEJAC met for a full day on April 15, 2004. Approximately 263 persons attended the meetings and the public comment period. The N EJAC is a Federal advisory committee that was established by charter on September 30, 1993 to provide independent advice, consultation, and recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S. Environm ental Prote ction Agency (E PA) on m atters related to environm ental justice. Ms . Vero nica Eady, Tufts U niversity, serve s as the chair of the Execu tive Council of the NE JAC. M r. Charles Lee, Associate Director, EPA Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ), serves as the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Executive C ouncil. OEJ maintains transcripts and summary reports of the proceedings of the meetings of the NEJAC. Those documents are available to the public upon request. The public also has access to the executive summaries of reports of previous meetings, as well as other publications of the NEJAC, through the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/oeca/main/ej/nejac/index.html (click on the publications icon).
    [Show full text]
  • Legislators of California
    The Legislators of California March 2011 Compiled by Alexander C. Vassar Dedicated to Jane Vassar For everything With Special Thanks To: Shane Meyers, Webmaster of JoinCalifornia.com For a friendship, a website, and a decade of trouble-shooting. Senator Robert D. Dutton, Senate Minority Leader Greg Maw, Senate Republican Policy Director For providing gainful employment that I enjoy. Gregory P. Schmidt, Secretary of the Senate Bernadette McNulty, Chief Assistant Secretary of the Senate Holly Hummelt , Senate Amending Clerk Zach Twilla, Senate Reading Clerk For an orderly house and the lists that made this book possible. E. Dotson Wilson, Assembly Chief Clerk Brian S. Ebbert, Assembly Assistant Chief Clerk Timothy Morland, Assembly Reading Clerk For excellent ideas, intriguing questions, and guidance. Jessica Billingsley, Senate Republican Floor Manager For extraordinary patience with research projects that never end. Richard Paul, Senate Republican Policy Consultant For hospitality and good friendship. Wade Teasdale, Senate Republican Policy Consultant For understanding the importance of Bradley and Dilworth. A Note from the Author An important thing to keep in mind as you read this book is that there is information missing. In the first two decades that California’s legislature existed, we had more individuals serve as legislators than we have in the last 90 years.1 Add to the massive turnover the fact that no official biographies were kept during this time and that the state capitol moved seven times during those twenty years, and you have a recipe for missing information. As an example, we only know the birthplace for about 63% of the legislators. In spite of my best efforts, there are still hundreds of legislators about whom we know almost nothing.
    [Show full text]
  • V I Cc- Tc D+1 69.-715/L47,-? Co' 1 Eh Li
    i'DCATleq-L 1-0t1 4.f t+41vE grk't 12 C9- 4— -Tirk-c-- AlAs6e.._ PO (cs —r4( S J Tc7C-FC-04 - Ft7e EM-cr Isr -5c 60j. ?5 es--eoeLL0-1 Pq-ezt7 6-\41-frelt€ Of ctil- 4-- 11 - 5 )} e(ice-v Sufibere6, 1 -41-6- oki en tV• -14-0 6)(70170 1.Z-h1 e.,L) - sli4erta -7,01C N TV6 u 4 44 t 3T614,ol-L- v I cc- Tc D+1 69.-715/L47,-? Co' 1 eh Li 8-- CoNcraerrr--71-(_ Le) 0-r).16- [-A,)^1-a --, Cr (-J(6 UJ20L_O DT- -r) 0-)6a-rci -1=igt 1.4p61.- LAJ Tht -1.0 LA-n(4N ti 1TP cktiCq,?, 4C.-Ti \ID Das 6 64-Ice- 4->oi-reeez_ F-Dt.),10 L4 e.._51 Zia L1.-1 + 2vT Cs74-acri TL--("*- CV L-1 S ThZcYJ 11 er 1-11‘. „j7-11.c.cc4 k 1 tS Ai-Yr;2 11-114"C""' C' ID C . 0-1 01.1‘ • H KA/ • THE SAN DIEGO UNION-WHO' tial treatment to, any individual or in 1994 whose major provisions groupon, the basis of race, sex, blocking services to illegal immi- Davis color, ethnicity, or national origin in grants never took'effect. the operation of public employment, — , .',,Bustamante wantedsDaVis to drop ill appoint panel public education, or public contract- the appeal filed by former Gov. Pete On:legal outreach •, • Wilson, a Republican who became Polanco said when his bill was the main supporter of Proposition 187.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons from the Deukmejian Era for Contemporary California State Budgeting
    FROM JERRY­RIGGED TO PETERED OUT: LESSONS FROM THE DEUKMEJIAN ERA FOR CONTEMPORARY CALIFORNIA STATE BUDGETING Daniel J.B. Mitchell, UCLA Ho­Su Wu Professor of Management and Public Policy The new governor took office in the midst of a major state budget crisis. At the time he took office, it was unclear that state could pay its bills if drastic action were not taken. Yet the incoming governor was committed to a no­tax­increase program. Through borrowing, the state managed to surmount its budget crisis. As the economy recovered and resulting tax revenue flowed in, it even was able to engage in major construction projects. When he stood for re­ election, the governor was overwhelmingly returned to office for a second term. Sadly, however, the economy began to slow during that second term. Fears mounted that the state could face a renewed budget crisis. This description may seem to depict the career to date of Arnold Schwarzenegger. He inherited a budget crisis from Gray Davis who he replaced in the 2003 recall. But the introductory vignette actually refers to the story of George Deukmejian (“Duke”) who was first elected in 1982, inheriting a budget crisis from Jerry Brown. (Deukmejian’s construction projects leaned towards prisons for most of his terms in office, needed as state sentencing laws tightened, rather than the roads and other infrastructure pushed by Schwarzenegger.) And as it turned out, the economic downturn that began to take shape towards the end of Deukmejian’s second term indeed did produce a major budget crisis, a legacy he left for his successor, Pete Wilson.
    [Show full text]
  • Paybacks Policy, Patrons, and Personnel
    PAYBACKS POLICY, PATRONS, AND PERSONNEL Maria Weidner, Earthjustice Nancy Watzman, Public Campaign How the Bush Administration is Giving Away Our Environment to Corporate Contributors ABOUT US Earthjustice is a nonprofit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife. Earthjustice defends the right of all people to a healthy environment and brings about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations and communities. White House Watch is a project of Earthjustice that monitors administrative actions – including nominations and appointments, regu- latory developments, and shifts in federal policy – and uncovers attempts to weaken the nation’s existing environmental and public health safeguards. Note: While Earthjustice recognizes the influence that campaign contributions have on envi- ronmental policy, the organization has not taken a position on campaign finance reform legislation. Public Campaign is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to sweeping reform that aims to dramatically reduce the role of special interest money in America’s elections and the influence of big contributors in American politics. Public Campaign is laying the foundation for reform by working with various organizations, particularly citizen groups around the country that are fighting for change in their states. Together we are building a network of state-based efforts and create a powerful national force for federal reform. Note: Public
    [Show full text]
  • ED444608.Pdf
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 444 608 JC 000 457 AUTHOR Martinez, Katherine, Ed. TITLE FACCCTS: The Journal of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, 1998-1999. INSTITUTION California Community Colleges, Sacramento. Faculty Association. PUB DATE 1999-00-00 NOTE 146p.; Published four times a year. PUB TYPE Collected Works Serials (022) JOURNAL CIT FACCCTS: The Journal of California Community College Faculty; v5 n1-4 Sep 1998-May 1999 EDRS PRICE MF01/PC06 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *College Faculty; *Community Colleges; Educational Finance; Educational Trends; *Governance; Legislators; Political Candidates; *Retirement Benefits; Two Year Colleges IDENTIFIERS *California Community Colleges ABSTRACT This document contains the four Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (FACCCTS) newsletters published during the 1998-99 academic year. In the September 1998 issue, faculty members talk about what shared governance means and how to improve it on individual campuses. The issue also features Gray Davis' plans forthe community colleges if he is elected governor and presents endorsements to support education-friendly candidates for the November 3 election. The December 1998 issue explains how to calculate new retirement benefits in the State Teachers' Retirement System, how the changes affect all faculties, andwho faculty should thank for the improvements. Faculty member Carolyn Russell gives a first-person account about the grassroots efforts that successfully convinced state legislators to pass the retirement package. The February 1999 issue features Assemblywomen Gloria Romero and Charlene Zettel and their commitment to helping community colleges receive the funding they need to do their jobs well. It also provides a list of legislators and their primary community college districts.
    [Show full text]
  • The California Recall History Is a Chronological Listing of Every
    Complete List of Recall Attempts This is a chronological listing of every attempted recall of an elected state official in California. For the purposes of this history, a recall attempt is defined as a Notice of Intention to recall an official that is filed with the Secretary of State’s Office. 1913 Senator Marshall Black, 28th Senate District (Santa Clara County) Qualified for the ballot, recall succeeded Vote percentages not available Herbert C. Jones elected successor Senator Edwin E. Grant, 19th Senate District (San Francisco County) Failed to qualify for the ballot 1914 Senator Edwin E. Grant, 19th Senate District (San Francisco County) Qualified for the ballot, recall succeeded Vote percentages not available Edwin I. Wolfe elected successor Senator James C. Owens, 9th Senate District (Marin and Contra Costa counties) Qualified for the ballot, officer retained 1916 Assemblyman Frank Finley Merriam Failed to qualify for the ballot 1939 Governor Culbert L. Olson Failed to qualify for the ballot Governor Culbert L. Olson Filed by Olson Recall Committee Failed to qualify for the ballot Governor Culbert L. Olson Filed by Citizens Olson Recall Committee Failed to qualify for the ballot 1940 Governor Culbert L. Olson Filed by Olson Recall Committee Failed to qualify for the ballot Governor Culbert L. Olson Filed by Olson Recall Committee Failed to qualify for the ballot 1960 Governor Edmund G. Brown Filed by Roderick J. Wilson Failed to qualify for the ballot 1 Complete List of Recall Attempts 1965 Assemblyman William F. Stanton, 25th Assembly District (Santa Clara County) Filed by Jerome J. Ducote Failed to qualify for the ballot Assemblyman John Burton, 20th Assembly District (San Francisco County) Filed by John Carney Failed to qualify for the ballot Assemblyman Willie L.
    [Show full text]