Does your state lean blue or lean red? Check out our new report, highlighting partisan control of state government from 1992-2013.
Arizona Humane Farms, Proposition 204 (2006)
| Arizona Constitution |
|---|
|
| Articles |
| Preamble • I • II • III • IV • V • VI • VI.I • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI • XII • XIII • XIV • XV • XVI • XVII • XVIII • XIX • XX • XXI • XXII • XXV • XXVI • XXVII • XXVIII • XXIX • XXX |
Contents |
Election results
| Humane Farms | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
 Yes | 926,913 | 62% | ||
| No | 569,190 | 38% | ||
Text of measure
The language that appeared on the ballot:
Analysis by Legislative Council
Beginning January 1, 2013, Proposition 204 would amend the Arizona criminal code to make it a class 1 misdemeanor to tether or confine a pig during pregnancy or a calf raised for veal on a farm for all or the majority of a day in a manner that prevents the animal from lying down and fully extending its limbs or turning around freely. The law would not apply to:
1. Pigs or calves during transportation.
2. Pigs or calves in rodeo exhibitions, state or county fair exhibitions or other similar exhibitions.
3. The lawful slaughter of pigs or calves.
4. Pigs or calves involved in lawful scientific or agricultural research.
5. Pigs or calves while undergoing an examination, test, treatment or operation for veterinary purposes.
6. A pig during the seven day period before the pig's expected date of giving birth.
Proposition 204 would tentatively establish an enforcement and administration fund consisting of fines, penalties and other monies generated by the enforcement of this proposition and donations made to the fund. This fund would only be fully implemented if a court ultimately determined that creation of this fund is required by a separate state law dealing with the funding of programs created by a vote of the people.
Fiscal Impact Statement
State law requires the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) Staff to prepare a summary of the fiscal impact of certain ballot measures. State and local governments may receive additional revenues in the form of fines and penalty assessments from violators of provisions of Proposition 204. The language of the proposition states that the measure does not impose mandatory expenditure of state revenues for any purpose. If, however, a court rules that the proposition results in mandatory expenditure of state revenue, a Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Fund is established and funded through enforcement related revenue and donations. The total amount of fines will depend on the level of compliance, which is difficult to predict in advance.
Campaign finance
Donors to the campaign for the measure:
- Arizonans for Humane Farms in Support of I-07-2006: $1,696,817
- Total: $1,696,817
Donors to the campaign against the measure:
- Campaign for AZ Farmers and Ranchers Against I-07-2006: $1,242,739
- Total: $1,242,739
- Overall Total: $2,939,555
See also
- Arizona 2006 ballot measures
- Arizona State Senate
- Arizona House of Representatives
- 2006 ballot measures
External links
- Arizona Secretary of State, 2006 Ballot Propositions & Judicial Performance Review Proposition 204
- National Conference of State Legislatures Ballot Measures Database
References
| |||||
