Arizona ballot news
From Ballotpedia
| ||
| Propositions • | Recall | • Law |
Here you'll find a collection of ballot news stories from Arizona.
Low voter turnout in Arizona city brings the idea of all mail-in election
BULLHEAD CITY, Arizona: During a two-hour city council on November 19, 2009, City Clerk Diane Heilmann presented a report that she conducted that highlighted the vast monetary differences of a traditional city election and an all mail-in election. The report calls for a mail-in election, that the city clerk states would save the city great amounts of money. Election turnout has been low, yet still costs the city $92,635 per election.[1]
According to Heilmann: “…A traditional election requires payment for poll workers, training for poll workers, set up polling sites (10 sites in BHC), test voting equipment for each polling site, fee for replacement and maintenance of polling site equipment, payment of employees who pick up and deliver materials and ballots at polling sites, and payment for employees who work on board for opening and verifying results. Also, procuring polling site workers is becoming increasingly difficult.”
The report lists the arguments for this type of election:
- Higher percentage of voter participation
- Cleans up voter registration rolls and keeps them current because ballots mailed are non-forwardable
- Automatically meets early voting provisions
- Easier for shut-in and other limited-access voters
Six states propose marijuana measures amid a rise in support
Arizona, California, Florida, Minnesota, Oregon, South Dakota: Thus far six states throughout the country have proposed a total of six marijuana related measures for the 2010 ballot. The propositions follow the approval of Maine's Question 5, a measure that proposed creating nonprofit dispensaries to help patients get a safe supply of their medicine. It also proposed establishing a statewide ID card system to protect patients from arrest.
Shortly after the approval of Question 5, the American Medical Association announced that they reversed their position on marijuana. Additionally, the association has since urged the federal government to remove marijuana from Schedule One of the Controlled Substances Act.[2] According to a Gallup poll, support for marijuana has increased. In October 2009, they reported 44% of Americans were in favor of full legalization of marijuana, compared to 31% in 2000.[3]
Tribal leader in favor of December measure placed on leave
Arizona: Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr. was placed on administrative leave by the Tribal Council on October 26, 2009. Ironically, Shirley has been promoting a measure that will appear on the December ballot that would reduce the number of tribal council members.
According to news outlets, council members received reports relating to Shirley and his dealings with contractors who provide satellite and wireless services to the tribe and a loan agreement. According Shirley, Jr.: "I wasn't informed about what the allegations are," he said in a news release. "All that's out there is hearsay. . . . I certainly believe I'll be exonerated. We've got nothing to hide."[4]
Arkansas group backing illegal immigration measure
LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas: The initiative committee known as Secure Arkansas are spearheading the effort to place an measure on the 2010 ballot that would require anyone who is at least 14 years of age to sign an oath saying they are legal residents or citizens in the country. This would be done is that person is seeking benefit. However, verification would not be needed if a person were seeking emergency medical treatment, prenatal care or public school enrollment.[5]
Circulation has begun for the measure, as the group’s efforts were certified by the Attorney General on October 14, 2009. A letter on their website read as follows:
- “You can help prevent your tax dollars from subsidizing illegal aliens!
- Attorney General, Dustin McDaniel, approved our Initiated Constitutional Amendment today, October 14, 2009. Jeannie Burlsworth, our Chairman, is bringing the Amendment to the Secretary of State Thursday, October 15, so it can be published in the Democrat-Gazette. (Legally, it has to be published in the newspaper.)
- Stand by! It won't be long before we can collect our first signatures. We need 77,503 signatures of registered Arkansas voters to get this Amendment put on the ballot, BUT our goal is 100,000 (in case some are thrown out).”
Arizona judge voids 2009 law
PHOENIX, Arizona: On October 30, 2009, an Arizona Superior Court Judge ruled that a law, passed in 2009, violates the state constitution. The law, which requires Pinal County to have a 5 member board of county supervisors and to elect two members in 2010, goes against the part of the Constitution that bans “local or special laws,” according to the judge.
Arizona law requires that a county with a population of more than 200,000 must have 5 county supervisors. Pinal County had under 200,000 people at the time. The law was passed by legislature earlier this year.[6]
The National Initiative For Democracy releases youtube video
PHOENIX, Arizona:
The National Initiative For Democracy video groups released a video today in preparation for a full length documentary about the need for a national voter initiative process.
The NI4D Money Bomb |
Supreme Court Justice O’Connor to hear Arizona voting-rights case
TUCSON, Arizona: This week retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor will be sitting on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for two days. O'Connor will be hearing approximately five cases. One of the cases involves a voting-rights case. Specifically, O'Connor will be hearing Gonzales v. The State of Arizona which involves 2004's Proposition 200. Proposition 200, which was approved by voters, requires voters to show identification before voting. In 2008 the state won the case after arguing that the proposition was not intentionally discriminatory.[7]
Arizona Representative not charged in false statement about petition
PHOENIZ, Arizona: Arizona Representative Russell Jones cannot be charged for falsely stating he was present when residents signed a petition for his candidacy for the state senate in 2006. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled on September 24, 2009 that a person could not be charged for falsely stating presence, and can only be charged for submitting an invalid petition.
State law says that any candidate circulating a petition must be present to witness signatures. However, when Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas investigated the claim, he found that Jones was in Phoenix at the Legislature during signature gathering.[8]
Medical marijuana initiative gaining steam for 2010
PHOENIX, Arizona: The Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, a group organizing a petition drive, is backing a potential statewide measure that would allow residents in Arizona with specific medical conditions to be treated with certain amounts of marijuana for personal use.
So far, according to group manager Andrew Myers, the group has collected about 125,000 signatures, but still need to collect more to meet the required amount of 153,365 by July 2010. According to Myers: “This is going incredibly well and better than I would have anticipated”.[9]
Arizona among states wanting health care amendments
PHOENIX, Arizona: Arizona is one of many states hoping to have constitutional amendments placed on future ballots in relation to health care. Backers of such amendments are opposed to President Barack Obama’s new health care plans, and are hoping that these potential ballot measures would stop federal intervention on the issue.
According to Representative Nancy Barto: "It became very clear that the direction for what they call health-care reform at the federal level was putting at risk our health care freedoms, and we need to move quickly to make sure citizens are protected."
Lawmakers are hoping that passage of these constitutional amendments would prohibit restrictions on a person’s right to choose private health care. However, some experts say if a federal health care overhaul were to be passed, it would negate a successful statewide health care constitutional amendment.[10]
October 5 deadline draws closer in Arizona county
MARICOPA COUNTY, Arizona: Voters in Maricopa County have a deadline to make if they want to have their hand in deciding local ballot issues, and it’s coming closer. In order to vote in the November 3, 2009 election, voters must register by October 5, 2009. Local issues such as Propositions 400 and 401 are hot topics in the area, and local newspapers aren’t letting voters forget about registration procedures.
Included in the listed procedures include registration by mail, online registration, permanent early voting and registration age, citizenship and residency requirements.[11]
Arizona sales tax measure may be 2010 initiative
PHOENIX, Arizona: Gov. Jan Brewer is hoping for a sales tax increase measure to be placed on a future ballot, hopefully by way of citizen initiative. According to the governor, there is some hope to have a failed sales tax proposal reappear to lawmakers and temporarily hike up revenue, if enacted by voters.
According to Arizona state law, an initiative would eliminate the mandatory procedure to marshall the votes in the legislature to place the measure on the ballot. If the proposal goes down this path, the soonest an initiative could appear on the ballot is November 2010. According to Brewer, “We’ve got an $11 million budget and we’ve got $7 billion in revenues. Somewhere, somehow, we’ve got to resolve it.”[12]
Pima County's election fraud case yields documentary
PIMA COUNTY, Arizona: A documentary made to highlight events surrounding a recent election fraud case in Arizona will premiere on September 16, 2009 in Pima County. The film follows the case of a $2 billiion bond transportation measure that was passed under "suspicious circumstances".
The film is described as a "true detective story" in which investigator John Brakey investigates elections division personnel and dissects specific areas of a lawsuit filed as a result of the alleged election fraud. According to Brakey, in a dialogue with county supervisors: "This is not about just Pima County. It's about our country." [13]
One local website has called the film "an inspiring story about citizens fighting to regain the integrity of elections, citizens who share the ultimate goal of election transparency."
Arizona city's primary election yields plenty results
PRESCOTT, Arizona: The results from primary election of the city of Prescott, Arizona, held on September 1, 2009 have left the city with more to decide in the general election ballot.
In the aftermath of the election, the city saw Marlin Kuykendall elected as mayor, but did not see the three available city council seats filled. Now, the six candidates that recieved the most votes will see their names on the November 3, 2009 general election ballot. That public vote will be the final say in the issue of the vacant council seats.
Included in the election results is the three-quarters of a cent sales tax increase, which passed overwhelmingly amongst voters.[14]
Arizona legislatures misses sales tax increase dealine
PHOENIX, Arizona: Arizona legislature missed the deadline for Governor Jan Brewer's sales tax increase to appear on the November 3, 2009 ballot. Despite the missed deadline, election officials may provide leniency if possible.
Bob Burns, senate president, stated that he hoped for floor votes to be held soon, then would send the sales tax increase to the Arizona House of Representatives in order for them to review and revise the plan. According to Burns: "That's what we are hoping to be able to do, but (we are) not 100 percent clear on that at this point,"[15]
Gilbert tax increase referendum supporters submit signatures
GILBERT, Arizona: Supporters of moving three recently approved tax increases to the November 3, 2009 city-wide ballot submitted a total of 2,513 signatures on the sales tax petition, 2,462 on the use tax petition and 2,378 on the rental tax petition. Referendum supporters were required to collect a minimum of 1,749 signatures for each of the three measures.[16] The council adopted the tax increases in an attempt to close the city's $15-million budget deficit.[17] Referendum supporters, however, said that the tax increases are too simplistic and will only bolster similar problems in years to come.[18]
According to the town attorney, the council's votes cannot be subjected to a referendum. However, some council members said that they are contemplating not rejecting the petitions and delaying the final vote on the town budget until August 1, 2009. The new taxes are scheduled to go into effect September 1, 2009.[16]
Arizona budget stalled by sales tax increase initiative
Phoenix, Arizona: On Friday, lawmakers attempted to pass a state budget for the new fiscal year which began July 1, 2009. But, by the end of the day, lawmakers found themselves at yet another stalemate on the already late budget. The major point of contention is the Gov. Jan Brewer's proposal to place a temporary one-cent hike in the 5.6 percent sales tax rate on the November 2009 ballot for voters.[19] Lawmakers approved a state budget in June but only days later Brewer vetoed the bill because it did not include the sales tax measure.[20] The sales tax increase, if placed on the ballot and approved by voters, would be a temporary three-year temporary increase. Republican Senators Pamela Gorman and Ron Gould have already stated that they are opposed to the governor's tax measure. However on Friday morning Sen. Jack Harper announced that he would support the measure but only if additional spending reductions are made to the budget The spending reduction includes reducing the number of state and university workers by 5% by February 2010. Harper previously argued, "As long as others are driving up the spending in state government, it’s not my responsibility to provide them the revenues," in regards to the sales tax measure.[21] Democrat lawmakers said that they too are uncomfortable approving the sales tax measure because they don't want to use sales taxes paid by consumers in order to balance the budget.[19] According to Brewer, "If we don't get additional revenue in 2011, it will be a disaster. 2012 will be a major catastrophe."[22]
Arizona residents want town's tax increases to go on the ballot
GILBERT, Arizona: Some residents of Gilbert, Arizona are not happy with the latest set of tax increases passed by the Gilbert Town Council in response to falling tax revenues. Kevin Ross, a county assessor who lives in Gilbert, has initiated a petition drive to collect signatures in order to force a city-wide public vote on three taxes approved by the town council. He must collect 1,749 signatures for each of the three referenda by July 31.
The three taxes recently enacted by Gilbert's politicians are :
- An increase in the city's sales tax from 1.5% to 1.75%. This tax increase, according to the resolution approved by the town council, would be imposed for 30 months.
- An extension of a 1.5% rental tax to all residential rental properties. Currently, people who own just one rental unit are exempted from the tax.
- The creation of a one percent (1%) use tax on items purchased outside Gilbert but used in town.[23]
Supporters of the bill maintain that it is necessary to maintain some revenue input in the face of the economic downturn. Opponents, however, feel this method is too simplistic and will only bolster similar problems in years to come. Councilwoman Jenn Daniels, who voted against the increase, said that these problems would most likely recur over the next two years and that the town would feel these tax increases with greater severity. She also said that cutting spending instead of adopting a tax hike would send a message to struggling families that all social entities will make sacrifices to save money, including the state government.[24]
Gilbert is located in Maricopa County and as of a 2007 census report is estimated to have 207,550 residents.[25]
An attorney for the town says that Arizona law does not allow town tax hikes to be forced to a public vote using the veto referendum process.
Arizona governor wants sales tax measure on November ballot
PHOENIX, Arizona: Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer wants to place the issue of a temporary one-cent hike in the 5.6 percent sales tax rate on the November ballot for voters. In late June state lawmakers submitted an approved spending plan for fiscal year 2010, however, the plan did not include the governor's sales tax. A day later, Brewer vetoed the bill. According, to state officials the state is facing an approximately $3 billion deficit for FY 2010. Brewer said that although the legislatively approved budget includes several budget cuts, it isn't enough. The sales tax recommended by the governor specifically would ask voters to hike the tax to 6.6 cents, a penny increase, on every dollar of taxable items purchased. According to state officials the proposed tax is expected to generate approximately $1 billion a year.[26] Yesterday, Republican lawmakers announced that they are likely to approve the governor's proposal to place the sales tax increase on the ballot.[27]
Arizona Supreme Court hears arguments on First Things First challenge
PHOENIX, Arizona: The Arizona Supreme Court has started hearing arguments on both sides of a challenge to lawmakers attempted sweep of funds from the First Things First fund in January 2009. Challengers petitioned the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the legislators' removal of millions of dollars from the fund. First Thing First is a fund created as a result of Proposition 203 in 2006. The fund is comprised of revenue from an 80-cents-per-pack tax on cigarettes. Funds are generally used for children's health care. According to the Arizona Constitution, lawmakers can alter the original proposition but only if it is approved by 2/3rds of the legislature and if the change advances the original purpose of the policy. Some argue that this limits the movement of funds within the structure and duties of the Arizona Early Childhood Development and Health Board, said Paul Eckstein, an attorney representing the board. Solicitor General Mary O’Grady, acting on behalf of Gov. Jan Brewer, argued that the intiative's statutory wording, "except as otherwise provided by law," permitted the relocation of the funds to the general fund, as legislators had chosen to do in January.[28]
Campaign committee formed to support Prescott ballot measure
PRESCOTT, Arizona: A campaign committee, called Vote YES for Streets, has been established to support a three-quarters of a cent sales tax extension that will be on the September 1st primary election ballot. The committee will hold four open houses, all beginning at 6 p.m., to allow interested citizens to learn more about the ballot measure. [29]
Represented on the committee are representatives from the Yavapai County Contractors Association and the Citizens Tax Committee. Committee co-chairman Jason Gisi added a statement emphasizing voters' knowledge of the measure:
“Passage of this ballot proposition will go a long way toward improving the transportation network of streets and roads in Prescott,” according to committee chairman Jason Gisi. He added, “voters need to understand that the proposed three-quarters of a cent sales tax won’t actually become effective until 2016, and represents a decrease from the current 1% sales tax that continues through 2015."
Arizona Senate supports ban on public campaign money
PHOENIX, Arizona: A proposal to ban the use of public money for campaign funding, known as SCR1025, was supported by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the full Senate last month. On June 22, 2009 the Senate voted 17-12 in favor of the constitutional amendment to the November 2010 general election ballot.[30] The resolution now goes to the Arizona House of Representatives for consideration for the 2010 ballot.
The resolution calls for the elimination of funding for the state’s public financing program for candidates for state office.[31] If accepted, surcharges on all civil, criminal, traffic fines and dollar-for-dollar tax credits available for campaign donations will end.[32] In 1998, voters voted in favor of the campaign funding system. Since 1998, candidates running for legislative seats and statewide offices have used the funding system to run for office. However, candidates are not required to use the public funds.[33]
Tucson safety initiative means more taxes for residents
TUCSON, Arizona: This November Tucson residents will not only be voting on the "Public Safety First Initiative," a proposed City Charter amendment, this fall but they will also determine if the city's taxes should be increased. The safety initiative addresses increasing staffing levels for fire and police departments but in turn will force the city to impose property or sales tax increases to cover the new expenses, if the measure is approved by voters. According to Tucson city officials the additional positions will cost the city an additional $50 million per year. An alternative revenue source would be cutting five city staff positions, said Interim Deputy Budget Director Marie Nemerguth.[34] The measure calls for 350 additional police officers. Safety initiative sponsors said that any move by the city council to put an initiative or a tax increase to pay for the extra officers on the fall ballot would show "bad faith" towards the initiative and officers.[35]
Legislators in six states consider health insurance reform proposal
State legislators and activists in six states are considering a proposal that would allow people in their state to opt out of any federally-mandated health insurance plans that may be enacted by the federal government. According to Christine Herrera of the American Legislative Exchange Council, their state legislator members have endorsed a resolution that opposes a Medicare-modeled federal health plan. "Our state legislatures are looking at what's going on in Washington as trampling state's rights," she said, and as a result, some state legislators are looking for ways to allow their state's residents to opt out of any coming federal mandates.[36]
In Arizona, legislators have already placed the Arizona Health Insurance Reform Amendment (2010) on their 2010 ballot. Similar measures are under consider in Indiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota and Wyoming.[36]
Arizona legislator Phil Lopes, a Democrat, is opposed to this approach, saying, "The proponents of this are saying the system we have now works and we don't want any kind of reform. This flies in the face of what the public tells us they want." In a state legislative dialogue that has crossed state lines, Wisconsin Republican legislator Leah Vukmir says, "The real goal of national health insurance exchange isn't competition -- it's a federal power grab that flies in the face of the Tenth Amendment."[36]
Arizona affirmative-action ban on 2010 ballot
Arizona: On June 22, the Arizona State Senate passed a resolution to place a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment on the November 2010 ballot that would ban affirmative action (preferential treatment based on race and gender largely regarding employment and education).
The measure is identical to the unsuccessful 2008 proposal, called Arizona Proposition 104 (2008), which failed due to lack of a sufficient number of valid signatures from Arizona voters.[37]
Former California Board of Regent Ward Connerly, who led the 2008 effort, held a press conference after the ballot referral was approved. He said that banning such preferential-treatment programs would "do so in the mirror image of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 that outlawed racial segregation and solidified equal rights for all citizens". Similarly, Representative Steve Montenegro, who along with Senator Russell Pearce led the successful passing of the referral, said that "the referendum will eliminate racial and gender preference programs...that send minorities a message that they are inferior and in need of special treatment to be successful".
Opposition has been heard from Representative Kyrsten Sinema, who in 2008 formed a coalition opposed to Connerly's efforts called "Protect Arizona's Freedom". While not actively leading opposition efforts currently, she maintains her objections to the proposal on the grounds that it eliminates essential programs for keeping women and students of color in college.[38]
Are Racinos in Arizona's future?
PHOENIX, Arizona. Andy Tobin, a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives, is urging his fellow state legislators to consider allowing "racetrack casinos" or "racinos" in the state as a way of making up for tax revenues that are fast declining in the state's economic recession.[39]
Tobin says that allowing racinos in Arizona might be a way to mend the state's $3 billion budget deficit without having to raise taxes. Gov. Jan Brewer has called for a temporary tax hike.
Arizona voters rejected racinos in 2002.
Arizona legislators advance health care proposition
PHOENIX, Arizona. On May 26, 2009, a health-care reform proposal whose supporters want to see it on the November 2010 ballot in Arizona progressed a step through the Arizona State Legislature when House Concurrent Resolution 2014 was approved by the House Health and Human Services Committee on a 6-3 party line vote. on a 6-3 party line vote. It is sponsored by Nancy Barto.[40]
HCR 2014 would amend the Arizona Constitution by barring any rules or regulations that force Arizonans to participate in a health-care system. The proposed amendment would also ensure that individuals have the right to pay for private health insurance.[41]
The Arizona Health Insurance Reform Amendment is similar to a November 2008 proposition that narrowly failed, Proposition 101. However, the new version has some changes that take into account the main criticism levied against the 2008 measure. The new version ensures that patients covered under the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System will not be negatively impacted if the amendment passes. In 2008, AHCCCS officials argued that Proposition 101 would increase costs by preventing the agency from requiring patients to seek services from within its network of providers.[41]
Having been approved by the House Health and Human Services Committee, the proposal now goes to the full Arizona House of Representatives. If approved there, it will then be taken under consideration by the Arizona Senate.[41]
Arizona medical marijuana initiative planned for 2010 ballot
Arizona: Marijuana activists are preparing a medical marijuana ballot initiative for the 2010 ballot in Arizona. Voters have been asked on several previous occasions to relax the state's drug laws, notably with Proposition 200, Proposition 300, Proposition 301, and Proposition 203.
According to The Arizona Republic, "The initiative would allow individuals with illnesses ranging from cancer to HIV/AIDS or glaucoma to seek a doctor's recommendation for medical marijuana... Eligible individuals would be able to purchase up to 2 1/2 ounces of the drug every 14 days from a series of non-profit outlets, known as dispensaries. Patients in rural areas of the state could cultivate a limited number of their own marijuana plants." [42]
See also
References
| |||||
