From the moment Legislative Republicans, in their positions as the majority party in the State Legislature, inserted biased and vague wording in explanatory language on several initiatives scheduled to appear on the November ballot, Democrats cried foul and sought redress.
These initiatives are:
- “SCR 1032, which would require school districts, no matter their size, to dedicate at least 60 percent of operational spending to direct instructional expenses. With no context as to how existing education funding requirements are structured, this leaves voters with little information about how school districts, especially rural districts, will be affected by this initiative.
- HCR 2001, which would require voters to present valid government-issued proof of identity before casting a ballot in every election. Senate Democrats warned that the summary does not explain that the measure requires all voters provide ID when voting by mail, instead of signing the ballot envelope like they do now.
- HCR 2040, which would put additional restrictions on public labor organizations even though they are already prevented from using public monies. While initially framed around teachers’ unions, Senate Democrats agreed with public safety unions that the proposal likely has broader implications affecting all public employee organizations, including those representing police officers and firefighters.
- HCR 2048 is described as preventing the confiscation of scholarship accounts, including Empowerment Saving Accounts (ESAs), for children of military families, but Senate Democrats pointed out that the summary leaves out that the measure would invalidate any other measure looking to reform ESAs and restrict future legislatures and initiatives from making any changes to ESAs, including any measure which may be included on the 2026 ballot.”
Commenting on Legislative Republicans muscling their partisan perspectives into these referrals, State Senate Democratic Leader Priya Sundareshan wrote on July 8:
“Arizona voters deserve honesty, not confusion. The language voters read describing these initiatives should clearly explain what these measures would do, not obscure or exaggerate their consequences. Today Republicans repeatedly injected clear bias into this language in an attempt to influence voters, exactly what is prohibited by state law. Every voter deserves to know exactly what they’re voting on. Senate Democrats pledge to continue informing voters about the substance of each referral. We’ll continue fighting for transparency because informed voters are essential to a healthy Democracy.”
Senator Lauren Kuby said:
“This is about whether voters receive clear, complete information before they cast their ballots. When language leaves out key impacts or adds political talking points, it becomes harder for voters, not easier, to understand exactly what they’re being asked to approve.”
Senator Brian Fernandez offered:
“Arizonans should never have to guess what a ballot measure actually does. The ballot is where voters make some of the most important decisions affecting their communities. They deserve language that is accurate, transparent and complete.”
With the dispute over the writing of these ballot referrals, it was off to the courts to let judges decide whether what the Republicans did meets the political smell test.
Before yesterday, this was the status of the court proceedings on several initiatives.
“HCR2001 (the one looking to put restrictions on onsite and mail in voting by imposing additional identification requirements)– judge ruled there is no separate amendment violation, but an appeal has been filed
HCR2003 – judge ruled there is no single subject violation; no notice of appeal has been filed
HCR2044 – judge ruled there is no separate amendment violation; no notice of appeal has been filed
HCR2040 – oral argument was held on July 23; awaiting court decision
HCR2048 – oral argument was held on July 24; Democrats filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff; awaiting court decision”
With regard to HCR2048, the measure designed to neuter the Protect Education Initiative (now Proposition 212) and its goal of needed reforms on the welfare/scam for the wealthy and fraudster Empowerment Scholarship Private School/Indoctrination Center accounts, briefs from both sides were filed regarding the pamphlet language written by Legislative Republicans, with oral arguments scheduled before Judge Daniel Martin on August 6.
On Tuesday, the court did rule on HCR2040, the measure to curtail the power of all unions in the state, especially the Arizona Education Association.
In a victory for Democracy and the rights of organized labor, the court ruled against the Republican-written HCR2040, declaring it violated Article Twenty-One, Section One of the Arizona State Constitution, and ordered the Secretary of State’s office to remove it from the November ballot.
Posting on the ruling, Arizona Education Association President Marisol Garcia wrote:
“Today working families WON!
Bus drivers, counselors, teachers, firefighters, public safety won!
The courts ruling kicked 2040 off the ballot..but elections have consequences.
We will vote for those who stand with labor!”
Commenting on the court victory, Senator Sundareshan posted:
“Good riddance to this attack on unions, including educators and public safety, which Republicans – and only Republicans – tried to put on the November ballot!”
Senate Democrats released the below joint statement:
House Assistant Democratic Leader Nancy Gutierrez posted:
In a social media post, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said:
“…We just got great news, which is that a Superior Court judge just struck down as illegal HCR 2040, which was the measure that was referred to the ballot by Warren Peterson, my opponent, that would have prevented police officers and firefighters from advocating for higher pay and for better conditions on the job. This is just one of a hundred times when Warren Peterson has not supported pro-law enforcement legislation.
So great decision from the Superior Court today, but no doubt Warren Peterson and these other folks in the legislature who voted for this will try to appeal this, but I will continue to fight in the courts on behalf of our police officers and our firefighters. So great day, we’ll see you guys soon.”
The Arizona Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee posted:
Republican Anti Union Legislator and Lobbyist Matt Gress tried to masage his defeat by posting:
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.