Arizona has historically celebrated its constitution’s progressive nature, including the citizen initiative. In fact, when the territory’s constitution was originally submitted to President Taft, he vetoed it because it provided for the citizen recall of judges. The offending language was removed, Taft signed the statehood proclamation in Feb. 1912, and almost immediately the new Arizona legislature reinserted the recall provision into the state constitution. Take that, feds! Nothing’s changed.
Recently, however, the far-right, looney tune legislature has grown suspicious of citizen governance, particularly when people want to enact policies that actually help them as opposed to big business or the big god. Arizona’s GOP hasn’t exactly been shy about trying to silence the public, especially as that public becomes younger, more diverse and less Republican.
In 2008, roughly 291,000 Latinos voted in the state’s general election; this year, that number was approximately 550,000, an increase of 89 percent.
When the good people of wonderful little Bisbee banned plastic bags from their stores, for instance, the business interests at the legislature, and in the executive office, marshaled forces, and officials quickly passed a law making it illegal for towns to be more environmentally concerned than the bozos at the legislature.
Same with guns: When Tucson attempted to take more weapons off the street, the NRA wing of the Arizona legislature (well, more the center than a wing) passed another law nullifying Tucson’s efforts. Similarly, when Arizona voters approved medical marijuana in 2010, elected officials again believed they knew better than the public, and they attempted, unsuccessfully this time, to overturn the voter-approved initiative.
A pattern’s at work: Citizens come up with a good idea that helps, say, working families, schools or the environment; they gather enough signatures to put that idea on the ballot, usually because the legislature won’t vote on the measure itself; the good idea wins at the voting booth, and Arizona’s legislature immediately tries to overturn the people’s victory.
The tipping point for the legislature came last year when grassroot groups were able to gather enough signatures to put a minimum wage increase on the ballot, something the Koch-sponsored, ALEC-driven legislature would never approve. Citizens gathered enough signatures to put the wage question on the ballot, and voters overwhelmingly approved the increase. The next month the Arizona Chamber of Commerce appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, asking it to overturn the voters’ voice. In no uncertain terms, the judges unanimously told the chamber to take a flying fug.
Gosh, what’s a chamber of commerce or legislature full of business knob-suckers to do? Answer: Make it nearly impossible for citizen groups to gather enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballot.
The Arizona legislature accomplished that feat last week when Gov. Ducey signed a bill that prohibits grassroot groups from paying petition workers by the signature, which is how almost all propositions make it to the ballot. Instead, in what Gov. Ducey called a “tweak” to the process, groups now must pay signature gatherers by the hour, something well-heeled corporate interests can do but many grassroots groups can’t. The Arizona Chamber of Commerce was pleased with the outcome, noting that the new law “will add greater rigor and integrity to the initiative process.”
”Greater rigor” all right … enough rigor to put an end to citizen initiatives.
Curiously (or not), the new rules do not apply to elected officials, who can still pay signature gatherers by the name when they’re circulating nominating petitions. Hypocrisy much?
And get this: That new restriction is still not draconian enough for the mostly white fundy Republican leadership at the Capitol, an uneasy group who govern like cornered rats, who must be absolutely certain there’s no way an initiative crafted by civil rights voices can squeak through. After all, George Soros could pay petition workers by the hour! So this week another POS landed that will invalidate any signature that doesn’t conform exactly to the person’s voter roll name and address:
For example, a voter's signature could be disregarded if the signer includes a middle name but the voter-registration rolls do not show that name. If a voter leaves off his or her street designation—such as dropping "road" or "avenue" from their address—it could be tossed. If a petition sheet didn't meet certain standards for size, a judge could throw out all the signatures on that sheet.
Unsurprisingly, again, these new laws, intended to restore “integrity” and all their other unprincipled BS, do not apply to signature gatherers working for the lawmakers. It’s almost like they think they’re special.