Arizona opinion: No on Propositions 134, 136, 137
There are several ill-advised Propositions on the 2024 ballot. Given the slim majority of the AZ Legislature, it is way too easy for them to clutter and confuse our ballots. Most all of these Props are bad or unneeded, designed to give the Legislature more control, and the voters less. Please study each of the 13 Props and remember not to carelessly give away your citizen rights. Here are three of many coming to you soon.
PROPOSITION 134 — Vote No. A Constitutional Amendment that would change the Citizen Initiative laws to require that qualified voter signatures come from each of the 30 legislative districts, instead of at-large. The requirement remains 10% and 15% for state statute and AZ Constitutional changes, respectively — but changing where the signatures must be gathered would significantly increase the cost and logistics for Citizen Initiative proponents. Petition carriers would have to go into every corner of every LD, just to qualify for consideration on a ballot. This signature requirement from each LD would give rural districts an essential veto over state law changes that voters statewide may want.
This trend is being promoted in other states by Legislatures hostile to current Citizen Initiative rights. In AZ, they want voters to change the current at-large signature gathering to an electoral college-like framework. This would allow powerful donors to try to game the system. Getting the number of vetted voter signatures needed is already difficult; this change would make it nearly impossible.
If passed, this would create a double standard: a simple majority vote for the Legislature, but a nearly impossible hurdle for regular citizens. The Legislature is AGAIN trying to move the goalposts for citizens and their ballot initiative rights. The framers of our AZ Constitution wanted individual voters, not just their legislative districts, to influence the laws that govern us. We already have rule by legislative districts, in the form of Arizona House and Senate Legislators.
PROPOSITION 136 — Vote No. A Constitutional Amendment that would allow anyone to sue to invalidate a Citizen's Initiative, even before it is put on the ballot for voters to consider — yet after the signatures have been gathered and submitted. This enables one plaintiff and one judge to challenge and potentially rule an initiative unconstitutional — even if it has already been reviewed by Legislative attorneys for state and US constitutional compliance.
These Citizen Initiatives generally happen to correct a bad law or pass one that's been needed but ignored by the Legislature for years. With these changes, the opposition could go straight to the courts before the election, saving themselves the cost of a public campaign to defeat the measure on its merits. Conversely, it would force Initiative proponents to immediately spend money on litigation, in addition to the campaign for adoption. This would create significant extra fundraising demands and distraction for the Citizen Initiative proponents.
PROPOSITION 137 — Vote No. This Constitutional Amendment would remove the retention process for most state judges, appellate judges, and Supreme Court justices in the four most populous counties. By eliminating voters' decision to renew a judge's term, it gives these judges a near-lifetime appointment. In AZ, we've seen Senate confirmation repeatedly withheld for judge and cabinet appointments when partisan politics prevail. By removing term limits, it lets the former majority judicial appointments become permanently seated, and leaves the new governor weakened. Further, lifetime appointments can create entrenchment and extremism with no practical recourse. This move is clearly political gamesmanship. Why would Arizonans sign on for the problems we are experiencing with SCOTUS, and once again give away our rights?
Our Arizona rights to self-autonomy, voting rights, a strong public education system, and full representation are continuously being challenged. Stay vigilant about all Propositions on the ballot and consider voting to protect our rights and institutions.
Julie Pindzola is a 30+ year resident of Arizona, a graduate of NAU, and a retired Prescott city planner.
Subscribe to stay connected to Tucson. A subscription helps you access more of the local stories that keep you connected to the community.
