Opinion: Don't handcuff Arizona in an emergency. Vote no on Proposition 135
When the coronavirus epidemic broke out in China in 2019, the story felt distant — way over there in East Asia.
And yet there were reports it could one day spread to the rest of the world, making it a topic of budding interest here.
"A talker," as they say.
In Phoenix, some drive-time radio hosts started to crack jokes. The name "coronavirus" evoked the name of a popular Mexican beer , and much fun was had anticipating the coming beer epidemic.
Had we known then how quickly the coronavirus, later to be called COVID-19, would spread by air travel to western Europe, then the United States and all of the Americas, killing 7 million people worldwide and still counting, none of us would have laughed.
Ducey's COVID-19 response angered both sides
The pandemic was the most disruptive event of our generation, leading to shelter-at-home lockdowns, business and school closures, remote work and learning, face-mask mandates and a complete disruption of daily life over years.
As did the governors in other states, then-Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey invoked emergency powers to try to prevent the spread of the disease and to "flatten the curve" so that patient levels did not overwhelm Arizona hospitals and their doctors and nurses.
The pandemic was a mystery, and all of the states waded into its high tide uncertain which new protocols would be most effective at cooling the virus.
Ducey took a centrist path, treating the virus as both a medical and economic emergency — both of which needed to be managed and finessed.
With his executive orders, he made enemies on both sides of the aisle — Democrats who felt he did too little to quell the spread of disease and Republicans who thought he abused his authority with restrictions on civil liberties.
New limits were placed on executive power
Proposition 135 reflects the continuing angst of Republican lawmakers who want to reign in the powers of the governor — the executive — in such declared emergencies.
In 2022, they took the first steps in creating new checks on this executive authority by imposing a 120-day limit on public health emergencies unless extended by a vote of the Legislature.
Now comes a new ballot proposition that would amend the Arizona Constitution to impose tighter limits on the executive's emergency powers.
The proposed law would limit those declarations to 30 days, at which point they would expire, as explained by The Arizona Republic's Stacey Barchenger.
The Legislature could then extend the emergency powers beyond 30 days by a majority vote on a resolution that would not require the governor's signature.
Some emergencies would be exempted, such as a state of war, or fire or flood.
The measure would also give lawmakers new authority "to alter or limit" executive powers as they vote on whether to extend a continued emergency, Barchenger explained.
Emergencies need fast responses. This slows them
While checks and balances are an essential part of American government, in times of emergency such as a pandemic or other biological or radiological events, the government needs to act quickly to gather information, marshal resources, cut through red tape and qualify for federal emergency funding.
A governor needs to be nimble in such instances, to move quickly in the direction of new evidence and rapidly prescribe policy solutions. What is common in normal times — the slow deliberation and consideration of new directives — can become drags in an emergency.
Opinion: This is the sneakiest question on your ballot
As proposed, Proposition 135 demands too much decision-making by consensus and committee during dire moments that require faster action. It would cut against the very logic of "emergency" declarations.
There come times in life — and they are rare — when extraordinary measures are required to cope with quickly gathering threats. Arizona has historically imbued governors, the CEO of the state, with extraordinary powers to act in such emergencies.
Governors, who must run for election across the entire state, tend to be more centrist than lawmakers — many of whom win in districts dominated by their party base , which can demand fealty to more extreme ideals.
The authors of the Arizona Constitution were wise to trust the governor with these enlarged powers in times of crisis.
Arizona should vote no on Proposition 135
Proposition 135 — while well-meaning in its effort to create checks on executive overreach — would potentially inject more politics, more friction and more delay in moments when the state needs to move quickly.
Emergency declarations are reserved for dire moments when we must put greater trust in the executive branch to move quickly to protect the state's population.
Governors who misuse those powers could still be punished at the polls or even face impeachment. Lawmakers always have the bully pulpit to call out bad decisions.
But we know there are times in life when events can come crashing down on us with such ferocity that there isn't time for the typical process and plodding of government.
That is why The Arizona Republic recommends you vote no on Proposition 135.
This is an opinion of The Arizona Republic's editorial board .
