Enjoy an Ads-Free ASFN - lighter and faster too! Become an ASFN-Contributor and help support the site.
Go Back   Arizona Sports Fans Network > Other Stuff > Politics and Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old February 13th, 2007, 05:31 AM   #1
DutchmanAZ
Registered
 

Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: AZ
Posts: 674

Arizona's legislatures at it again...



http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...ative0213.html

As Arizona celebrates its 95th anniversary this week, lawmakers are considering substantial changes to the initiative process carved into the state's Constitution so residents could skirt the Legislature and create their own laws.

Critics fear the proposals will reduce the powers Arizona residents have enjoyed since the Progressive Era of the early 20th century.

But supporters describe the revisions as reform measures that would create a more open process and protect Arizona against laws that could do more harm than good. Some lawmakers want the power to modify a voter-approved law after a few years, and others want initiatives' authors to hold public hearings before submitting their proposals.
Rep. Kirk Adams, R-Mesa, has written proposals that he said would correct flaws in the initiative process. Public hearings on several of them will take place at 1:30 p.m. today in the House Government Committee.

When Arizona became a state on Feb. 14, 1912, Progressive Era principles including the initiative process became part of the Constitution. In 2006, Arizonans approved more initiatives than any other state in the country.

Sierra Club lobbyist Sandy Bahr is among those who question the Legislature's attempts to limit the power of initiatives.

"A lot of times, in the name of reform, people erect additional obstacles," Bahr said. "In this case, the reform would definitely create problems, especially for grass-roots organizations."


'Cooling-off period'
Arizonans approved the Voter Protection Act in 1998 to ensure that voter-approved laws would be protected from Legislative interference. The framers of the Arizona Constitution would have approved of that because they intended to put the little guy's interests over big-money interests, said Paul Bender, an ASU law professor who teaches Arizona constitutional law.

"There are trade-offs here," Bender said about the Voter Protection Act and direct democracy.

"But the framers opted for the people's power over Legislative prerogatives."

Adams said the Voter Protection Act needs to be reformed because it "does not allow us to adjust for changing circumstances. Arizona is the fastest-growing state in the nation. What works for Arizona in 2007 may not work for Arizona in 2012."

One of Adams' proposals would allow the Legislature to change initiatives four years after they are passed by voters.

A similar measure was shot down in the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, 3-2.

Sen. Chuck Gray, R-Mesa, proposed a five-year "cooling-off period" in which voter-approved laws would reign, but after that the Legislature could make changes.




Outside input
When the Legislature makes laws, it has open meetings to assess the merits of a measure. Bills are considered in the Senate and House before being approved by the governor. Even then, Adams said, the Legislature makes errors.

People who propose laws by initiative do not need to take in any outside input. Adams wants initiatives to be debated in a public hearing of a legislative council. The initiatives' authors would not be bound to make any changes.

He said that if his measure had been in place, discussion of a minimum-wage initiative approved by voters in November might have happened earlier. After voters approved an increase in the minimum wage, questions arose about whether developmentally disabled workers should have been included in the increase.

Under Adams' proposal, the legislative council also would write the measure's title, which has raised concerns among public interest advocates.

"Public input is always good, but if it's a hearing that could let the Legislature tinker with an initiative, that's a whole other can of worms," said Carla, the one-named executive director of the McDowell Sonoran Conservancy. Her group was part of the campaign to get Proposition 106, a trust-land protection measure, on the ballot.

Bahr said a legislative council made up of legislators likely would be able to set the agenda for the public hearing and decide who speaks and for how long.

Adams also is proposing that:


• Signatures be collected in multiple counties, which Bahr said would be a cost burden to grass-roots organizations.


• Petitions disclose who is funding the initiative.


• Voters learn at the ballot whether signatures were collected by paid signature gatherers or volunteers.


• People earn a set salary or get paid by the hour for collecting signatures. People now are paid by the signature, so they have an incentive to make up names, Adams said.


Legislator backing
Adams said the initiative process is important, and he is not trying to cut the power of the people to make laws.

If his measures are not accepted, Adams predicted lawmakers would consider more-drastic measures to upend the initiative process.

For example, Adams pointed to a Senate proposal that has not been scheduled for a hearing.

Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, introduced a measure that would stop an initiative from going to the ballot unless the Legislature had considered it first.

That means a measure would never go before voters unless a lawmaker was willing to introduce it.

Such steps do not sit well with Carla.

"Unfortunately, recently, citizens have had to use it (the initiative) more and more because they are not being listened to by the majority of the Legislature," she said.


Bypassing the Legislature
Residents have passed laws that first were rejected by the Legislature.


• Minimum-wage increase: Arizona voters in November increased the minimum wage to $6.75, from $5.15 per hour.


• Smoking ban: Starting in May, Arizona will enact a voter-approved smoking ban in all public places.


• Indian gaming extension: In 2002, voters extended an Indian gaming compact with the state that the Legislature failed to approve.


Initiative vs. referendum

• To bypass lawmakers and go directly to voters, residents can propose laws or constitutional amendments by collecting enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballot.


• If the Legislature wants voters to decide on law or constitutional amendment, it can put the proposal on the ballot, called a referendum.


• Initiatives, referendums and the recall of public officials collectively are called direct democracy.



Reach the reporter at jessica.coomes@arizonarepublic.com or (602) 444-6848.
Enjoy an Ads-Free ASFN - lighter and faster too! Become an ASFN-Contributor and help support the site.
DutchmanAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2007, 07:46 AM   #2
nidan
RIP George
 
nidan's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 21,198
IMO there some validity to this.

Right now initiatives are way to easy to get on the ballot. They often have unintended consequences, not to mention costs and can't easily be fixed.

Often these laws passed by these initiatives last long past the reasons for creating them. Initiatives put a straight jacket on state budget, such that there is very little room to make adjustments.

The biggest issue is the cost. Many initiatives are pushed by activists and the way they get signatures is often deceptive [Sig collectors are under no legal obligation to tell you the truth, they can and do lie to you].

The wording on the ballot is often chosen to to confuse voters.

Last but not least the other main use of initiatives is so that the legislators downtown can avoid personal responsibilty for proposing and voting on bills. Not to mention avoiding the checks an balances of having the Gov sign/veto it.

This will never pass because the few legislators who are not gutless realize that the GOP still has a lock on the state house and senate and initiatives area back door way of avoiding the Gov who may at times be a Democrat.
__________________

DogTv
nidan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2007, 01:55 PM   #3
Skkorpion
Grey haired old Bird
 
Skkorpion's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sun City, AZ
Posts: 11,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by nidan View Post
IMO there some validity to this.

Right now initiatives are way to easy to get on the ballot. They often have unintended consequences, not to mention costs and can't easily be fixed.

Often these laws passed by these initiatives last long past the reasons for creating them. Initiatives put a straight jacket on state budget, such that there is very little room to make adjustments.

The biggest issue is the cost. Many initiatives are pushed by activists and the way they get signatures is often deceptive [Sig collectors are under no legal obligation to tell you the truth, they can and do lie to you].

The wording on the ballot is often chosen to to confuse voters.

Last but not least the other main use of initiatives is so that the legislators downtown can avoid personal responsibilty for proposing and voting on bills. Not to mention avoiding the checks an balances of having the Gov sign/veto it.

This will never pass because the few legislators who are not gutless realize that the GOP still has a lock on the state house and senate and initiatives area back door way of avoiding the Gov who may at times be a Democrat.
Ian, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

I've been here long enough that I remember when Democrats outnumbered Republicans and controlled legislation. The Democratic legislators then, and the Republican ones now did not and do not want citizen involvement in law making under any condition.

Citizen law making lessens the power of the legislators and forces changes the public wants. Remember the fight over the banning of leg hold traps? It took a while but the citizens won.

In this state, right now, with a legislature dominated by right wing hard liners like Jeb Flake, ranchers still wield an incredible amount of power disproportionate to their numbers and economic impact.

So too do developers. Just last week, their captive legislators made a grab for the state's rainy day funds to build more freeways fast. They had to back off for now.

What about the Heritage Fund? Citizens forced that through (Sets aside lottery money to fund wildlife maintenance and habitat purchases.) The legislature tries to kill it every year and still manages to divert much of the funding to other unrelated programs.

And as far as wasting money, have you already forgotten the legislature created Alternate Fuel program?

And, again as proved in this last election, voters were not fooled by any of the initiatives.

Legislation by initiative is a good thing to have to control our government.
Skkorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2007, 02:04 PM   #4
nidan
RIP George
 
nidan's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 21,198
I understand that is how it is supposed to work but what about the initiatives pushed through by well funded special interest groups.

I also would think it would be a good idea if sig collectors faced legal sanctions if they lie.

It also doesn't seem unreasonable that after a period of time, maybe 10 years if the proposal is to short, that some for of review/re authorization or even as they say legislative adjustment was possible.
__________________

DogTv
nidan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2007, 02:07 PM   #5
Dback Jon
Killer Snail
 
Dback Jon's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 30,830
The initiative process works fairly well.

The idea of banning "Pay by Signature" and full disclosure on each form submitted by a PAID collector of who is paying for the gathering has merit - would inject a degree of transparecy into the process.
__________________



R.I.P Tim Minnick

The KING of Cards
Dback Jon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 04:13 AM   #6
DjaugheOld
Ads by Google
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 85249
Posts: 23,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skkorpion View Post
Ian, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

I've been here long enough that I remember when Democrats outnumbered Republicans and controlled legislation. The Democratic legislators then, and the Republican ones now did not and do not want citizen involvement in law making under any condition.

Citizen law making lessens the power of the legislators and forces changes the public wants. Remember the fight over the banning of leg hold traps? It took a while but the citizens won....

Legislation by initiative is a good thing to have to control our government.


Few people also remember that the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality was created through citizen initiatives during the 80's despite the legislatures efforts to kill the agency through underfunding and sunset clauses.
DjaugheOld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 06:48 AM   #7
Derm
slippery when wet
 
Derm's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe - home of the AZ Cardinals
Posts: 2,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dback Jon View Post
The initiative process works fairly well.

The idea of banning "Pay by Signature" and full disclosure on each form submitted by a PAID collector of who is paying for the gathering has merit - would inject a degree of transparency into the process.
Derm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 02:28 PM   #8
40yearfan
DEFENSE!!!!
 
40yearfan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ.
Posts: 31,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skkorpion View Post
Ian, you are absolutely wrong on this one.

I've been here long enough that I remember when Democrats outnumbered Republicans and controlled legislation. The Democratic legislators then, and the Republican ones now did not and do not want citizen involvement in law making under any condition.

Citizen law making lessens the power of the legislators and forces changes the public wants. Remember the fight over the banning of leg hold traps? It took a while but the citizens won.

In this state, right now, with a legislature dominated by right wing hard liners like Jeb Flake, ranchers still wield an incredible amount of power disproportionate to their numbers and economic impact.

So too do developers. Just last week, their captive legislators made a grab for the state's rainy day funds to build more freeways fast. They had to back off for now.

What about the Heritage Fund? Citizens forced that through (Sets aside lottery money to fund wildlife maintenance and habitat purchases.) The legislature tries to kill it every year and still manages to divert much of the funding to other unrelated programs.

And as far as wasting money, have you already forgotten the legislature created Alternate Fuel program?

And, again as proved in this last election, voters were not fooled by any of the initiatives.

Legislation by initiative is a good thing to have to control our government.
It's absolutely amazing what power the developers have. If you want to get legislation through and they are against it, you might as well pack up and go home. We've been trying to get electrician licensing through for the past 20 years, but we can't get them to agree to it because they are afraid their costs will go up (residential builing). They could care less about the safety of the average consumer if they think it will in any way affect their bottom line.
40yearfan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Tags
senate judiciary committee

 
You may also search for:

People searched for this, also searched for these:

what is arizona's stance on marijuana
when was arizona's nickname chosen


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Sitemap:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:45 AM.



Subscribe in a reader
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design