Arizona legislators silence voters with ‘strict compliance’

Commence Phase 2 of Operation Silence Our Citizens.

Having made it pricier to put initiatives on the ballot last week, our leaders now turn to making it easier to have initiatives tossed out in court before voters get the chance to consider them.

The last-minute bill got its only public hearing on Tuesday, wherein its sponsor, Sen. Debbie Lesko, R-Peoria, explained there’s nothing to see here.

“No way, no how do I intend to take away voters’ rights to put initiatives on the ballot. My legislation merely says all initiatives, whether I agree with them or not, have to follow the constitution and the Arizona Revised Statutes.”

Never mind that initiatives already have to follow the law.

House Bill 2244 would require that initiative campaigns strictly comply with state laws governing the initiative process, rather than the current lower “substantial compliance” standard used by the courts since the 1930s.

The reason for the change is obvious: to provide yet another opportunity to make it as difficult as possible for voters to exercise their constitutional right to make laws at the ballot box. And so, suddenly, comes HB 2244. The current “substantial compliance” standard means judges aren’t likely to throw out an initiative just because 7.9 point type was used when 8 point type is required by law. Or because the margins on a petition are off by a quarter of an inch.

Under a “strict compliance standard” — which has been defined by the Arizona Court of Appeals as “nearly perfect compliance” — a petition signed by 150,000 Arizonans (225,000, if it’s a constitutional change) could be tossed for any technical flaw.

The sort of flaws that judges have overlooked, in deference to voters.

Unlike judges, however, Republican legislators seem to have precious little respect for voters.

Oh, they, and those fine folks at the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry who are driving this bill, assure us there’s no intent to stifle our rights.

“The point is to smooth out a wrinkle in Arizona law,” the chamber’s Sara Agne told senators. Sure it is. More likely, it’s an opportunity to get rid of virtually any initiative the chamber doesn’t like on a technicality and never mind the hundreds of thousands of voters who wanted it on the ballot.

“This will be used to knock virtually anything that the chamber disagrees with off the ballot,” Sen. Steve Farley, D-Tucson, warned. “In effect, this is a veto for the Arizona Chamber.”

The Senate Appropriations Committee OK’d the bill on a 6-4 party-line vote.

In all, 347 Arizonans voiced opposition to the bill. But that was no match for its supporters: the chamber, Arizona Public Service, the Arizona Restaurant Association, the Center for Arizona Policy, the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association and Arizona Free Enterprise Club, one of the state’s premier dark-money groups.

Curiously, the bill doesn’t apply to politicians and their nominating petitions. They still will be held to the lower standard. Like that’s any surprise.