High court takes ‘dark money’ initiative off ballot

The decision is final: A citizens initiative that aimed to eliminate “dark money,” or anonymous political spending, in Arizona elections won’t appear on the Nov. 6 ballot.

In a ruling Wednesday afternoon, the Arizona Supreme Court ordered that the “Outlaw Dirty Money Act” not appear on the ballot, because supporters didn’t submit enough valid voter signatures to qualify.

The order upholds a lower court’s ruling that invalidated thousands of signatures after conservative political groups filed a lawsuit challenging the initiative.

Supporters of the Outlaw Dirty Money campaign had urged the court to let voters decide the issue in November. They contend so-called “dark money,” or “dirty money,” allows wealthy individuals to buy elections while hiding their influence.

Their proposal would have amended the Arizona Constitution to make public the identity of major campaign contributors.

The Supreme Court’s ruling was a clear victory for conservative advocacy groups that opposed the initiative, and that spend heavily to influence elections without disclosing their donors.

One of those groups is the state chapter of Americans for Prosperity, a political organization supported by billionaire Charles Koch. The group argues the issue is a matter of free speech because private individuals shouldn’t be forced to disclose whom they support with their money.

Wednesday’s ruling didn’t come as a surprise; the initiative’s fate was hanging by a thread.

State elections officials announced earlier this month that the act failed to qualify for the ballot because supporters didn’t submit enough valid signatures.

The Outlaw Dirty Money campaign challenged that ruling and the lower court’s decision.

Supporters of the act submitted 285,768 signatures when they filed petitions in July. State and county elections officials — who vet a 5 percent sample of the signatures — found an estimated 61,900 were invalid.

That left the Outlaw Dirty Money campaign with an estimated 2,071 fewer valid signatures than the 225,963 required for the act to appear on the ballot.

The court’s final decision on the initiative’s fate came a day before the state’s Thursday printing deadline for election-publicity pamphlets.