Arizona: Foes vow to fight new ballot qualification requirements | AZ Central

Libertarian Barry Hess said he’s determined to run for governor next year, even though he’ll face a 4,380 percent increase in the number of signatures he’ll need to qualify for the ballot. For Democrats, it’s a 9.8 percent increase. Meanwhile, any Republican seeking the seat will have a 5.8 percent decrease in the signature requirement. The shifting numbers are due to a late addition to a wide-ranging election bill that Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law last week. The measure was favored by Republicans, who flexed some local and national muscle to revive House Bill 2305 in the waning hours of the recently completed legislative session.

Arizona: Democrats criticize voting law they say helps the Republican Party | The Explorer

Gov. Jan Brewer penned her approval Wednesday to a series of changes in voting laws that Democrats and others say are designed to give her Republican Party an edge in future elections. The legislation, which will take effect later this year, sets up a procedure to stop sending early ballots to voters who have not used them in two election cycles. Rep. Martin Quezada, D-Phoenix, said the people this is most likely to affect are voters who are newly signed up through registration drives, voters who, at least initially, may be less in the habit of voting. And those voters, he said, are most likely Democrats. That contention is disputed by Sen. Michele Regan, R-Scottsdale. She said the highest number of people who have ignored their early ballots -- and would be subject to no longer getting them in the mail -- are in her Scottsdale legislative district. But Reagan conceded the reason for this could be the high number of home foreclosures in the district, with ballots mailed to people who are no longer there.

Arizona: Measure makes it tougher for 3rd-party candidates to reach ballot | East Valley Tribune

Contending one and maybe two congressional races were stolen from them, Republican legislators have approved a measure to finesse election laws to keep out the Libertarians who they say are taking votes from their candidates. The change, tucked into a much larger set of revisions to election laws, would sharply increase the number of signatures that Libertarian and Green Party candidates need just to get on the ballot for their own legislative and congressional primaries. Barry Hess, the Libertarian Party's former candidate for governor, said in most cases the number of signatures required is far more than the number of people actually registered in most districts.

Arizona: Bennett vows to push for voter proof of citizenship, despite court ruling | Cronkite News

Voting and civil rights groups cheered a decision by the Supreme Court Monday that struck down an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship for voting. The court’s 7-2 ruling said Arizona’s voter-approved Proposition 200, which required proof of citizenship for voter registration, was trumped by the federal “motor voter” law that only requires a potential voter to swear to their citizenship. Justice Samuel Alito, in one of two dissenting opinions, said the court’s ruling “seriously undermines” the state’s interest in preserving the integrity of elections. And Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett said late Monday that the state is not about to give up the fight, saying the state would pursue appeals with the Election Assistance Commission and the courts. But Proposition 200 opponents think it is too late for the state, now that the Supreme Court has ruled on the case.

Arizona: Bill makes qualifying harder for minor-party candidates | AZ Central

Libertarians and Green Party candidates would be virtually cut off from running for office under new nominating-petition requirements in a bill now on Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk. Meanwhile, the legislation eases the number of signatures needed for Republican and Democratic candidates. On Tuesday, critics of the law said it’s a valentine for Republican candidates, who see third-party candidates, particularly Libertarians, as spoilers in races. The provision was tacked onto a wide-ranging election bill, House Bill 2305, one week before the Legislature adjourned. It passed on largely partyline votes in the closing hours of the session with the support of most Republicans and solid opposition from Democrats. On Tuesday, the minor-party officials said the bill, if signed, would cement the two parties’ hold on Arizona elections.

Arizona: Senate passes election overhaul bill | Arizona Daily Star

The Arizona Senate revived an election omnibus bill Thursday that could limit early voting participation after Republican leaders pressured their caucus to pass the measure in the final hours of the 2013 legislative session. The legislation backed by state and local election officials seeks to trim the state's permanent early voting list and limit who may return mail ballots for voters. Opponents portrayed the bill as a thinly-veiled effort to curb Democratic and Hispanic voter turnout. The 16-13 vote came after the Senate initially voted against the bill late Thursday. Republican Sen. Steve Pierce changed his vote and helped the measure pass when it was brought back for reconsideration. The House voted 33-26 earlier on Thursday to advance House Bill 2305. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer would not say on Thursday whether she would sign the measure into law.

Arizona: Impact of early voting list plan distributed | NewsZap

Maricopa County officials say that about 20,000 registered voters would be removed from the permanent early voting list under proposed legislation aimed at reducing the number of provisional ballots. No particular demographic group would be hit harder than another, according to an analysis by the Maricopa County Elections Department. Sen. Michele Reagan, R-Scottsdale, developed SB 1261 with input from county election officials. As approved by the Senate, it would remove people from permanent early voting lists if they fail to vote in four consecutive federal elections and fail to respond to notice from the county elections office. “No other other state that I found who has a permanent early voting list has no ability to clean up their list,” Reagan said.

Arizona: Lawmakers propose more requirements to put referendums on ballots | East Valley Tribune

A senate panel voted Wednesday to throw some additional hurdles in the path of Arizonans who want to write their own laws.
Existing law already has a set of requirements for putting a measure on the ballot to propose a new statute or constitutional amendment. These include for who can circulate petitions, what has to be on each page and how many names can be on each sheet. SB 1493 adds some new ones, including a mandate to organize petition sheets by county of residence of signers, by the circulator on that signature sheet, and by the name of the person who notarized each. But the real change is that the legislation says that both election officials and courts, in reviewing the validity of petitions, must void those that are not in "strict compliance'' with all legal requirements. That change is significant.

Arizona: Senate leaders move to revive election bills | San Francisco Chronicle

Arizona Senate leaders resurrected a handful of election bills Tuesday that had been stalled amid opposition from Democratic lawmakers and civil rights groups worried about voter disenfranchisement. Senate President Andy Biggs unveiled the election omnibus bill that mirrors a handful of election bills proposed earlier in the legislative session. The bills had previously failed to gain traction in the GOP-led Legislature. The omnibus bill would allow county election officials to remove voters from the permanent early voting list if they didn't vote by mail in the two most recent general elections. Voters could stay on the list if they returned a completed notice within 30 days confirming their intent to vote by mail in the future. Local elected officials proposed the change because too many voters were showing up at local precinct places to vote after receiving mail ballots, creating concerns about voter fraud.

Arizona: Maricopa analysis: Early-voting plan would ax 20K voters from permanent absentee list | KTAR.com

Maricopa County officials said that about 20,000 registered voters would be removed from the permanent early-voting list under proposed legislation aimed at reducing the number of provisional ballots. No particular demographic group would be hit harder than another, according to an analysis by the Maricopa County Elections Department. Sen. Michele Reagan, R-Scottsdale, developed SB 1261 with input from county election officials. As approved by the Senate, it would remove people from permanent early- voting lists if they fail to vote in four consecutive federal elections and fail to respond to notice from the county elections office. "No other other state that I found who has a permanent early voting list has no ability to clean up their list," Reagan said.

Arizona: Advocates, officials spar over handling early ballots in Arizona | Cronkite News

In the run-up to last year’s general election, several political action groups worked to get residents of low-income and high-minority neighborhoods on Maricopa County’s permanent early voting list. As Nov. 6 approached, those groups had thousands of volunteers knocking on doors to encourage people to mail back those ballots and, if voters couldn’t for any reason, offering to deliver ballots to the county. “We’re in this to really be able to give a community a voice,” said Petra Falcon, executive director of Promise Arizona, a Latino rights group that mobilized one of the larger ballot-collection efforts. “Voting is the very first step to doing that.”

Arizona: Fixes for consolidated elections stall, leaving cities in dark about when to hold elections | Arizona Capitol Times

When voters in Tucson and Phoenix went to the polls to elect their mayors in 2011, voters elected them for four years. But a bill passed last year by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Jan Brewer may extend the mayors’ time in office by a year. Or it may shorten their terms by a year. Nobody is sure which one it will be. After seeing the savings and the boost in voter turnout Scottsdale achieved from moving its election dates to the fall of even-numbered years to match the state election cycle, Rep. Michelle Ugenti of Scottsdale sponsored a bill to move all city elections to coincide with the state schedule.

Arizona: Bill may ease state voting process | Yuma Sun

Arizona county recorders like Yuma's Robyn Stallworth Pouquette want to be able to keep their early voter lists as clean and accurate as possible, reducing the use of time-chewing provisional ballots that delayed official statewide results of the 2012 general election by days. A bill working its way through the Arizona Legislature aims to do that. SB1261 gives the keepers of Arizona's voter rolls the ability to remove voters from the permanent early voting list, or PEVL, if they haven't used their early ballot in four years and don't respond to a follow-up postcard query. Right now, the only way off the list is for a voter to make a request in writing.

Arizona: Senate kills measure to make recall election changes | East Valley Tribune

A plan to revamp the state's recall laws for all future elections fell apart Thursday as some Republican senators broke party ranks. On an 18-10 vote the Senate killed a House-passed measure which would have required both a primary and a general election in the event of a recall. Foes said they saw no reason to alter a system that has been in place since the early days of Arizona statehood. And its fate may have been sealed by a late alteration that created an even more convoluted system where a recalled official actually could be defeated in his or her own partisan primary and yet still be on the general election ballot.

Arizona: Foes of Arizona elections measures threaten suits if bills pass | AZ Central

Opponents of two controversial Arizona elections bills made another appeal Monday to kill the legislation, threatening legal action if the measures become law. Latino advocacy groups released the results of an automated telephone survey that said 59 percent of surveyed voters opposed the concept of removing names from the state’s permanent early-voting list. Senate Bill 1261 would take a voter off the list if he or she fails to cast an early ballot for two consecutive federal election cycles and fail to respond to notification of their removal from the list. The bill also would forbid anyone from altering a voter’s registration form.

Arizona: Measures on early voting, ballot delivery opposed | Arizona Daily Star

Some groups are threatening to sue if lawmakers adopt new restrictions on early voting and who can take someone else's ballot to the polls, claiming the measures target minorities. John Loredo said Monday that the two measures, likely up for a House vote this week, violate the federal Voting Rights Act. That law precludes states from altering any voting laws in a way that puts new restrictions in the path of minority voting. And Monica Sandschafer, of One Arizona, said the two bills are no accident. "This is a direct response to the Latino vote," she said at a Monday press conference at the Capitol.

Arizona: Proposal would flood money into politics | Associated Press

Arizona Republican lawmakers are poised to wildly increase the state's campaign finance limits in an effort that would allow an unprecedented flood of private dollars into local elections and undermine the state's public campaign financing system. Republicans said current limits are unconstitutionally low, especially given the growing influence of outside political advertisements in national and state campaigns made possible by a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that erased years of campaign finance law. But Democrats argued the measure would give wealthy donors and political groups more influence in campaigns while effectively dismantling the state's public financing options approved by voters. The bill would not increase funding for candidates running under the state's public campaign financing option.

Arizona: Rejected ballots reflect continuing problems in Arizona’s elections | Arizona Capitol Times

Tens of thousands of ballots cast in Arizona’s 2012 election were rejected by elections officials, indicating continued communication and voter education problems in the state, according to an analysis by the Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting. Nearly 46,000 of the more than 2.3 million ballots cast in Arizona’s 2012 election – or about 2 percent – were rejected. That rate is down from 2.2 percent in 2008, when Arizona led the nation in rejected provisional ballots. The analysis was based on a review of rejected ballots and interviews with experts and legislators. The rejected votes consist of early voting or provisional ballots in which voters went through the voting process but later had their ballots thrown out after review by elections officials. The most common reasons were that voters weren’t registered in time for the election, voted in the wrong precincts or didn’t sign their ballots. Early votes and absentee ballots are cast when a voter is on the permanent early voting list or lives outside the state or country during election cycles. Provisional ballots are cast when voters are not listed on a jurisdiction’s voter roll or registration records, or if they received an early ballot.

Arizona: Election changes divisive | AZ Daily Sun

Should early voters be allowed to give their ballots to someone else to be delivered to the elections office? Coconino County Recorder Patty Hansen doesn't think so, noting there's nothing to prevent someone from chucking the ballots into a trash receptacle. "That's really dangerous," Hansen said during a discussion last week by the county Board of Supervisors on proposed election law changes before the Legislature. But Supervisor Mandy Metzer, who represents parts of the Navajo Nation where roads are poor and public transportation scarce, had a different take. "It casts a shadow on the efficiency of the permanent early voter system," she said. She and other county supervisors are somewhat split on a couple of proposed changes to state election law that Hansen supports.

Arizona: Federal judges hear GOP challenge to AZ redistricting map | Arizona Capitol Times

Federal judges hearing a civil suit brought by Republican voters who claim the state’s new legislative maps were illegally drawn to benefit Democrats questioned lawyers Friday about whether some members of the commission that made the maps were free of political influence. That’s the heart of the case brought against the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission by 11 Republican voters, including the wife of Arizona Senate President Andy Biggs. They allege the two Democrats and one independent on the commission improperly shifted Republican voters from some districts to make them more likely to elect Democrats to the state Legislature on the premise of complying with the federal Voting Rights Act.

Arizona: Lawmaker wants to divert Clean Elections funding to education | Cronkite News

A state lawmaker wants voters to decide whether to strip the Citizens Clean Elections Commission of its funding and give that money to the Arizona Department of Education. Rep. Paul Boyer, R-Phoenix, said he authored HCR 2026 because that money would be better spent on students than on what he considers a failed system for publicly funding political campaigns. “I think if we really want to direct that money towards a public good, I believe that public education through charters and also through the district schools are the best use of that money,” Boyer said. “I’m always looking for ongoing funding for education, and I view this as an ongoing funding stream.”

Arizona: Election Maps Said to Dilute Republican Votes | Bloomberg

A Republican Party consultant testified at a trial over Arizona’s election redistricting that the state’s redrawn maps were the result of a “deliberate policy of underpopulating some districts” to benefit Democrats. Republican voters, in the federal court trial in Phoenix, accuse the state’s Independent Redistricting Commission of “a pattern of discriminatory intent” by concentrating Republicans in districts that exceed the average population while leaving Democrats with pluralities in a disproportionately large number of underpopulated districts. “What you saw manifested is that all of the potential voters in districts overpopulated have had their votes diluted and potential voters in underpopulated districts have had their votes enhanced,” Thomas Hofeller, testifying for opponents of the plan, said yesterday. Hofeller, a redistricting consultant for the Republican National Committee, said that the five most underpopulated districts were what he called Hispanic districts. That would be consistent with an attempt to under-populate Hispanic districts, and it wouldn’t be a logical outcome if it hadn’t been a goal to under-populate them, he said.

Arizona: Redistricting challenge heads to US court today | Arizona Daily Star

Republican interests head to federal court today hoping to realign the state's legislative districts more to their liking. Challengers are pinning their hopes on the fact that 30 districts crafted by the Independent Redistricting Commission are not all equal in population. Attorney David Cantelme contends the differences were done "deliberately, intentionally and in violation of the one-person/one-vote principle." The goal of the commission, he charges, was to cluster as many Republicans as possible together in districts, leaving the other, underpopulated districts with more Democrats than otherwise would occur, giving Democrats an unfair and illegal advantage in electing their own candidates to the Legislature. Attorneys for the commission do not dispute the population disparities.

Arizona: No special spot on voter registration form for Libertarians | Daily Sun

State lawmakers are free to provide special spots on voter registration forms to Democrats and Republicans that are not offered to other political parties, a federal judge has ruled. Judge Cindy Jorgenson acknowledged that the 2011 law does mean that those who want to register as Libertarians -- or, for that matter, any minor party -- have an additional hurdle. That's because the registration forms have three spaces: Republican, Democrat and "other." And that last option requires an individual to write out the name of the desired party. But Jorgenson rejected claims by an attorney for the Libertarian Party that the law amounts to illegal and unacceptable discrimination. She said the state has a legitimate interest in keeping the registration form simple.

Arizona: Latino youths protest Arizona election reform | NECN.com

A proposed overhaul of Arizona's early voting laws has been blasted by Latino youth who say the Republican-backed effort would suppress minority turnout just as more Hispanics are registering to vote. Students on spring break are expected to lobby lawmakers at the Arizona Legislature Thursday in opposition to two measures that would limit who gets to vote early and how mail ballots are returned to local election officials. Hispanics leaders, including Arizona Democratic lawmakers, said the election bills are aimed at silencing voters who tend to vote for Democrats. Republicans currently control Arizona's state government. "We are not going away," said Daria Ovide, a Phoenix-based voting activist. "We are going to be voting no matter what and we are going to remember who was helpful and who was not helpful."

Arizona: Voter Registration Law Takes Heat At Supreme Court | Fox News

Monday marked yet another Supreme Court showdown for Arizona and the Obama administration. At issue, this time, was the state's Proposition 200 measure, which requires voter registration applicants to provide documentation proving U.S. citizenship. Critics of the measure say the state has no authority to go beyond what's required on the simplified federal voter registration form. On the federal form applicants must check a box indicating U.S. citizenship, sign attesting to that fact and drop the form in the mail. Arizona officials, citing hundreds of cases of non-U.S. citizens registering to vote, say additional barriers need to be put in place.  Under Proposition 200, applicants can present a number of various documents, including driver’s license, birth certificate and certain Native American tribal documents. "If somebody's willing to fraudulently vote, that person would be willing to sign falsely," said Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, who argued the case Monday. "We need evidence that the person is a citizen," he added.

Arizona: Glitch costs couple their right to vote | Mohave Daily News

Two Bullhead City residents were denied their right to vote in Tuesday’s primary election, apparently over the county’s mapping of the street where their residence is. Shaukat and Marie Ali were told they don’t live in the city. Someone at the polling place contacted the Mohave County Voter Registration office in Kingman. “When they called up, they gave them my registration ID number, and based on the ID number, they said we didn’t live in the city,” Shaukat Ali said. “I can’t be more sorry that he was disenfranchised,” said Mohave County Voter Registration Supervisor Kim Stewart. Ali’s street, Lakeview Drive, was built in 2005 and has seven registered voters living on it, according to Stewart. The street was incorrectly shown to be in the Davis Dam Precinct, outside of the Bullhead City limits. Lakeview Drive certainly is within the city limits; it’s a U-shaped cul de sac off Desert Trails Drive east of the Bullhead Parkway. It is nowhere close to the Davis Dam Precinct, which is north of the city limits in the area of Davis Dam and Lake Mohave. “No one’s ever mentioned it to us (by asking why their ballot didn’t include city elections) so we didn’t know it was broken,” Stewart said.

Arizona: Justices will probe Arizona’s voter registration law | ABA Journal

It’s almost spring, and that means the usual seasonal rites in the District of Columbia: the cherry blossom trees, the deluge of students—and another case before the U.S. Supreme Court involving a controversial law passed by the state of Arizona. The Grand Canyon State has been before the justices to defend its laws or programs five times over the last three years. In 2010, the high court: upheld an Arizona immigration law that penalized businesses if they employ illegal immigrants; struck down a state law providing for matching funds for candidates for state office that was meant to put them on an equal footing with wealthy, privately financed candidates; and held that a group of taxpayers lacked standing to challenge a state program of tax credits for donations for private school tuition. Last term, the justices ruled that several provisions of the state’s controversial immigration law, SB 1070, were pre-empted by federal law. The court also declined to enjoin a provision requiring the police to verify the immigration status of people they stop or arrest. This year’s offering is Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, a case about voter registration procedures that comes with an undercurrent of concern over illegal immigration. Arguments are scheduled for March 18.

Arizona: Court to rule on Arizona voting law | SCOTUSblog

The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to rule on the constitutionality of a state requirement that voters must prove they are U.S. citizens before they register to vote and cast their ballots.   The Court granted review of an Arizona case in which it previously had refused the state’s request to block a lower court decision that struck down that requirement.  Arizona’s voters adopted that law when they passed “Proposition 200″ in 2004.  The Court will not rule on the case until after this year’s election, so the requirement will not be in effect next month.  (The case is Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., docket 11-71.) That was the only new case granted Monday.   In one significant denial, the Court refused to consider imposing a heavier duty on managers of employee retirement plans to justify investing plan assets in the company’s own stock.  The Court turned aside without comment two petitions on that issue.  (Gray v. Citigroup, 11-1531, and Gearren v. McGraw-Hill Companies, 11-1550.)

Arizona: Can Arizona Make You Show Your Birth Certificate to Vote? The state’s voter ID requirement goes to the Supreme Court on Monday | Slate Magazine

You’ve probably heard that the Supreme Court may be on the verge of striking down an integral part of the Voting Rights Act. That case, however, is not the only chance that the highest court will have this term to affect voting rights around the country. On Monday, the justices will hear oral arguments in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., a case that concerns Arizona’s power to impose its own conditions on top of the federal rules for voter registration. The case began as a challenge to Proposition 200, an initiative passed by Arizona voters in 2004 that requires voters to prove that they are U.S. citizens by showing a birth certificate, passport, driver’s license, naturalization certificate, or tribal document before registering and also to show identification when casting their ballots. Under the law, state election officials must reject any voter registration forms not accompanied by sufficient evidence of citizenship—even the federal form produced by Congress under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which doesn’t generally require the documents Arizona does.