Blog For Arizona

GOP war on voting: Gov. Brewer signs bill voiding citizens referendum on HB 2305

Posted by AzBliueMeanie:

More than 140,000 Arizona citizens signed the petitions for a referendum of the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, exercising their constitutional right under the Arizona Constitution to refer HB 2305 to the voters of Arizona to decide the issue. The repeal legislation passed by our Tea-Publican legislature would void the referendum and once again deprive the voters of Arizona of their constitutional right to vote to decide this issue.

Today Governor Jan Brewer completed the skullduggery of the Tea-Publicans in the legislature, depriving the voters of Arizona of their constitutional right to vote to decide this issue. Gov. Brewer signs elections-overhaul repeal: Governor Jan Brewer signed House Bill 2196 Thursday. The action cancels a November election where voters would have had the final say.

Remember in November!

(Update) The Arizona Republic is all for denying you your constitutional rights

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Republic, formerly known as The Arizona Republican, and the mouthpiece of the establishment Republican Party in Arizona, is schizophrenic when it comes to your constitutional rights to a citizens referendum and voting.

Columnist Laurie Roberts published a series of reports on the Legislature plotting end run around voters on election law: "a fair amount of skullduggery is afoot."

Coliumnist E.J. Montini published Voters can suppress the suppressors: "The only way voters can guarantee it never happens again is to note of every politician who goes along with the scheme and, when those names appear next on the ballot box, suppress their re-election."

But the "editorial board" of The Republic has twice now published editorial opinions essentially telling the voters of Arizona to "go screw yourself."

Our Tea-Publican lawless legislature loses in court, again (part the infinity)

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Our Tea-Publican lawless legislature has lost in court, again. This time it was our lawless legislature's attempt to overturn the constitutionality of the voter-approved citizens initiative creating the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC), Prop. 106 (2000), to determine redistricting election boundaries rather than the state legislature. Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (CV12-01211-PHX-PGR).

I have previously explained that, based upon case law precedents, this should be a no-brainer for the court in favor of the AIRC. Arizona Legislature v. the AIRC court hearing this Friday. And it was, except for Justice Paul Rosenblatt, who agreed with part of the ruling, but argued the citizen initiative wrongly removed any power lawmakers would have to influence how the politically sensitive lines are drawn in his dissent. Justice Rosenblatt is simply wrong. It happens.

The Court granted defendant's Rule 12(b)(6) Motion for Failure to State a Claim, which is rare.

The Court's Ruling (.pdf) relies upon the case precedents I previously outlined, as the Court is bound to do:

The Supreme Court, however, has at least twice rejected the notion that when it comes to congressional redistricting the Elections Clause vests only in the legislature responsibilities relating to redistricting. Both cases found that states were not prohibited from designing their own lawmaking processes and using those processes for the congressional redistricting authorized by the Clause. In subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that a state can place the redistricting function in state bodies other than the legislature.

Ohio ex. rel. Davis v. Hildebrant, 241 U.S. 565, 566 (1916) and Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355 (1932).

Public Citizen events for 'Son of Citizens United' decision day in McCutcheon

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

McCutcheon v. FEC, aka "Son of Citizens United" was heard on the second day of the U.S. Supreme Court's term back in October. Court observers believe that a decision in this case could be announced as early as next week when the Court returns from hiatus. Public Citizen is organizing events around the country to coincide with the announcement of the decision in "Son of Citizens United."

Press release: Nationwide Rapid Response Planned for U.S. Supreme Court’s McCutcheon Ruling:

Activists Are Organizing More Than 100 Rallies for the Decision Day

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Hundreds of activists nationwide are planning rallies, protests and other events in response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which could be decided as soon as the week of Feb. 24. More than 100 events are being organized in some of the largest cities around the country, to take place on the day of the ruling.

The events range from press conferences and rallies to petition drives, to be held in cities including Baltimore, Md.; Chicago, Ill.; Denver, Colo.; Grand Rapids, Mich.; Houston, Texas; Los Angeles, Calif.; New York, N.Y.; San Diego, Calif.; San Francisco, Calif.; Seattle, Wash.; and Washington, D.C.

AZ Lege repeals HB 2305, the citizens referendum is now off the ballot

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Our lawless legislature continues to demonstrate its contempt for the citizens of Arizona and their constitutional right to refer an act of the legislature to the voters to decide in a citizens referendum ("citizens veto"). The larger context here is its utter contempt for democracy and the right to vote.

More than 140,000 Arizonans braved the heat of an Arizona summer to circulate and sign petitions to refer HB 2305, the GOP Voter Suppression Act, to the ballot in November to let the people decide on what the legislature enacted as a "strike everything" amendment in the dead of night when no one was watching. There was no public notice, and no public hearing before a committee.

Last week, the Arizona House on a party-line vote voted to deny Arizonans their constitutional right to vote on a citizens-referred referendum. Arizona House approves bill to repeal election-law changes.

Yesterday, the Senate Tea-Publicans complete their anti-democraticdenial of your constitutional rights. Arizona Senate repeals 2013 election law:

The Arizona Senate has voted to repeal a sweeping 2013 Arizona election law that included trimming the state’s permanent early voting list and a host of other provisions that incensed voter-rights advocates.

Majority Republicans who pushed House Bill 2305 through last June voted Thursday to repeal the law 17-12. The House passed an identical bill last week. The bill will now go to the governor.

Repealing the law will cancel the voter referendum.

Sen. Michele Reagan's dark money disclosure bill will accomplish little

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Republic will never admit they were shamed into doing it by my constantly berating them for not reporting on Sean Noble and the "Kochtopus" dark money network operating in their own backyard in the state of Maricopa. But I am going to claim a small victory anyway.

Today the Arizona Republic published the entire report by Pro Publica at azcentral.com. The Dark Money Man: Sean Noble, Koch cash and politics. (Note that this is not by Arizona Republic reporters).

This small victory comes the day after Sen. Michele Reagan's half-measure for dark money campaign finance disclosures was heard in her Elections Committee on Tuesday. Reagan's bill is a band-aid approach to close a gaping wound in Arizona elections. Lawmakers seek to shine light on anonymous campaign contributions:

State lawmakers took the first steps Tuesday to cut down on so-called “dark money’’ in political campaigns, but with no clear indication if their plan will work, or whether it’s even legal.

Legislation approved by the Senate Elections Committee requires all campaign commercials, literature and similar materials to include the names of the three largest contributors. Sen. Michele Reagan, R-Scottsdale, said it’s unacceptable that people can spend large amounts of money to influence elections and remain hidden.

On paper, the vote for SB 1403 was unanimous. But several GOP legislators, after hearing from lobbyists, said they fear the measure creates unnecessary hurdles.

And Sen. Kimberly Yee, R-Phoenix, openly worried requiring people to get out from behind the committees they create to affect elections might chill their First Amendment rights to speak freely.

Proposed constitutional amendment is a Trojan Horse attack on the AIRC

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I previously posted about SCR 1003 (.pdf), a resoution which would refer a legislative ballot measure to the ballot that requires "the reauthorization of statewide initiative and referendum measures that create funds for public monies, dedicate public monies to a specific purpose or otherwise effect state General Fund (GF) revenues or expenditures."

Note that this reauthorizaton is not for all citizens initiative and referendum measures, just the ones the legislature does not like -- the ones that require the legislature to spend money on priorites decided by the voters, like heath care and education. This is the teabaggers' "I hate the Voter Protection Act" (Prop. 105 -1998) measure to undermine Prop. 105. The reauthorization applies retroactively to all specified statewide initiative and referendum measures approved on or after November 3, 1998.

The teabaggers want the opportunity to revisit and to reverse the laws that the citizens of Arizona enacted as a super-legislature exercising the powers reserved to the citizens under the Arizona Constitution and exercising their constitutional right to citizen initiative and referendum. This reauthorization provision would give opponents a second bite at the apple after seven (7) years. It would invite a perpetual campaign that seeks to undermine the legitimacy of laws enacted by the voters. The teabaggers are demonstrating their utter disdain for your constitutional rights and for democracy.

Felony disenfranchisement is a vestige of Jim Crow

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Jamelle Boiue writing at The Daily Beast expounds upon Attorney General Eric Holder's call to end felony disenfranchisement of former prisoners who have served their sentence and repaid their debt to society. The Jim Crow Zombie That Won't Die:

Felon disenfranchisement laws are, literally, a vestige of Jim Crow. It’s time for them to go.

Nationwide, five million Americans are barred from voting because of felony convictions. In recent years, a coalition of reformers on the left and right (including former Virginia governor Bob McDonnell and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky), have moved to either mitigate the effects of this, or push for full repeal of these felon disenfranchisement laws.

And for good reason. As is true of most things in the criminal justice system, this is a status quo with particular harm for African Americans. Thanks to the rampant racial disparities in arrests and prosecutions, blacks—and black men in particular—bear the brunt of these policies. More than thirteen percent of black men are unable to vote because of a felony conviction, with no regards to the nature of the offense or time served.

Indeed, for reasons you can imagine, the biggest impact is felt in the states of the former Confederacy, where disenfranchisement laws are especially draconian, and several states—Alabama, Tennessee, and Mississippi—have lifetime voting bans.

Action Alert: Fight for your right to vote on Monday

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Announcement from the Arizona Democratic Party:

HB2305 Update!

We need your help on Monday, Feb. 17

Thanks to your help, and the signatures of over 144,000 Arizonans, the harmful anti-voter bill HB2305 was referred to the November 2014 ballot.

Now the same politicians who passed HB2305 are trying to repeal it in a desperate attempt to circumvent the referendum process. First they thought they could pass this harmful bill without the scrutiny of voters, now they think they can kill the referendum to avoid being held accountable by the voters.

We think HB2305 is bad because it will hurt voters. Republicans now are trying to repeal it because they think it will hurt them politically. The Legislature has no right to do an end-run around the referendum and the Arizona Constitution, which gives the citizens the right to veto any bill from the Legislature. Additionally, without a referendum, Republicans will be free to pass more harmful anti-voter bills in the future. The Republicans in the Legislature cannot be trusted.

Join us at the State Capitol as we let the Republicans in the Legislature know that we will hold them accountable for taking away the right of the voters to weigh in on this important issue.

 

What:
Day of Action to demand that the voters are not silenced and allowed to vote on HB2305 in November

When:
Monday, February 17, 2014 at 12:00 p.m.

Where:
Lawn of the Arizona State Capitol
Directions

Click Here to SHARE and JOIN our Facebook event for the HB2305 Day of Action

Pro Publica exposé on Sean Noble and the 'Kochtopus' dark money network (Updated)

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Republic frequently decries "dark money" organizations on its editorial page, but it oddly is limited to concern about public employee union "dark money" organizations that attacked their boy, Phoenix City councilman Sal Diciccio. It's funny (not) how little attention the Republic pays to the vast network hub of "dark money" organizations operating out of Maricopa County. Maybe it's because these people are their friends, neighbors and asssociates whom they hang out with at cocktail parties and political events.

About the only place you can find any reference to Sean Noble* and the "Kochtopus"  dark money network he operates out of Maricopa County is here. This is a fundamental failure of the corporate news media to perform its constitutional function as the "watchdog of democracy."

Kim Barker and Theodoric Meyer at Pro Publica have a richly detailed new exposé on Sean Noble and the "Kochtopus" dark money network, The Dark Money Man: How Sean Noble Moved the Kochs' Cash into Politics and Made Millions:

For a brief, giddy moment, Sean Noble—a little-known former aide to Arizona congressman [John Shadegg]—became one of the most important people in American politics.

Plucked from obscurity by libertarian billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, Noble was tasked with distributing a torrent of political money raised by the Koch network, a complex web of nonprofits nicknamed the Kochtopus, into conservative causes in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

Noble handed out almost $137 million in 2012 alone -- all of it so-called dark money from unnamed donors -- from his perch atop the Center to Protect Patient Rights, a group run out of an Arizona post office box.

AZ House votes to deny Arizonans their constitutional right to vote on a citizens-referred referendum

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Our lawless legislature continues to demonstrate its contempt for the citizens of Arizona and their constitutional right to refer an act of the legislature to the voters to decide in a citizens referendum ("citizens veto"). The larger context here is its utter contempt for democracy and the right to vote.

More than 140,000 Arizonans braved the heat of an Arizona summer to circulate and sign petitions to refer HB 2305, the GOP Voter Suppression Act, to the ballot in November to let the people decide on what the legislature enacted as a "strike everything" amendment in the dead of night when no one was watching. There was no public notice, and no public hearing before a committee.

(If you want to outlaw something in the Arizona Constitution, let's start with the "strike everything" amendment. All bills should have to be filed, noticed for public hearing, and proceed through "regular order" of committee hearings and floor amendments.)

You willl recall that at the end of January, the House Judiciary Committee took up HB 2196 (.pdf), a singe-sentence bill to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act. House Judiciary Committee approves repeal of HB 2305 on a party line vote. The House Rules Committee signed off on this GOP skullduggery earlier this week.

So what happened in the Senate Elections Committee?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

So what happened in the Senate Elections Committee on Tuesday? Hint, you won't find it in your newspaer, I looked.

SCR 1003 (.pdf), which would refer a legislative ballot measure to the ballot that requires "the reauthorization of statewide initiative and referendum measures that create funds for public monies, dedicate public monies to a specific purpose or otherwise effect state General Fund (GF) revenues or expenditures," was held in committee.

SB 1344 (.pdf), which would strips the voter-enacted Citizens Clean Elections Commission of any jurisidiction from accepting, investigating or acting on complaints of campaign contribution and expense violations by non-participating candidates for statewide or legislative office, was also held in committee.

SB 1403 (.pdf), Sen. Michele Reagan's half-measure to introduce some transparency into "dark money" campaign finance disclosures, was also held in committee.

SB 1232 (.pdf), which would "require circulators who are not residents of this state (non-residents) and paid petition circulators to register with the Secretary of State (SOS) prior to circulating petitions and prescribes circulator registration information," passed with a "do pass" recommendation 5-0, with two absent. This was an element of HB 2305.

Your tax dollars at work.

Time for the restoration of ex-felon voting rights

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Bravo to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. for calling for the restoration of ex-felon voting rights. Someone who has repaid their debt to society should not be forever banned from the franchise to vote. This holdover provision from Jim Crow laws should go. We are a better country than this. Holder Urges States to Lift Bans on Felons’ Voting:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. called Tuesday for the repeal of laws that prohibit millions of felons from voting, underscoring the Obama administration’s determination to elevate issues of criminal justice and race in the president’s second term and create a lasting civil rights legacy.

In a speech at Georgetown University, Mr. Holder described today’s prohibitions — which in some cases bar those convicted from voting for life — as a vestige of the racist policies of the South after the Civil War, when states used the criminal justice system to keep blacks from fully participating in society.

“Those swept up in this system too often had their rights rescinded, their dignity diminished, and the full measure of their citizenship revoked for the rest of their lives,” Mr. Holder said. “They could not vote.”

Mr. Holder has no authority to enact the changes he called for, given that states establish the rules under which people can vote.

Those fake NRCC mirror web sites violate federal law

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

You have all heard by now about last week's GOP dirty tricks by the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee, setting up fake mirror web sites for Democratic candidates. If it's the NRCC, that means the Arizona Daily Star's former political reporter hack and all-around prick Daniel Scarpinato is involved. In fact, the Star gave "The Scarp" gratuitous copy in its reporting on this story. GOP fundraising websites touting Democrats called unethical:

A move by the National Republican Congressional Campaign has local Democrats seeing red over a set of new websites that appear to tout Democrat candidates.

The Republican political committee has created mini-websites for U.S. Reps. Ron Barber, Ann Kirkpatrick and Kyrsten Sinema touting their accomplishments and asking for donations.

However, those pulling out their checkbooks with the intent of backing the incumbent Democrats will actually be giving their hard-earned dollars to Republicans.

The tactic isn’t isolated to Arizona, either. The NRCC has created at least a dozen websites in other states similarly targeting other Democrats running for office.

Campaign staffers are calling the slick, one-page websites with their high-resolution photographs of the candidates a cheap political play, designed with only one goal in mind: to trick voters into giving money to Republicans.

NRCC national press secretary Daniel Scarpinato is proud of the mini-websites, saying voters can get information from the Republican-backed websites that is not readily available on the candidates’ sites.

Update on Arizona's proof-of-citizenship voter registration form case

Posted by azBlueMeanie:

Arizona Attorney General Tom "banned for life by the SEC" Horne and Secretary of State Ken "Birther" Bennett are in U.S. District Court in Kansas, Kris W. Kobach et al. v. United States Election Assistance Commission (13-4095-EFM-DJW) suing the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and threatening to impose a two-tier system for voting in Arizona and Kansas based upon whether you registered to vote with the Arizona voter registration form or the federal motor-voter form (NVRA).

Dion Lefler of the Wichita Eagle reports on the latest breaking news in this case, Judge questions feds’ role in Kansas, Arizona voting laws:

A judge strongly questioned Tuesday whether a federal commission has the authority to prevent Kansas and Arizona from demanding proof-of-citizenship documents from people trying to register to vote using federal forms.

Judge Eric Melgren repeatedly pressed Department of Justice lawyer Bradley Heard to explain how a Supreme Court decision last year on Arizona's proof-of-citizenship law allows the federal Election Assistance Commission to reject requests from Arizona and Kansas to add state-law requirements to the instructions for filling out the voting form.

"The single pivotal question in this case is who gets to decide … what's necessary" to establish citizenship for voting, Melgren said.

Heard said that decision lies with the EAC under the federal National Voter Registration Act, also known as the motor-voter law. He said the law empowers the commission to decide what questions and proofs are necessary to include in the federal registration form.

While the law doesn't explicitly state the EAC can overrule states on proof of citizenship, Heard said the legislative history shows that requiring document proof was considered and rejected by Congress.

"I've read the legislative history, and I'm not very impressed by it," Melgren responded.

Tea-Publicans move to deny Arizona citizens their constitutional right to vote on a citizens-referred referendum

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

More than 140,000 Arizona citizens signed petitions for a "citizens veto" of the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, exercising their constitutional right under the Arizona Constitution to refer the legislature's anti-democratic measure to the voters in a referendum.

Tea-Publicans, fearing retaliation from the voters in November, are moving to deny Arizona citizens their constitutional right to vote on this citizens-referred referendum -- making it a two-fer for voter suppression, and demonstrating their utter disdain for your constitutional rights.

Rep. "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth's (R-Gilbert) bill to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305 subject to a citizens referendum ("citizens veto"), HB 2196 (.pdf), cleared the House Rules Committee on Monday on a party-line 5-2 vote.

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted for SB 1270 (.pdf), the Senate version of Rep. "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth's (R-Gilbert) bill to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, on a party-line 6-3 vote. It now goes to the Rules Committee.

Remember in November -- kick 'em all out!

Senate Elections Committee hearing on Tuesday

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

In addition to attempting to repeal HB 2305 to deny the voters of Arizona their constitutional right to vote on a bill that the voters referred to the ballot as a referendum, there are several other election/campaign finance bills coming up in the Arizona legislature this week.

One of the principal architects of the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, Sen. Michele Reagan, who has fantasies of becoming our next Secretary of State to make it easier for her to suppress your vote, has several bills scheduled in her Elections Committee on Tuesday Agenda (.pdf), Room SHR 1 at 2:00 p.m.

Remember how Rep. "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth swore last week that he was not aware of any legislator attempting to revive elements of HB 2305? Yeah, that was bullshit, and everyone knew it.

SB 1232 (.pdf) would "require circulators who are not residents of this state (non-residents) and paid petition circulators to register with the Secretary of State (SOS) prior to circulating petitions and prescribes circulator registration information." The bill also "permits any person to challenge the lawful registration of circulators in the superior court of the county in which the circulator is registered."

The bill "Conditions the enactment of the following provisions on the approval or rejection of Laws 2013, chapter 209, the subject of referendum petition R-03-2014, at the next general election, or the failure of Laws 2013, chapter 209 to be referred to the ballot at the next general election:

a) eliminates the requirement that non-resident circulators register with the SOS prior to circulating petitions and eliminates the requirement that the SOS provide for a method of receiving service of process for registered non-resident circulators.

b) directs the SOS to remove all petition sheets collected by a circulator who fails to register as required.

Update on Arizona's proof-of-citizenship voter registration form case

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Arizona Attorney General Tom "banned for life by the SEC" Horne and Secretary of State Ken "Birther" Bennett are in U.S. District Court in Kansas, Kris W. Kobach et al. v. United States Election Assistance Commission (13-4095-EFM-DJW) suing the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and threatening to impose a two-tier system for voting in Arizona and Kansas based upon whether you registered to vote with the Arizona voter registration form or the federal motor-voter form (NVRA).

Last month the EAC filed with the Court a detailed 46-page EAC Final Decision on Proof of Citizenship Requests (.pdf). In its decision, the EAC found that added documentation results in an overall decrease in registration of eligible citizens — undermining the core purpose of the National Voter Registration Act. The EAC essentially told Arizona and Kansas to "go pound sand."

The AP reports this week Kansas, Arizona rekindling lawsuit over proof-of-citizenship voter registration:

Kansas and Arizona have rekindled a lawsuit seeking to force the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to require residents to show proof-of-citizenship when registering to vote, arguing that a recent agency decision to deny the requests was unlawful.

In a filing late Friday in a case with broad implications for voting rights, the two states asked U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren to order federal officials to include state-specific requirements in federal voter registration forms.

'Kochtopus' list of donors

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Ruh-roh. Someone who attended the recent "Kochtopus" confab in Palm Springs left behind evidence of the conspiracy of the corporatocracy to end our democratic Republic. The Washington Post reports, A rare look inside the Koch brothers’ political empire:

The labyrinthian design of the political network backed by the Koch brothers and their fellow conservative donors serves several purposes, but one of the biggest is to ensure the privacy of its financial backers. As we detailed last month, the money flows through a complex maze of tax-exempt groups and limited liability corporations, creating multiple barriers that shield the identities of the donors. Such anonymous contributions should be allowed, Charles Koch has argued, to protect people from the attacks that he and his brother David and their company have fielded. Critics say the Kochs and their allies seek to influence elections without accountability.

Now a document published by Mother Jones provides a rare glimpse inside the closely held network. The spreadsheet -- apparently left behind by a guest who attended a recent Koch-sponsored donor seminar at a resort outside Palm Springs – lists the names of more than 40 top donors, along with the senior Koch officials they met with during the three-day conclave.

House Judiciary Committee approves repeal of HB 2305 on a party-line vote

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I took the time this morning to watch the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Rep. "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth's HB 2196 to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305. "Fast Eddie" was in high dudgeon, taking offense to any suggestion that he or his committee are plotting an end-run around the citizens referendum ("citizens veto") of HB 2305 by repealing it, only to reenact it in smaller bills.

"Fast Eddie" sounded like the stereotypical Southern genteel gentleman, ""I do declare! Sir, you have offended my tender Southern sensibilities by impugning my character. I challenge you to a duel at dawn!" He must need a ladder to get up on his high horse.

His first victim was a witness from the League of Women Voters, which opposes HB 2196 (damn Dude, I though everyone loves the ladies at the LWV). "Fast Eddie" stated that he hasn't introduced any bill to replace HB 2305, and insisted "I have no knowledge" of any effort to break it up into pieces and to reintroduce the bill (he obviously does not read the newspapers where legislators are quoted saying this), on the other hand . . . "that doesn't mean it won't happen." HB 2305 "was my bill" and "I've made my postion clear. We'll repeal it and see what happens."

Jennifer Laredo of the Arizona Education Association, which also opposes HB 2196, echoed the same concerns as the League of Women Voters. Laredo bluntly stated that we can't get a definitive answer regarding any end-run around the citizens refrendum. There is no commitment from the legislature.

Action Alert: bill to repeal HB 2305 and to deprive you of your right to a 'citizens veto' is back on the agenda today

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Your presence is requested. For those of you who have signed up for a legislative account to submit testimony online, now's your chance.

Rep. "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth's (R-Gilbert) bill to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305 subject to a citizens referendum ("citizens veto"), HB 2196 (.pdf), will be heard in the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday. January 30, at 10:00 a.m. in Room HHR 4. Even the the Arizona Repuublic's Laurie Roberts is warning the Legislature plotting end run around voters on election law: a fair amount of skullduggery is afoot:

Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, is running a bill – HB 2196 — that would repeal last year’s election law changes. The bill will be heard at 10 a.m. Thursday in the House Judiciary Committee.

Sounds good, right? The Legislature is handed its first referendum in 16 years and it responds by killing the referred law, seemingly heeding the will of at least 111,000 voters.

Well, don’t get too choked up over our leaders’ reverence for the will of the people.

A Republican insider has told me that the plan is to repeal last year’s election law then pass a series of up to six new bills, enacting the same measures that 111,000 voters put on hold last year.

The Arizona Republic is all for denying you your constitutional rights

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

So the "editorial board" of The Arizona Republic, formerly known as The Arizona Republican, and the mouthpiece of the establishment Republican Party in Arizona, editorializes today that it is all for House Judiciary Committee Chairman "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth's (R-Gilbert) bill, HB 2196 (.pdf), to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, and to deny you, the citizens of Arizona, your constitutional right to vote on a citizens referred referendum.

More than 100,000 Arizona citizens signed the petitions for a "citizens veto" of the GOP Voter Suppression Act, exercising their constitutional right under the Arizona Constitution to vote to veto the legislature's anti-democratic measure.

No matter to this unsigned editorial from the "editorial board" of the Republic. Repeal HB 2305 and end this mess.

This opinion clearly is not shared by everyone at the Republic. Columnist Laurie Roberts called the Republican legislature's attempt to repeal a measure referred to the ballot for a "citizens veto" as "skullduggery." Are legislators plotting end run around voters in election-law referendum?  Columnist E.J. Montini said this action shows "exactly how much the Republicans who control the Legislature resent Arizona voters." Will lawmakers vote to deny your vote?  Columnist Linda Valdez has not written an opinion on the subject recenty, but in the past has opposed the GOP Voter Suppression Act.

New York Times: The Koch Party

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The New York Times editorialized on Sunday that the Republican Party has been displaced by the secretive "dark money" web of "Kochtopus" organizations, and is now the Koch Party. Maybe it's time for truth in advertising? The Koch Party:

Only a few weeks into this midterm election year, the right-wing political zeppelin is fully inflated with secret cash and is firing malicious falsehoods at supporters of health care reform.

As Carl Hulse of The Times reported recently, Democrats have been staggered by a $20 million advertising blitz produced by Americans for Prosperity, the conservative advocacy group organized and financed by the Koch brothers, billionaire industrialists. The ads take aim at House and Senate candidates for re-election who have supported the health law, and blame them for the hyped-up problems with the law’s rollout that now seem to be the sole plank in this year’s Republican platform.

* * *

Democrats intend to counter this campaign with the facts, but few of the candidates have the money to do so now. As a result, the campaign is taking a serious political toll, increasing the chances that Republicans who support a repeal of the law will win back the Senate majority this fall.

Naturally, Democrats are using the campaign to increase their own fund-raising, begging donors to give unlimited amounts to left-leaning super PACs and advocacy groups. But it is unlikely that they will be able to match the resources or the cunning of the Kochs, who are using vast pools of money earned through corporate revenues to build a network unrivaled in complexity and secrecy. This weekend, they are bringing together some of the biggest Republican bank accounts at a resort in Palm Springs, Calif., to collect money and plan this year’s strategy.

As Politico described it (Koch World 2014") on Friday, they have already set up an operation so sophisticated it rivals “even the official Republican Party in its ability to shape policy debates and elections.” Its components include a political consulting firm to recruit, train and support like-minded antigovernment candidates, which will be active in the congressional primaries. There is also a center that provides technology and administrative services to right-wing groups and candidates, an office that compiles and analyzes voter data and a youth advocacy group.

 

This week in the Arizona GOP's war on democracy

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

This has been some week in the Arizona GOP's war on democracy, hasn't it?

On Thursday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth's (R-Gilbert) bill, HB 2196 (.pdf), to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, and to deny the citizens of Arizona their constitutional right to vote on a citizens referred referendum, was pulled after angry citizens and the media showed up at the hearing. More than 100,000 Arizonans signed the petitions for a "citizens veto" of the GOP Voter Suppression Act, exercising their constitutional right under the Arizona Constitution to vote to veto the legislature's anti-democratic measure. No matter.

The Arizona GOP's plan is to repeal HB 2305, and to pass the separate provisions for voter suppression in the bill as separate bills to make another citizens referendum virtually impossible, and to get their way by "skullduggery," as Arizona Republic columnist Laurie Roberts called it. Are legislators plotting end run around voters in election-law referendum?" "Fast Eddie" promises to bring his bill back up for a hearing, possibly as early as this week.

On Friday, the Arizona GOP was in U.S. District Court arguing to a three judge panel of federal judges that you, the voters of Arizona, by enacting a citizens referred initiative to create the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC), Prop. 106 (2000), violated their federal constitutional right to gerrymander congressional districts in favor of GOP candidates. (Where are the Neo-Confederate "states' rights" federal "guvmint" haters now?) As I explained, their legal argument is entirely without merit. Arizona Legislature v. the AIRC court hearing this Friday. This is one of those frivolous "junk lawsuits" you hear about.

Presidential Commission on Election Administration releases its report

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Presidential Commission on Election Administration has released its report, The American Voting Experience: Report and Recommendations of the Presidential Commission on Election Administration (.pdf).

Greg Sargent writes at the Washington Post, A step towards better elections:

[The Commission's] prescriptions are very likely to please voting reformers, though they probably will cite areas where the panel could have gone farther. The key recommendations are improved voter registration through online registration and interstate exchange of voter lists, to ensure accuracy and speed the process; expansion of early voting; and improved voting technology.

One of the most important things about the report is that it unabashedly identifies our voting difficulties as a national problem that requires a national solution. “We view the recommendations as broad-based solutions to common problems evident on a national scale,” the report says. “The recommendations in this report are targeted at common problems shared by all or most jurisdictions. For the most part, they are of a size that should fit all.”

The report does discuss some regional variations, but this is a clear declaration of the scope of the problem, and the required scope of the solution. Indeed, the report recommends the creation of a national standard: “no citizen should have to wait more than 30 minutes to vote.”

“Some had eschewed national solutions, or any kinds of efforts to fix these problems, by suggesting they’re so particular and local that they can’t be solved with national policy,” Wendy Weiser, the director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, tells me. “This sets a national standard for judging our election performance against. Here is a bipartisan group with strong credibility from both parties, strongly putting their thumb on the scale for national solutions.”

Action Alert: bill to repeal HB 2305 and to deprive you of your right to a 'citizens veto' to be heard Thursday

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Your presence is requested. For those of you who have signed up for a legislative account to submit testimony online, now's your chance.

Rep. "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth's (R-Gilbert) bill to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305 subject to a citizens referendum ("citizens veto"), HB 2196 (.pdf), will be heard in the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday.

Press release from the Protect Your Right to Vote Committee:

NEWS ALERT! House Committee to Vote on Repeal of HB2305

First Step in Effort to Circumvent Protect Your Right to Vote Referendum

PHOENIX -- The Legislature will attempt on Thursday to revive a massive effort to make it more difficult for Arizonans to vote in 2014, a plan that had been put on ice by a successful citizen’s referendum during the summer.

The Protect Your Right to Vote Committee referendum gathered over 146,000 signatures to put the omnibus House Bill 2305 – which would prevent tens of thousands of eligible voters from casting ballots if it becomes law – to a statewide vote in 2014. According to recent media reports, incumbent lawmakers bent on getting tough with voters intend to circumvent the referendum vote by first repealing HB2305, and then re-passing the various voter roadblocks as new individual bills this session.

Step one begins Thursday morning when the House Judiciary Committee hears House Bill 2196, which repeals last session’s HB2305. Judiciary Chairman Eddie Farnsworth, R-Mesa, is the sponsor of both bills. The hearing begins at 9:30 a.m. in House Hearing Room 4, 1700 W. Washington Street.

The Arizona Daily Star's creative headline writer strikes again!

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I almost spit out my coffee this morning when I opened up the fishwrap newspaper this morning. The print edition headline on the front page of our sad small-town newspaper, the Arizona Daily Star, reads "Setback for AZ's voting ID effort" -- on Martin Luther King Day, no less.

A quick Google search reveals that no other newspaper publishing this Howard Fischer report used this politically biased headline. Most used "Citizen proof request rejected by federal eelction commission." The Sierra Vista Herald used "State bid to change federal election law rejected." Hell, even our sad small-town newspaper did not use this politically biased headline in its online version: Panel rejects AZ's bid to require proof of citizenship for voting. All factual headlines.

The headline should read "A victory for voting rights," or "GOP voter suppression rejected."

EAC files its response in proof-of-citizenship case

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Arizona Attorney General Tom "banned for life by the SEC" Horne and Secretary of State Ken "Birther" Bennett are in U.S. District Court in Kansas, Kris W. Kobach et al. v. United States Election Assistance Commission (13-4095-EFM-DJW) suing the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and threatening to impose a two-tier system for voting in Arizona and Kansas based upon whether you registered to vote with the Arizona voter registration form or the federal motor-voter form (NVRA). The Judge in his Order Remanding Matter to EAC for Final Agency Action (.pdf) gave the EAC until January 17 to respond to the order of the Court.

The EAC filed its response just minutes before the midnight deadline. Read the richly detailed 46-page EAC Final Decision on Proof of Citizenship Requests (.pdf). A bullet point summary of the EAC analysis follows:

• Congress specifically considered and rejected proof-of-citizenship requirements whn enacting the NVRA.
• The requested proof-of-citizenship requirements are inconsistent with the EAC's NVRA regualtions.
• The requested proof-of-citizenship requirements are inconsistent with the EAC's prior determinations.
• The Supreme Court's Inter-Tribal Council opinion guides the EAC's assessment of the states' requests.
• The states' requested proof-of-citizenship instructions would require applicants to submit more information than is necessary to enable election officials to assess eligibility.
• The requested changes would undermine the purpose of the NVRA.
• The requested proof-of-citizenship requirements are not similar to Louisiana's request for modifications to the state-specific instructions.
• The decision by the Federal Voting Assistance Program to grant Arizona's request has no bearing on the state's requests to the EAC.

CONCLUSION: "For the foregoing reasons, the Commission DENIES the States’ requests."

In short, go pound sand.

'Kochtopus' dark money organizations with Arizona ties have yet to pay $15M fine to California

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

In other news you never see reported in Arizona's GOP-friendly media, California has yet to receive the $15 million in penalties imposed on "Kochtopus" dark money campaign organizations after an investigation by the Fair Political Practices Commission into secret political donations last year by the Phoenix-based Center to Protect Patient Rights, run by GOP political consultant Sean Noble, tied to billionaire Republican contributors Charles and David Koch.

The Los Angeles Times reports, Two groups that used secret political donations haven't paid penalties:

State authorities have yet to receive $15 million in penalties they imposed on campaign groups after a headline-making investigation into secret political donations.

The money is owed to California's general fund, where it could support government programs.

Two Arizona nonprofits paid $1 million in fines for their role in hiding the source of political cash sent to California in 2012. But the two campaign groups that received and spent the money were ordered to pay $15 million and have sent nothing — seven weeks after the Nov. 30 deadline.

That didn't take long: new versions of the GOP Voter Suppression Act to be filed

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Well that didn't take long. Yesterday i posted that the AZ Lege seeks to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, to deprive the voters of their 'citizens veto'. A co-author of the GOP Voter Suppression Act, Sen. Michele Reagan (R-Scottsdale), indicated that she would like to "repeal the bill before it goes up for the referendum election. However, she would like lawmakers to go back and pass portions of the bill once again in 2015."

"Republican Sen. Adam Driggs of Phoenix, who has had discussions with both Reagan and McComish about repealing the law, said he can’t control what bills lawmakers decide to introduce.  But he said he would discourage lawmakers from immediately sponsoring new legislation including measures from a repealed HB2305."

Rep. "Fast Eddie" Farnsworth (R-Gilbert), has already filed the bill for repeal of HB 2305, as HB 2196 (.pdf).

Howard Fischer reports, Arizona lawmaker considering end run on voting-law referendum:

State lawmakers are moving to repeal major changes in voting laws made last year — and then re-enacting at least some of them in a way to thwart a referendum drive.

The proposal by Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, comes after foes of those changes gathered enough signatures to put the measure on hold until voters have a final say in November.

HB 2196 would repeal the law, making the November vote unnecessary.

Voter ID on trial in Pennsylvania: Commonwealth Court Judge strikes down voter ID

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

We had to wait awhile for the decision in this case, but Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard McGinley has finally ruled, striking down Pennsylvania's voter ID law as an unreasonable burden on the fundamental right to vote (under the Pennsylvania Constitution). Judge strikes down Pa. voter ID:

A judge Friday struck down Pennsylvania's controversial voter-identification requirement, in a case that likely will wind up before the state's highest court.

Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard L. McGinley, a Democrat, said that the Republican-backed law would unreasonably burden the fundamental right to vote, and that the state had been unable to explain convincingly why it was necessary.

"Voting laws are designed to assure a free and fair election; the Voter ID Law does not further this goal," McGinley wrote in his 103-page ruling.

Time for 'None of The Above' option on the ballot

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I have been advocating for this option in Arizona for years, to no avail. For many years I lived in a GOP voter registration dominated district where frequently the Republican candidate appeared on the ballot without opposition. An "undervote" by leaving the ballot blank for that race does not indicate my dissatisfaction with that office holder. I wanted the option of "None of The Above" to register a protest vote against my elective representative. I am sure many Republicans probably feel the same way in Democratic voter registration dominated districts. Hopefully it would chasten them and make them more responsive to their constituents.

Hell, based upon recent polling, it appears voters would prefer "None of The Above" to any candidate appearing on the ballot. That should be the voter's right.

Nevada’s unique “none of the above” voting option for statewide races was recently upheld after the U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to consider an appeal by national Republicans. US Supreme Court won’t hear Nevada ballot case:

The option has been on the ballot since 1976. It applies only to statewide races and was enacted by the Legislature to try to curb voter apathy in the wake of the Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon.

The intent was to give voters a way to voice their displeasure with candidates and elected officials at the ballot box.

Bipartisan 'fix' to the Voting Rights Act filed in Congress

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Ari Berman at The Nation reports, Members of Congress Introduce a New Fix for the Voting Rights Act:

Today Representatives Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and John Conyers (D-MI) and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) will introduce legislation to strengthen the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision last June invalidating a critical section of the VRA. The legislation, known as “The Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2014,” represents the first attempt by a bipartisan group in Congress to reinstate the vital protections of the VRA that the Supreme Court took away.

* * *

The Sensenbrenner-Conyers-Leahy bill strengthens the VRA in five distinct ways:

1: The legislation draws a new coverage formula for Section 4, thereby resurrecting Section 5. States with five violations of federal law to their voting changes over the past fifteen years will have to submit future election changes for federal approval. This new formula would currently apply to Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Local jurisdictions would be covered if they commit three or more violations or have one violation and “persistent, extremely low minority turnout” over the past fifteen years.

The formula is based on a rolling calendar, updated with a current fifteen-year time period to exempt states who are no longer discriminating or add new ones who are, creating a deterrent against future voting rights violations. It’s based on empirical conditions and current data, not geography or a fixed time period—which voting rights advocates hope will satisfy Chief Justice John Roberts should the new legislation be enacted and reach the Supreme Court.

The new Section 4 proposal is far from perfect. It does not apply to states with an extensive record of voting discrimination, like Alabama (where civil rights protests in Selma gave birth to the VRA), Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia, which were previously subject to Section 5. Nor does it apply to states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that have enacted new voting restrictions in the past few years.

AZ Lege seeks to repeal the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, to deprive the voters of their 'citizens veto'

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Several capitol observers have been warning about this possibility for some time now. The face of voter suppression in Arizona, Sen. Michele Reagan (R-Scottsdale), is now preparing to proceed with a despicable plan to deprive the voters of Arizona of their citizens referendum ("citizens veto") of the GOP Voter Suppression Act, HB 2305, that she co-authored by pulling an Emily Litella: "Never mind!"

That's right, the evil GOP bastards, seeking to deprive the Democratic Party of a major motivational tool for their base voters to turn out in force in November, is proposing to repeal HB 2305, and then to enact portions of the law as new legislation. The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reports Legislators consider preemptive repeal of controversial election bill:

Lawmakers are considering introducing legislation to repeal last year’s election reform bill, HB2305, which remains on hold because opponents gathered enough signatures to force a referendum on the law this November.

Republican Sen. Michele Reagan of Scottsdale said she is working with leadership to repeal the bill before it goes up for the referendum election. However, she would like lawmakers to go back and pass portions of the bill once again in 2015.

Reminder: Arizona State Hearing - National Commission on Voting Rights

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Arizona Hearing on Voting

Thursday, January 9, 2014
10:00am - 5:00pm

ASU College of Law
Armstrong Hall - Great Hall
1100 S. McAllister Ave.
Tempe, AZ 85287
View Map | Get Directions

Register Now at AZHearing.lawyerscommittee.org

ASL and Spanish interpretation will be provided

Attention voters, activists, elections officials and all with a stake in Arizona’s elections! We invite you to come out to ASU College of Law on January 9, 2014 to hear about the state of voting in Arizona and share your voting experiences. The hearing is free, nonpartisan, and open to the public! There will be three formal panels of witnesses testifying on topics such as voting discrimination, registration and polling place problems, access for voters with disabilities and language minorities, and more!

This hearing is part of a series of fact-finding hearings hosted by the National Commission on Voting Rights across the country to learn more about the current landscape of elections. Over the past few years, numerous states have enacted restrictive voting laws, while many others continue to grapple with recurring election administration and electoral reform challenges. The Commission will document what keeps voters from the ballot box and election reform efforts that expand access.

We want to hear from you! The public can participate by providing oral testimony during the hearing’s public comment periods and by submitting written testimony by email to [email protected]. You can also submit written testimony or request assistance writing your testimony by visiting AZHearing.lawyerscommittee.org.

RSVP is encouraged, but not required. RSVP here. (Por favor, confirme su asistencia aquí.)

For questions, please contact Erandi Zamora at [email protected].

Register Now

Sponsors and Supporting Organizations (list in formation):
ACLU of Arizona • Arizona Advocacy Network • ASU College of Law Indian Legal Clinic • Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. • Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law • Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund • National Action Network • National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

WaPo investigates the 'Kochtopus' dark money network; Arizona's political media ignores the political corruption in its own backyard

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Both The Arizona Republic and the Arizona Daily Star rely heavily on the Washington Post for reporting and syndicated columnists. But the editors are highly selective in the reports they choose to publish. For example, neither Arizona newspaper thought it newsworthy to publish the big investigative report by Matea Gold in the Washington Post on Monday about the evil bastard Koch brothers. Hmmm, is Arizona's GOP-friendly media still protecting Sean Noble and the "Kochtopus" dark money laundering organization Center to Protect Patient Rights? Koch-backed political coalition, designed to shield donors, raised $400 million in 2012:

The political network spearheaded by conservative billionaires Charles and David Koch has expanded into a far-reaching operation of unrivaled complexity, built around a maze of groups that cloaks its donors, according to an analysis of new tax returns and other documents.

The filings show that the network of politically active nonprofit groups backed by the Kochs and fellow donors in the 2012 elections financially outpaced other independent groups on the right and, on its own, matched the long-established national coalition of labor unions that serves as one of the biggest sources of support for Democrats.

The resources and the breadth of the organization make it singular in American politics: an operation conducted outside the campaign finance system, employing an array of groups aimed at stopping what its financiers view as government overreach. Members of the coalition target different constituencies but together have mounted attacks on the new health-care law, federal spending and environmental regulations.

Key players in the Koch-backed network have already begun engaging in the 2014 midterm elections, hiring new staff members to expand operations and strafing House and Senate Democrats with hard-hitting ads over their support for the Affordable Care Act.

Arizona State Hearing - National Commission on Voting Rights

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Announcement from the Arizona Advocacy Network:

JANUARY 9, 2014
10:00 a.m.- 4:00 p.m.
ASU College of Law - Armstrong Hall - Great Hall
1100 S. McAllister Ave. Tempe AZ

Join Arizona Advocacy Network, The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and community partners in a commission that will hear testimony dealing with voting discrimination and election administration problems throughout the country.

The purpose of the commission and the hearings will be to build the Congressional record for a Voter Registration Act fix.

Volunteers are needed! Please contact [email protected] for more information

Come and hear about the state of voting in Arizona and share your voting experiences. The hearing is free, nonpartisan, and open to the public! There will be three formal panels of witnesses testifying on topics such as voting discrimination, registration and polling place problems, access for voters with disabilities and language minorities, and more!

Primary races for Secretary of State - What I expect to hear from the candidates

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Democrats in Arizona now have a primary race for Secretary of State -- the chief elections officer in Arizona. Sen. Leah Landrum Taylor (LD 16) is joined by former Attorney General Terry Goddard as of Monday. Democrat Goddard to run for secretary of state.

On the Republican side we have the co-author of the GOP Voter Supression Act, HB 2305, Sen. Michele Reagan (subject to a "citizens veto" referendum on the 2014 ballot), Rep. Justin Pierce, former state Sen. Jack Harper, and self-funded millionaire Wil Cardon.

So let me lay down some markers of what I expect to hear from the candidates in the way of policy proposals for election law in Arizona.

I have been arguing for some time in favor of the "universal voter registration" proposals from the Brennan Center for Justice. Voter Registration Modernization | Brennan Center for Justice.

In a universal voter registration system, it would be the government's obligation to ensure that every eligible citizen was registered to vote. Individual citizens could opt out if they wished, but the registration process itself would no longer serve as a barrier to the right to vote.

Here are some of the important ways that federal policy can and should encourage the states to improve on the current voter registration system:

1. Mandate that the states put systems in place that would phase in universal voter registration, while preserving the states' ability to experiment with different systems.

2. Require states to immediately implement permanent registration, so that voters wouldn't have to re-register if they moved within a state.

3. Require states to implement Election Day registration, as a fail-safe mechanism for eligible voters missing from the voter rolls for any reason.

4. Provide the federal funding that states would need to ensure that every eligible voter is registered.

In 2013, Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown came within one vote in the state senate of passage of House Bill 3521, a universal voter registation bill, when a Democratic senator balked at voting for the bill. Secretary Brown promises to bring this bill back again in 2014.

Court cases to watch in the coming weeks

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Our lawless legislature has several cases in court to keep an eye out for a decision in the coming weeks.

The first case of importance is Biggs, et al. vs. Brewer, et al. (CV2013-011699), the Tea-Publican legislature's challenge to Governor Jan Brewer's Medicaid (AHCCCS) expansion plan heard in Maricopa County Superior Court by Judge Kathleen Cooper on December 13, 2013. A Minute Entry dated December 18 says the matter is "under advisement." Judge Cooper did not indicate at the December 13 hearing when she would rule on pending motions, but there is a deadline of sorts -- the "ObamaCare" Medicaid expansion provisions become effective on January 1, 2014.

Harris, et al. v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (CV-12-0894-PHX-ROS-NVW-RRC), the Tea-Publican legislature's challenge to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission's (AIRC) state legislative districts map, was heard by a three judge panel of federal judges on March 22 and concluded on March 30, 2013. Supplemental briefs addressing the effect, if any, of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder on this case wrapped up by August 9. A decision has been pending for more than 120 days.

We are already well into the 2014 election cycle with the primary filing deadline in May. I would argue that time has already expired on the game clock -- there needs to be certainty in legislative district lines, and the 2012 legislative district lines should remain in place for 2014. I anticipate a decision in this case shortly.

National Youth Summit 'Freedom Summer' Free Webcast

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

2014 is the 50th Anniversary of the "Freedom Summer" Mississippi voter registration project. I am old enough to remember the news reports each evening about this voting rights effort. I have had the privilege and honor of meeting several participants in Freedom Summer.

For those of you not old enough to have lived during this era, I wonder whether the Civil Rights Movement is even taught in schools at all.

There are far too many people who take their "right to vote" for granted, and choose to forget that people had to fight for your right. They risked their lives and went to prison, were beaten, and were killed for the right to vote that so many take for granted today.

The Smithsonian National Musueum of American History has an educational program on Freedom Summer scheduled for February 5, 2014, during Black History Month. O Say Can You See? Blog: Freedom Summer:

Remembering the civil rights movement at the grassroots

Joy Lyman, one of the museum's Freedom School Scholars, will moderate the National Youth Summit on Freedom Summer on February 5, 2014. Joy hosts the latest episode of the History Explorer podcast series, featuring the experiences of activist Zoharah Simmons from a presentation by the museum's Program in African American Culture in 2000 called "Fighting for My Rights." Joy reflects on how the Civil Rights Movement can be better taught to encompass the complexity of the story.

The National Youth Summit on Freedom Summer will be held February 5, 2014 and webcast live from Jackson, Mississippi

Arizona needs a 'Moral Mondays' movement

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The most fascinating political development of 2013 to observe was the rise of the progressive "Moral Mondays" movement in North Carolina in response to the radicalized extremist Tea-Publican controlled state legislature.

"Moral Mondays" engages in civil disobedience protests, organized in part by local religious leaders including William Barber, head of the North Carolina chapter of the NAACP. Members of the protest movement meet every Monday to protest an action by the North Carolina legislature and then enter the legislature building. Once they enter, a number are peacefully arrested each Monday.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution recently reported that a Moral Mondays organization was being established in Georgia. Your daily jolt: Moral Monday protests coming to state Capitol:

The Moral Monday protests that rocked North Carolina (and led to hundreds of arrests each Monday) last year may be coming to Georgia.

A group called Moral Monday Georgia (moralmondayga.org) has quietly begun gathering supporters and planning organizing meetings this month. They plan one of the first actions on the Jan. 13, the first Monday of the session, and the platform focuses on a call to expand Medicaid, restore funding to public schools and raising the minimum wage.

On Christmas Day, the AP reported that the "Moral Mondays" movement will spread to other Southern States (i.e., Red States). Moral Mondays to continue, spread to other states:

The Moral Monday movement to protest changes in North Carolina public policy that organizers believe are extreme and hurt the state won’t abate in 2014 and will spread to other states, its leader said.

Activists from a dozen states attended a meeting in Raleigh earlier this month to learn how to hold similar protests in their states.

The 'Kochtopus' Death Star kills Citizens Clean Elections

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I have to admit that I was surprised by how quickly the Arizona Supreme Court entered its order setting aside the injunction of the Court of Appeals and agreed with the arguments of the "Kochtopus" Death Star, the Goldwater Institute, on higher campaign finance limits. It's as if there was no deliberation at all and the minds of the Justices were already made up before oral argument. That does not look good for appearance sake.

With its order allowing the higher campaign finance limits to go into effect, State Supreme Court lifts campaign finance limits, the Arizona Supreme Court has effectively ruled on the case despite the fact that a trial on the merits is pending before Superior Court Judge Mark Brain in the Maricopa County Superior Court. I am not sure what purpose would be served by proceeding with this litigation, other than to allow the "Kochtopus" Death Star to make its argument that there should be no campaign finance limits at all because "money=speech," under its gross distortion of the First Amendment.

The case for aggressive litigation in the AIRC redistricting cases

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

This is the reason why I believe the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) should have been aggressive and filed a counter-claim against the secretive GOP redistricting organization FAIR Trust and its lawyer/lobbyists who tried to influence the AIRC on behalf of the Arizona GOP delegation. It would have allowed for litigation discovery and testimony under oath from everyone involved in FAIR Trust, and it would have conflicted out the lawyer/lobbyists who are currently representing the GOP in the redistricting lawsuits before the courts.

The Orlando Sentinel reports, Florida Supreme Court rules lawmakers can be forced to testify in redistricting court fight:

The Florida Supreme Court ruled Friday that state lawmakers can be forced to testify and turn over documents related to whether they intentionally redrew political maps for partisan gain last year.

The fight between voting-rights groups such as the League of Women Voters of Florida and the Legislature stems from 2010 constitutional amendments adopted by voters that specify lawmakers couldn’t base their decisions when re-drawing congressional and legislative districts on the desire for political gain.

Specifically, the Fair Districts amendments outlawed drawing new lines with the intent to favor or disfavor incumbents or political parties.

AZ Supreme Court to hear arguments re: injunction against campaign finance limits on Tuesday

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Last month, the Arizona Court of Appeals issued a preliminary injunction against HB2593 (new higher campaign contribution limits) in a ruling in Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission, et al. v. The Honorable Mark H. Brain (CV13-0341-PR) and real parties in interest (.pdf).

The Arizona Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Tuesday, December 17 at 9:30 a.m. on the request by Senate President Andy Biggs and House Speaker Andy Tobin to overturn the Court of Appeals’ injunction against HB2593.

As previosuly reported, the Supreme Court will only hear arguments on the narrow statutory construction issue that the appellate court cited in its injunction. Only the injuncton is at issue before the high court.

As I posted previously:

There is no reason to believe, as the Court of Appeals apparently believed by issuing a temporary injunction, that candidates will suffer irreperable harm if the 2014 election is conducted under the same campaign finance limits law in place for the 2012 election. The merits of the case will be tried to the trial court, and whatever decision Judge Brain renders will be appealed by the parties to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court in the normal course of the appeal process.  A final decision will be rendered in time for the 2016 election.

Stay tuned . . .

(Update) Judge sends Arizona Prop. 200 voter registration case back to the EAC

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Wichita Eagle reports today, Judge sends voter citizenship suit back:

A federal judge has sent back to federal elections officials a request by Kansas and Arizona to force modifications in a national voter registration form so the states can fully enforce proof-of-citizenship requirements.

U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren on Friday sent the states' lawsuit back to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, with instructions that the commission has to have a final decision by Jan. 17.

The states want the federal form to include instructions requiring Kansas and Arizona residents to provide a birth certificate, passport or other proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote.

The Justice Department says such a change places an additional obstacle for eligible voters and would affect nationwide policy by setting a precedent.

Well Judge, here's the problem with your order. The EAC has no commissioners to comply with your order.

Senate Tea-Publicans have used obstruction of presidential appointments to the EAC to "nullify" the agency out of existence without ever enacting legislation to terminate the agency. This unprecedented form of "nullification" is being remedied with executive and judicial nominees now that Democrats exercised the constitutional option to eliminate the Senate filibuster rule, but the confirmation process has not yet made it down to presidential appointments to the EAC.

Arizona Prop. 200 voter registration case to be heard Friday

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Press release from the Brennan Center for Justice:

Federal Court in KS to Hear Arguments on KS, AZ Voter Reg Restrictions

The U.S. District Court in Wichita will hear arguments tomorrow, December 13, in Kris W. Kobach et al. v. United States Election Assistance Commission, which seeks to undermine federal voter protections and restrict voter registration access.

Kansas and Arizona filed the lawsuit in August to require voters to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote, despite Supreme Court finding this summer invalidating Arizona’s restrictive registration requirements.

Last month, the League of Women Voters U.S., Kansas, and Arizona – represented by Brennan Center for Justice and others – filed a motion to intervene in the case, challenging the states’ proposed citizenship restrictions for voter registration.

“The Kansas and Arizona laws would make it harder for certain citizens to vote,” said Wendy Weiser, who directs the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program and represents the League affiliates in this case. “The Supreme Court this year invalidated Arizona’s law and clearly confirmed Congress’s authority to protect the right to vote in federal elections. This lawsuit by Kansas and Arizona is a transparent attempt to undermine that authority, and it could seriously hurt voters.”

WHAT: U.S. District Court injunction hearing on Kansas and Arizona’s voter registration lawsuit

WHEN: Friday, December 13, 2013, 9:30 AM CT

WHERE: Wichita U.S. Courthouse, Courtroom 408 (EFM)
             401 N. Market
             Wichita, Kansas 67202

WHO: U.S. Election Assistance Commission, States of Arizona and Kansas

If you would like more information or have any questions, please contact Erik Opsal with the Brennan Center for Justice: [email protected], 646-292-8356 or visit the Brennan Center's case page HERE.

###

Two critical lawsuits to get a hearing in December

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Two critical lawsuits will get a hearing in December.

The lawsuit filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on behalf of 36 Republican legislators and a pair of citizens by lawyers for the Goldwater Institute contends the hospital assessment in the law is a tax that required a 2/3 vote of the Legislature under the state Constitution. It also alleges that allowing the director of the state's Medicaid program to set the assessment and exempt some providers gives him taxing authority that properly belongs to the state Legislature. Judge sets date to hear Medicaid expansion lawsuit:

Maricopa County Superior Court judge Katherine Cooper set a Dec. 9 date to hear the suit filed in September on behalf of 36 Republican state lawmakers and a pair of citizens.

* * *

Brewer's lawyers want Cooper to throw out the suit. They say the plaintiffs don't have standing to sue and lawmakers could sue to stop any law it moves forward.

The Arizona Republic reported, Brewer’s lawyers: Suit challenging Medicaid expansion has no merit:

Arizona lawmakers on the losing side of the Medicaid expansion vote have no legal authority to stop the new law that broadens eligibility for low-income residents, attorneys for Gov. Jan Brewer argued in a court filing Wednesday.

Brewer’s attorneys asked Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Katherine Cooper to dismiss the lawsuit, filed last month by the conservative Goldwater Institute, saying the court should not get involved in a legislative dispute.

The Republican lawmakers “are a disgruntled faction within the Legislature that was outvoted by a bipartisan coalition,” wrote Douglas Northrup, an attorney with Fennemore Craig. “Legislators’ alleged injury is a loss of legislative and political power.”

Three other plaintiffs — two constituents and the state director of Americans for Prosperity — also lack authority to sue, he argued, largely because they can’t show they’ve suffered any harm from the portion of the law that’s being challenged, which is an assessment on hospitals to help pay for expansion.

“If the court found that standing to challenge a law’s constitutionality is found with such tenuous allegations of injury, every constituent whose legislator voted against an allegedly unconstitutional bill would have standing,” Northrup wrote.

He argued that the Arizona Supreme Court recognized the limits of legislative standing in a 2003 case, ruling that individual legislators did not have authority to challenge then-Gov. Janet Napolitano’s line-item veto authority.

Treasury proposes new rules for 501(c)(4) tax exempt status

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

About damn time! Treasury proposing new rules on tax-exemption:

The Treasury Department proposed new guidelines Tuesday that would affect so-called social welfare groups applying for tax-exempt status[.]

The intended rule change would establish a new term, “candidate-related political activity,” to help the IRS determine which organizations should be disqualified from 501 (c)(4) status.

The department said it will also seek recommendations for changing how much of a group’s activities could fall into that prohibited category before they would be ineligible for tax-exemption.

Many lawmakers have criticized the IRS’s current policy of allowing organizations to qualify as long as the majority of their activities do not involve political actions, a standard that is difficult to measure.

The newly proposed rules would clarify that social welfare does not count as prohibited activity. It would also define the term “candidate-related political activity” to include communications, grants and contributions and activities closely related to elections or candidates advocating for a clearly identified political candidate.

The Notice of Proposed Rule Making is Here.

'Kochtopus' ALEC model legislation to assault the 17th Amendment

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The "Kochtopus"-funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is considering model legislation to assault the 17th Amendment -- the direct election of U.S. Senators -- at its December meeting. Think Progress reports, ALEC Mulls Assault On Constitution’s 17th Amendment — The Direct Election Of Senators:

In an agenda for a December meeting posted on ALEC’s website, one of the items up for review is language for a bill, called the Equal State’s Enfranchisement Act, that would allow state legislatures to add a candidate’s name to the ballot for a U.S. senate seat, along with the names of those nominated by voters.

“A nomination petition stating that the United States Senate is the office to be filled, the name and residence of the candidate and other information required by this section shall be filed with each Presiding Officer of the legislature of the state of __________,” the model legislation states. “The petition shall be filed at the same time as primary nomination papers and petitions are required to be filed.” The language also adds that at least 20 percent of the “then-sitting members of the legislature” must sign onto the nomination.

If ALEC’s members decide to further pursue this act and manage to get it passed in any state, it would be an assault to the 17th Amendment of the Constitution.

GOP ramps up its war on voting

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Zach Roth at MSNBC reports With eye on 2014, GOP ramps up war on voting:

Working ballot by ballot, county by county, the Republican Party is attempting to alter voting laws in the biggest and most important swing states in the country in hopes of carving out a sweeping electoral advantage for years to come.

Changes already on the books or in bills before state legislatures would make voting harder, create longer lines, and threaten to disenfranchise millions of voters from Ohio to Florida, Pennsylvania to Wisconsin, Georgia to Arizona and Texas.

Efforts underway include moving election days, ending early voting and forcing strict new voter ID laws. The results could significantly cut voter turnout in states where, historically, low participation has benefited Republicans.

In the 10 months since President Obama created a bipartisan panel to address voting difficulties, 90 restrictive voting bills have been introduced in 33 states. So far, nine have become law, according to a recent comprehensive roundup by the Brennan Center for Justice – but others are moving quickly through statehouses.

“We are continuing to see laws that appear to be aimed at making it more difficult to vote—for no good reason,” Daniel Tokaji, an election law expert at Ohio State University, said in an interview.