AZ Top Two Primary Ballot Initiative

Arizona's Open Government/Open Elections organization has been trying to get Top Two Open Primary as a ballot initiative on the 2012 General Election.

Arizona voters are entitled to decide if they want to scrap the current partisan system of nominating candidates, the state Supreme Court ruled Friday.

In a brief order, the Supreme Court justices overturned a lower court ruling which concluded that the initiative to create a wide-open primary was constitutionally flawed. Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Mark Brain had said it illegally dealt with more than one subject. The justices did not explain their decision, promising details later.

Friday's ruling is a significant victory for proponents of the change which would have all candidates from all political stripes run against each other for statewide, legislative, county supervisor posts, and overrule Tucson's partisan primary for mayor and city council. Then the top two would face off in the November general election.

But the Supreme Court action does not mean the "Open Government/Open Elections" initiative actually will be on the November ballot.

County election officials are still reviewing a random sample of initiative petition sheets to verify that there are at least 259,213 valid signatures to put the issue on the November ballot. And some preliminary numbers from the state's largest county suggest the petition drive could fall short.

Matt Roberts, spokesman for the Secretary of State's Office, said after clearly invalid petitions were removed, that left more than 358,000 signatures. And a 33 percent failure rate, if that proves to be the final number, it would leave just about 240,000 valid signers, short of the 259,213 needed to qualify for the ballot.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us

AZ Judge Rules Top Two Primary Initiative can not be on Ballot

Thanks to Ballot Access News for this post.

On August 6, Arizona Superior Court Judge Mark H. Brain ruled that the initiative for a Top-Two Open Primary violates the single-subject rule, and therefore cannot be on the November ballot. He found that the portion of the initiative that eliminates elections for party committee members is not the same subject as imposing a top-two primary for public office. The decision is Save Our Vote v Bennett, cv2012-010717.

It is extremely likely that the proponents will appeal this decision to the Arizona Supreme Court.

The question is not whether using public funds to elect party officers is good or bad policy, but whether using public funds to elect party officers is the same subject, or a different subject, that changing the method by which public officers are elected.

This is exactly what I told the "Open Government Committee" not to do when this was being developed. The process I spoke to them about was first, any party can pay for any selection process they want to use to designate their candidate choices. Then these party choices, any other party members, independents, and write-ins would be on the open primary ballot funded by the tax payers. To make this work, the entry to get on the ballot must be as equal as possible.

The open primary voting could result with a winner if a candidate gets 60%+ votes. Otherwise you then go to the Top Two in the General Election. This could make an uncontested candidate still having to convince the electorate, as any write-in could get enough votes to cause the voters' to force a General Election.

Another twist, if the turnout is under a certain % value, there will always be a Top Two General Election.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us