Archives

PROP 132: Initiatives; supermajority vote; requirement

Summary: Prop 132 would amend the state Constitution to require a 60% vote to increase taxes at the ballot.

Arguments for it: Proponents argue it protects taxpayers from runaway spending by requiring the same kind of supermajority vote at the ballot as lawmakers need at the Capitol to raise taxes, and that the higher threshold will make it harder for out-of-state special interests to raise taxes on Arizona citizens.

Who’s for it: Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, The Goldwater Institute, Gov. Doug Ducey, Arizona Tax Research Association (ATRA)

Arguments against it: Lawmakers already need a two-thirds majority vote to pass any increases on taxes or to roll back tax credits and exemptions, and that supermajority requirement has hindered lawmakers’ ability to pass even common-sense tax increases. The same rule isn’t applied to tax cuts. They note the original bill highlights supporters’ real intent, as it would have applied that supermajority requirement to all initiatives.

Who’s against it: League of Women Voters of Arizona, Arizona Center for Economic Progress, Arizona Education Association. The AZPHA Board is currently asking membership to ratify our OPPOSITION to 132

 

PROP 209: Predatory Debt Collection Protection Act 

Summary: The measure makes multiple changes to state statutes on wage garnishment debt collection. It limits the interest rate on medical debt to 3%. It would protect more equity in homes, vehicles, household goods and bank accounts from being taken by creditors. It also limits the amount that can be garnished from your wages to pay off debts.

Arguments for it: Medical debt, in particular, causes many Arizonans to fall into bankruptcy. The standards for wage garnishment and asset collection are outdated. People shouldn’t lose their homes or vehicles because of predatory debt.

Who’s backing it: Healthcare Rising Arizona (which receives support from the SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West), Arizona Public Health Association, Arizona Students’ Association, Phoenix Workers Alliance, Neighbors Forward AZ, Democrats of Casa Grande.

Arguments against it: The measure is supported by out-of-state special interests. It would have far-reaching effects and could cause creditors to charge more to make up for lost costs. It would be bad for business.

Who’s opposing it: Goldwater Institute, Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry, Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Tucson Metro Chamber, Greater Phoenix Chamber, Arizona Bankers Association

 

PROP 211: Voters’ Right to Know Act

Summary: Prop 211 would change state law to require political groups and people spending more than $50,000 to influence the outcome of an election to disclose the original donor of contributions over $5,000. It would also require real-time reporting of significant campaign spending and allow the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission to enforce the provisions of Prop 211. Allows civil penalties for violations.

Arguments for it: “Dark money” is a corrupting influence on our democratic system and Arizona voters deserve to know who is funding political campaigns. Prop 211 will bring transparency and accountability to campaign messaging because voters will know who is paying for those ads. And it’ll stop regulated utility companies like Arizona Public Service (APS) from secretly funding the campaigns of their own regulators, as has happened in past elections.

Who’s backing it: League of Women Voters of Arizona, former Phoenix mayors Paul Johnson and Terry Goddard. The AZPHA Board is currently asking membership to ratify our SUPPORT for 211.

Arguments against it: Disclosing the names of political donors will open them up to threats and harassment from opponents.

Who’s opposing it: Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Center for Arizona Policy Action

 

PROP 308: Tuition; post-secondary education

Summary: Prop 308 would change state law to allow all Arizona students, regardless of immigration status, to be eligible for financial aid and in-state tuition at Arizona universities and community colleges. Students must have graduated from an Arizona high school and been enrolled for two years. The measure earned bipartisan support at the Capitol. It would ask voters to repeal Prop 300 from 2006, which passed overwhelmingly at the time and barred non-citizens from receiving in-state tuition.

Arguments for it: Arizona students should be able to attend Arizona universities, regardless of immigration status. Undocumented students and Dreamers are a vital part of our economy. It’s good for business and it’s the right thing to do.

Who’s backing it: Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Southern Arizona Leadership Council, Arizona Education Association, Aliento Education Fund, Valley Interfaith Council, Stand for Children, Local First Arizona. AZPHA Board is currently asking membership to ratify our SUPPORT for 308.

Arguments against it: It offers in-state tuition to undocumented immigrants.

Who’s opposing it: Former Senate President Russell Pearce, the Arizona Republican Party, RidersUSA

 

PROP 310: Fire districts; funding; sales tax increase

Summary: Prop 310 would increase sales taxes by a tenth of a penny on the dollar to fund rural fire districts.

Arguments for it: Fire districts serve 1.5 million Arizonans and are responsible for not only fighting fires but providing emergency medical services in car crashes along major parts of Arizona’s highway system. Fire districts are strapped for manpower, equipment and resources, and 911 calls often take upwards of 30 minutes for a response.

Who’s backing it: Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona, Arizona Fire Chiefs Association, rural fire districts. AZPHA Board is currently asking membership to ratify our SUPPORT for 310.

Arguments against it: It’s a 20-year tax increase on all Arizonans to bail out rural fire districts, which already have access to a local tax base.

Who’s opposing it: Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Arizona Republican Party