Arizonans Make Decisions on Ballot Measures: An Analysis from a Public Health Perspective

Arizonans approved 7 ballot measures and rejected 3 others in the recent election. Fortunately, approved the Predatory Debt Collection Protection Act and the Stop Dark Money voter initiatives by a wide margin. Voters also wisely approved Proposition 308, which will now allow for in-state and in-county tuition for certain non-citizens at Arizona’s community colleges and universities.

Importantly, voters also wisely rejected Proposition 128, which would have given the legislature more authority to change previously approved voter initiatives with a simple majority vote if a part of the initiative is later found to be unconstitutional or illegal (I was most concerned about the ‘illegal’ portion of that language as it was super-nebulous). Voters also wisely rejected Proposition 309 which would have made mail in voting more difficult and complicated.

Sadly, voters approved Proposition 132. In future elections, any proposition or voter initiative that includes a tax will require a 60% majority to be approved. This will make it much more difficult to pass future voter initiatives that require a tax funding source for implementation. 

Similarly, voters approved Proposition 129, which will require all future voter initiatives to have a single subject. 129’s passage will (in my opinion) give opponents of future voter initiatives more ammunition to knock initiatives off the ballot before voters even get a chance to vote on them.

Voters rejected Proposition 310, which would have supplied badly needed funds to rural fire districts. Because Prop 132 passed, if an alternative to Prop 310 is proposed at a future date it will need a 60% majority vote to succeed.

Note: The voting trends for proposition 310 were interesting but not surprising. Urban, suburban, and tribal voters were generally willing to pay the 0.1% statewide sales tax to subsidize rural fire and EMS districts. Voters in rural Arizona voted No on 310 by a wide margin, sinking the proposition.

Proposition 132 passed requiring future propositions that include a tax pass with at least 60% of the vote. Prop 132 was successful in large part because of strong support in rural Arizona. As a result, EMS care in Arizona fire districts will likely continue to be substandard in perpetuity because passing a future proposition that includes any kind of tax is likely unachievable.

Rural Arizona voters missed perhaps their only opportunity to infuse funding from urban and suburban voters to subsidize their fire and EMS districts. It would also take a 60-40 vote to increase the property tax cap in rural fire districts, meaning improving EMS care in AZ will be next to impossible now.