« Small minority group cannot seek Cumulative Voting as remedy | Main | Bell will ask Ethics Committee to review Enron emails about DeLay »

Arizona Supreme Court will hear challenge to ballot pamphlet language on anti-Clean Elections initiative

The Arizona Republic: Arizona's highest court will decide how an initiative that would strip the funding for Clean Elections will be described in a guide seen by more than 1 million voters before they go to the polls this fall.

Attorney Paul Eckstein, who represents groups supporting publicly funded elections, said the wording approved by a special legislative panel last week is biased and doesn't let Arizonans know it was created by a vote of the people in 1998. He will file his challenge with the Arizona Supreme Court next week, likely proposing new language. If the court agrees that the analysis is not impartial, it can order Secretary of State Jan Brewer to adopt new wording.

After three hours of nitpicking over wording, the Republican-controlled Legislative Council last week agreed on a two-paragraph explanation of an initiative that could ultimately end Clean Elections. There was more than 30 minutes of debate over the words "public money" vs. "taxpayer money." Eventually, the term taxpayer money was used to describe how the election system is funded.

A group called No Taxpayer Money for Politicians wants to end publicly funded campaigns and put that money into state coffers. The group filed 275,000 signatures, far more than needed for a constitutional amendment. The essence of the argument is that no taxpayer money should go to politicians for political campaigns. -- Top court will judge Clean Elections text (Arizona Republic)