anti-Clean Elections initiative tossed off the ballot
The Arizona Republic reports: A judge on Thursday rejected a ballot initiative designed to end public funding for state election campaigns in Arizona.
Judge Margaret Downie of Maricopa County Superior Court ruled that Proposition 106 violated the "single-subject rule" for making changes to the state Constitution.
The measure would get rid of public financing for campaigns, but would also prevent the Clean Elections Commission from pursuing other duties such as scheduling debates, publishing a voters guide and regulating campaign-finance laws.
The judge concluded that a voter might reasonably agree with one part of the initiative, such as getting rid of publicly financed political campaigns, but might support the commission's other duties. ...
The institute's suit also contended that petitions used to explain the purpose of the anti-Clean Elections initiative were "highly partisan" and "designed to mislead voters." Downie tossed out that complaint, saying that the Legislature only requires an impartial description of an initiative in the actual ballot language, not on the petitions used to qualify. -- Ruling helps boost Clean Elections (Arizona Republic)
I believe the public financing of the Clean Elections program and the other duties of the Commission were adopted in one initiative. If so, wasn't that a violation of the "one subject" rule?