Arizona Proposition 105 - Majority Rules - Let the People Decide
Currently, a ballot initiative that gets the support of at least half the people who vote is approved. Proposition 105 would require a majority of all those registered, not just a majority of those who vote, for any measure that increases taxes, fees or involves additional government spending.
Click on "Read more" to see a synopsis of the pros and cons and find more information about this ballot measure.
Will you vote in favor of Proposition 105?
1) Yes, special interests should not be able to increase taxes or spend Arizona state funds using ballot initiatives.
2) No, if someone doesn't vote, that doesn't mean that their vote should be cast as no.
Advocates of Proposition 105 say that: Proposition 105 is needed to protect both representative democracy and the free enterprise system. Passage of this ballot measure would remove the ability for special interests to use ballot initiatives to raise our taxes or mandate increased spending.
Opponents of Proposition 105 say that: If this measure passes it means that on every issue that involves expenditures everyone who stays home and doesn't vote for whatever reason is effectively a no vote. Anyone that votes yes on any tax increase or spending issue would be overruled on every initiative.
UPDATE: Proposition 105 failed with 66% of the voters voting no.
You Might Also Be Interested In....
Comments
It is wrong to count people who don’t vote. Prop 105 is highly misleading. It demands a majority of “registered” voters vote Yes to pass a measure. That sounds fine, but that includes all of the registered voters who don’t vote. We have hundreds of thousands of “registered voters” on our state rolls that are no longer qualified to vote due to moving, being deceased, etc. Prop 105 automatically counts them as No votes along with all of those who don’t vote at all or don’t vote on a particular initiative because they choose not to based on not understanding it. This makes voting unfair and that is wrong! Vote No on 105. Visit http://thevotersofaz.com
These ballot initiatives are getting way out of hand and in most cases the advertising is completely misleading. The ballot initiatives are sponsored by special interest groups and seem to increase in both number and the complete disgracefulness of their misleading advertising.
Proposition 105 is the only proposition I have ever supported because it severely curtails the chance of future propositions passing, making it much less likely that large sums of special interest money will be used to try and pass them.
Glen,
You’re right, some initiatives are out of control–the thing is 105 is the most out of control initiative I have ever seen. It is extremely deceptive and has nothing to do with taxes, spending or fiscal responsibility.
105 is about voting rights. End of story.
Arizona currently has 498,000 inactive voters on our rolls. That list includes people who have died and others who have moved away. Prop 105 automatically counts all of those non-voters (including the non-living) as No votes.
That’s unfair, not to mention crazy!
I too worry about fiscal responsibility (events in Washington this weekend terrify me), but that is NOT what 105 is about.
Voters already amended the constitution in AZ four years ago and it is in our constitution that any initiative or referendum must have a source of revenue AND if that revenue is not coming in, there is no obligation to pay for whatever new spending that initiative or referendum needed. 105 is so broad that it kills the initiative process by corrupting the voting process. The last thing we need is to let voters know that we are counting votes of people who don’t vote. That’s confusing and will increase voter apathy.
Saying this is about taxes and fiscal responsibility is not true.
It is about voting. It is wrong to count people who don’t vote.
It is difficult for me to believe that anyone would vote yes on a ballot proposition which essentially gives away their voting rights. Proposition 105 is just plain wrong because it would count non-voters, as well as those who have moved or died since the last election, as no votes, thus cancelling those who actually take the time and effort to cast their votes for a particular issue.
Please vote “NO” on Prop 105. Prop 105 will enable anyone who chooses not to vote in future elections to be automatically counted as a “NO” vote on all future initiatives. If it passes, it will count non-voters, as well as those who have moved or died since the last election, as “No” votes on all future initiatives. Here’s how it will play out: Many times only 45% of registered voters actually vote. If all voters who actually vote (i.e, 45%) check a “Yes” vote on future initiatives, they will not be able to pass those initiatives. The reason: the other 55% of registered voters (who don’t even take the time to vote) will be counted as “No” votes. We, the people who vote, will never be able to pass an initiative. Non-voters will have the power to defeat future initiatives. The only way to defeat THIS initiative (which, if passes, will take away the passing of future initiatives) is to vote “NO” on Prop 105 in the upcoming election. By voting “NO” this time, you will be protecting your vote of “Yes” in future elections.
Prop 105 isn’t majority rule; it just gives “NO” voters extra votes. Not only do people opposed to a proposition get a vote, but they also get the votes of everyone who has moved, died, and otherwise missed voting. Let’s be fair about voting and give each person only ONE vote. As someone who grew up in Arizona, I am proud that we are a state that allows citizens to pass laws. This proposition will limit law passing to only the legislature.
Prop. 105 is maybe the worst initiative I’ve ever seen in Arizona. It obliterates any semblence of the initiative process and is anti-democratic at it’s core. That we would count couch potatoes as if they voted NO is appalling. Elections should be decided by active citizens. This is gaming of the system of the worst kind.
If the proponents have a problem with the Voter Protection Act — which protects initiatives that are voted on by the people — then they should be honest about it and take it head on. Of course they won’t because then people would KNOW they would be voting to lose their voice — something they will never do.
Please vote NO on Prop. 105. It is an absolute disaster.
While I can see the reasoning that this prop would seem to restrict democratic ideas/processes, I also see that the prop process has been usurped by special interests to push forward their agenda.
As for funding someone’s special pet project as the rules require, simply find some group in the minority such as smokers and tax them. This way the minority funds the majority’s desires. All in the name of “democracy.”
The prop process is broken and it is time to make it harder to raise taxes to pay for public/special interest whims.
I do not know if this prop is the answer but we need to find a way to force a super majority of voters to increase taxes for any reason. Otherwise we will be half-cented to death for tomorrow’s next whim. What protections are there for any voting minority?
Just because the proposition process has been corrupted, we do not need to make bad law. Prop 105 makes no sense…it does not really fix the problem…it just creates some very scary new ones. We need to demand better from our activists and law makers. We need to pay more attention to the details. If I am wrong on this please make your arguments…in English please and use really small words…I am just one of those dumb voting citizens out there!
I definitely will vote NO on 105. Perhaps there needs to be more of a majority for propositions dealing with higher taxes and fees, however, this prop isn’t the way to achieve it. If the prop would have said, require props with higher taxes to have a 2/3rds or some reasonable majority from all people who actually vote, I may have bought into it.
I think there is one hting everyone is overlooking. If a non vote is a no vote, word the prop so you get what you want out of the prop from the no vote. Seems simple to me….
Vote YES - anything that helps keep the idiots from increasing our taxes is a good thing.
I think this law is misleading and I cannot vote for it because it is wrong to count non-voters, but I am tempted by it. I do not like the proposition process in AZ. Regular citizens are not using like it was intended. Now we just have PACs and special interest groups putting up stupid laws that are usually highly discriminatory. To be honest, I wish we could just amend the constitution to get rid of the proposition process. We elect legislators to make laws and I do not see how the proposition process makes us any better than any other state.
We cannot really be sure that this would prohibit people from lowering taxes or increasing taxes the few times it is might need. Essentially, it puts all the power into the hand of lawmakers at the State Capitol. So then lobbyist just need to talk to a select group of politians and then they can more easily get their way. This is a DEFINITE NO!
If this truly only applies “for any measure that increases taxes, fees or involves additional government spending,” I’m on board. What seems inherently wrong is the fact that they can sneak in a ton of forced expenditures within the fine print on any given bill. Imagine if restaurants did that when you ordered lunch. It’s robbery and this bill prevents it. America should have more faith in its own resourcefulness than in its government. America’s government is not America and it was never meant to be used as a support system.
I’m surprised to even see such a thing proposed. It is a well known fact that many register and fewer vote. What about all those people who register just to patronize the nice person working tirelessly in the hot sun to get people registered but have no intention to vote or pay any attention to the issues. For there vote to count as a “NO” violates their right to not vote even if they register. It forces those who choose to stay home to count anyway. NOT COOL! It’s out vote that counts not our registration. This is ridiculous. I want to know who proposed this and declare whoever did this is TOTALY UN-AMERICAN! I would say they were just stupid, but this proposition is so trickily misleading that calling them diabolical is more befitting. At face value it looks like a “power to the people” initiative, but the key word that changes the whole dynamic is “registered”. Why should anyone who stays home, moves out of the district, or is an idiot have a vote that counts for anything …ever. What about people who leave a proposition blank because they didn’t feel educated enough to decide? Is their vote a “NO” vote too. Again I say this is completely ridiculous and totally un-american. Vote “NO” on Prop 105.
Prop 105 will prevent all the tax increases in the ‘off years’ where it seems they capitalize on the low voter turnout to get the deed done. Anyone that votes for more taxes and more buracracy is just plain un-american. There are enough tax revenue to accomplish services that are needed. We are already paying taxes, and fees and user fee’s that would drown a horse. If this measure passes, the legislature will word the propositions to make the ‘no’ vote count as a ‘yes’ anyway, so it doesn’t really matter. I’m voting for it, even though it will be circumvented if passed.
I will vote for it. we wont have to pay taxes for four yrs or next election!
I’m voting YES. I’ve seen too many new taxes get passed when a low voter turn out of a bunch of stupid people. A bunch of smart people stay home thinking no one would possibly vote for that tax increase, but the unions make sure to pad the polls with their illiterate minions.
Unions want this country to become socialist like 90% of the countries out there, because they love pillaging government coffers with the special interest money they’ve spent to put politicians in their back pocket.
It’s time to stop funding the idiots out there!
I’m sorry, but to say “We have hundreds of thousands of “registered voters” on our state rolls that are no longer qualified to vote due to moving, being deceased, etc.” as a reason against this bill is not addressing the issue. If this is in fact true and I believe this to be an embellishment, that should be fixed independently of this vote. But to the point of prop 105, why should everybody in the state be subject to the vote of only a few? That simply defies logic. The way we count votes today, we vote like Congress, Yea/Nah/Present. Non-voters are essentially voting present today. What good does that do anyone? Get rid of this “present” ideology and take a stand, let the majority make the decisions.
Too many propostions (with resulting tax and fee increases) in off-year elections; Prop 105 helps to ensure that tax increases will not be authorized by a minority of voters. The proposition only applies to tax and fee referendums, so it sounds like a good idea to me!
“If this is in fact true and I believe this to be an embellishment, that should be fixed independently of this vote. But to the point of prop 105, why should everybody in the state be subject to the vote of only a few?”
They shouldn’t, and wouldn’t. If they actually took the time to vote no themselves.
The reality is the overwhelming majority of registered voters don’t vote in this city. Nothing will get passed if we require a majority of registered voters. The truth is this city is full of retirees who don’t care about improving this city. They are here to save their money and stay at home. For those of us who like light rail, the Cardinals stadium, smoking bans and other progressive acts, need laws this like this because otherwise nothing will get passed.
I agree that I don’t want special interests pushing a small set of voters to get things passed. But I also don’t want a law that requires 80% of registered voters to get something passed because then nothing will get passed since most voters stay home. I will vote No on this. However, if they proposed something more reasonable in the future like 55%+ of registered voters, I would vote Yes on this. 80% is just ridiculous though
Who is behind this madness? Why can’t I find the organization or individuals who proposed this?