Related articles:

Anti-affirmative action fails, shy valid signatures for ballot Affirmative-action opponents file suit to put ban on ballot Affirmative- action foes face another petition suit Foes of AZ affirmative action ban filing challenge

Other articles by Howard Fischer:

Failed legislative bill leaves public-financed campaigns in doubtBurns: Brewer bungling her job House approves boost in funding for those seeking office next year 3 recommended to Brewer to fill seat on high court AZ can enact own greenhouse gas regsRecession reins in sprawl Pet bills aplenty pouring forth from Legislature Brewer wants budget right away, but not those other, lesser bills Flat-tax plan could hit walletsRepeal of ban on sparklers nears final OK

Administrative & Professional
Tucson Urban League
CEO/President Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION Finance and Accounting
Charles E. Gillman Company
Accounting Specialist Sales and Marketing
Everready Glass
Sales Reps Mechanical
Komatsu Equipment Co
Resident Field Mechanic Administrative & Professional
Jorgensen Brooks Group
Counselor

PHOENIX — Backers of a plan to constitutionally ban government affirmative action programs in the state gave up Friday in their legal efforts to get on the ballot.

Max McPhail, director of the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative, acknowledged that Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Edward Burke had given initiative supporters until next week to prove that many of the signatures that county recorders declared invalid did, in fact, belong to registered voters. McPhail had argued that once those additional names were counted, there would be more than enough to put Proposition 104 on the ballot.

On Friday, though, McPhail said there was no way for him to make his case — at least not in the time available.

"Because of the upcoming primary, Maricopa County said we could have only two computers to check 4,000 signatures," he said.

"It takes about six minutes to check each signature," McPhail explained. "It's not humanly possible to check all the remaining signatures (the county declared invalid) to present on Tuesday."

But McPhail said this isn't the end of efforts to convince voters to bar programs that gives race- or sex-based preferences in public education, employment and contracting: He said a new initiative campaign will begin after November with the goal of putting the issue on the 2010 ballot.

The time crunch wasn't the only hurdle facing McPhail.

Burke had indicated he would allow initiative foes to present their own evidence next week that many of the petitions that Secretary of State Jan Brewer had allowed to be counted had been circulated by people who were not legally entitled to do so, including convicted felons and people not Arizona residents. That testimony could have wiped out any additional signatures McPhail might have been able to convince Burke to accept.

McPhail denied that was a factor in the decision to drop the lawsuit, saying he doubted the foes could have disqualified that many petitions.

But Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, an initiative opponent, said that even if the measure makes the 2010 ballot, voters will reject it.

She conceded that initiative organizer Ward Connerly has done a good job of selling the measure as one of promoting equality and prohibiting quotas, which already are illegal. Sinema said her job will be to convince voters that the impact of the proposal would be much different.

"When they understand it's going to eliminate programs that help, for instance, young Latina women prepare for college, like the Mother-Daughter Hispanic Program, they don't want to eliminate those programs," Sinema said.