Related articles:

Arizona lawmaking primer

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

The framers of the state Constitution would probably shake their heads in disappointment at the proposed legislative attempt to hijack voter-approved programs.

Capitol Media Services' Howard Fischer reported in Tuesday's Star that Arizonans may be asked to repeal a 1998 constitutional amendment that restricts lawmakers from altering voter-approved initiatives or referendums. The issue could be put to the voters in a special election as early as March.

Fischer reported that Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, incoming chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said it will be virtually impossible to balance next year's budget if almost half of the state's spending is constitutionally off-limits. Pearce said lawmakers need the flexibility to make adjustments.

Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, who will head the House Appropriations Committee, said putting the entire budget in play "would allow us to do cuts with more mercy," according to Fischer's story.

There's no question that the state is in a budgetary quagmire. Revenue forecasts put the deficit for the current fiscal year at about $1.5 billion. And as much as $4.9 billion of the state's $9.9 billion spending plan may be legally untouchable, Fischer reported.

The framers were a mistrustful bunch who put their trust in the people of Arizona and wrote a progressive, populist state Constitution.

George W. P. Hunt, president of the constitutional convention of 1910 and the state's first governor, called it a "people's constitution," according to Toni McClory in "Understanding the Arizona Constitution."

Among the populist measures: The right of initiative and referendum.

Initiative measures get a spot on the ballot when citizens or special-interest groups gather signatures for the legislation.

Also, the Legislature can refer legislation to the voters for a decision through the referendum process. Constitutional amendments must be approved by voters.

The 1998 measure augments the framers' original intent by forbidding legislators from altering anything approved by voters.

We embrace Arizona's populist and participatory spirit; however, we support some tweaks to the initiative process to make it more effective and efficient, such as changing the deadline for filing initiative signatures to allow ample time for verification. And we've criticized referendums as a result of legislative indecisiveness.

We also recognize that citizen-approved measures can put a stranglehold on the Legislature — and that is exactly what the authors of the Constitution and voters in 1998 wanted.

Kavanagh questioned, in Fischer's story, whether voters would be willing change their direction.

"They seem to have a lingering mistrust of the Legislature," he said.

Mistrust of the Legislature is a well-founded Arizona tradition. We haven't seen any evidence of a change in public opinion.

In addition, a special election would be a gamble.

Pearce and Kavanagh told Fischer that a vote this spring probably would be too late to fix this year's budget shortfall, but it could help in working through next year's projected deficit of about $3 billion.

Running a special election this spring could cost Pima County alone up to $3 million, county Elections Director Brad R. Nelson told us Tuesday. He had not received word from the Secretary of State's Office what, if any, costs would be reimbursed.

Calls to the Secretary of State's Office to inquire about the projected cost of a statewide special election were not returned Tuesday.

The cost of a special election is an expense our state cannot afford.

If such a measure failed in a special election, Pima County taxpayers alone would be out $3 million — and the budget would still be $3 billion short for the new fiscal year

Without question, our state's financial outlook is dismal. The Legislature must be creative as it identifies potential revenue sources and cuts.

However, we encourage the Legislature to be careful when it comes to respecting the will of the people. Attempting to usurp voter-mandated expenditures should not be the first choice to balance the budget.