Home General Arizona Top-Two Primary Initiative Expected to Qualify for Ballot This Year
formats

Arizona Top-Two Primary Initiative Expected to Qualify for Ballot This Year

Published on April 14, 2012, by in General.

An initiative to convert Arizona elections to the top-two primary system now used by Louisiana, Washington state and California is expected to qualify this year. Assuming the initiative has enough valid signatures, it will be on the November 2012 ballot. The petition deadline is July 1 and only another 50,000 signatures are needed.

On May 9, sponsors of the Arizona initiative and the similar California initiative will defend their idea, in a debate sponsored by the O’Connor House Public Policy Committee. Former State Senator Steve Peace of California, a backer of California’s Proposition 62 in 2004 (which lost at the polls) and Proposition 14 in June 2010 (which won at the polls) will team with Grady Gammage, Jr., a sponsor of the Arizona initiative. Gammage is an attorney and a Senior Fellow at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute.

On the other side will be Alan Maguire, a former high-ranking employee of the Arizona legislature, and currently President of the Arizona Economic Forum, and President of the Maguire Company, a public policy consulting firm. He will be teamed with Richard Winger. The event is at Phoenix’s main public library, the Burton Barr Library, at 1221 N. Central Avenue. It runs from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. The event is free, and the room is large. But the O’Connor House still recommends that people who wish to be in the audience register in advance, to guarantee a seat. Here is the O’Connor House web page. The O’Connor House is associated with former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. The moderator will be Michael M. Grant, an attorney who has also served as host for 25 years for the local PBS station’s public affairs show “Horizon.”

7 Responses

  1. Demo Rep

    The top 2 primary is juvenile WORTHLESS.

    Gerrymanders control ALL/most at the moment.

    Where is that simple P.R. const. amdt. petition ???

    Total Votes / Total Seats = EQUAL votes needed for each seat winner.

    Both Majority Rule aka Democracy and minority representation.

  2. An Alabama Independent

    If this passes in Arizona, which party (between the Democrats and Republicans) would most benefit on statewide races?

  3. #2, top-two systems on the average don’t benefit Republicans vis-a-vis Democrats, or vice versa. It doesn’t change things.

    For instance, Washington state used a partisan nominating process in 2004, and the two major party candidates for Governor were Democrat Christine Gregoire and Republican Dino Rossi. In 2008, Washington state used a top-two system. The two candidates on the ballot in November for Governor were Christine Gregoire and Dino Rossi. Gregoire won both elections.

    The only thing that changed between 2004 and 2008 were that Washington voters had other choices on the November ballot in 2004, but they did not in 2008.

  4. An Alabama Independent

    But wouldn’t you agree Washington State is a state where statewide Republicans have a fair chance of winning at least 40% of the time? If top-two comes to California for good, I think most agree that the Democrats will dominate all statewide elections. While the demographics may change in Arizona, wouldn’t one agree the GOP would win most statewide races in the immediate future in a top-two system? As demographics changed – as happened in California- then the Democrats might be more victorious.

  5. Demo Rep

    The U.S.A. has very advanced robot party hack disease —
    See the END of the Roman Republic in 120 B.C. to 27 B.C.

    The BARBARIAN robot party hacks have armies of EVIL lawyers exploiting ALL of the loopholes in the gerrymander regimes.
    ———
    P.R. legislative and NONPARTISAN App.V executive/judicial

  6. Jim Riley

    #3 Gregoire didn’t have a majority in 2004.

  7. Chante Abramian

    Caution is the word here. It’s not that loan modification companies are all fraudulent, it’s that in many cases they are breaking the law when they take up front fees from a consumer in default. If you do business with a company that is breaking the law, should you be surprised later when they turn out to be fraudulent? L. Young, ESQ

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Protected with SiteGuarding.com Antivirus