This one is pretty simple folks. Proposition 112, if passed would make it much harder for citizens initiatives to be voted on. That should mean a lot to this crowd because the current citizens initiatives to ban photo radar and red light cameras in Arizona cities would require many more volunteer hours to get the required signatures… 50% more hours, to be specific.
Prop 112 would not only require 50% more signatures but it also shortens the length of time allowed to collect them by 2 months.
How this passed through the State Legislature of AZ is a huge mystery to all of us. What they are saying, in effect, is that they only want lawmakers aka “career politicians” to have any say in what laws are passed. It sounds like they all want to lose their jobs because that’s pretty damn good reason to vote them all out.
Only one proposition on the ballot this year was put on by citizens. The other 8 were added by legislature. Of course, Prop 112 doesn’t require more signatures for political candidates to get on the ballot making it extremely one-sided and hypocritical. What this means is that politicians won’t have to pay more money to run their campaigns in the form of signature collector fees. But conversely, it’s okay for them to require more of the citizens. This is unacceptable.
Please vote NO on proposition 112. A no vote would retain the following requirements of citizen initiatives without making them more difficult:
**10% of previous voter count.
**July 1st signature turn-in deadline for general and mid-term elections.
I mentioned this prop here a few weeks back. My guess is that the state and scam companies were sweating because we cut it close with the signatures so they want to make sure there’s no more close calls that would thwart their sinister ways of producing income for this state.
The state’s excuse for this one is that they need more time to get an accurate count of signatures and to be able to verify the validity of the signatures.
No arguments here. I think you are onto something.
I love their reasoning in this article: “We don’t want to put the county recorders staff under too much stress.”
Hilarious.
Sponsor and Vote Prop 112 was sponsored by Representatives John McComish (R-20), Andy Biggs (R-22), Chad Campbell (D-14), Kyrsten Sinema (D-15), and Senator Jonathan Paton (R-30). It passed the House nearly unanimously with three Reps. and two Dems. not voting. Prop 112 passed the Senate nearly unanimously with two Reps. and one Dem. not voting.
Supporters of 112
Arizona Farm Bureau; Arizona Chamber of Commerce; The O’Connor House; State Representative Chad
Campbell(D-14); Senate President Robert Burns (R-9)
http://progressivevotersguide.com/2010/arizona/general/pdf/AANBallotMeasureAnalysis.pdf
To be fair, Andy Biggs was a HUGE opponent of the speed camera system and fought hard to get anti-camera legislation through the House (despite that dickwad Speaker of the House that fought any full house votes).
I am also voting NO on this one, along with just about every other prop on the ballot. Almost every single prop on the ballot wreaks of Legislature power grab in the name of “hunting rights”, “lieutenant governor re-org” (especially egregious – the politicos of both political parties never want another “loose cannon” like Jan Brewer getting the governor’s chair without their pre-election approval), “fiscal responsibility” (they really want to gut the Voter Protection Act), etc.
I’m a fiscal and social conservative, GOP guy, to boot…
If they really wanted to reform the ballot process, they’d cap the number at 100,000 or maybe double the however many signatures it takes to get a governor on the ballot (also capped at 100,000).
B….To be fair Andy Biggs is the douche bag who introduced and passed the Toll Road bill….AGAIN, ALL OF THESE POLITICIANS ARE LIARS AND WILL SCREW YOU THE MINUTE YOU TURN AROUND.
Looking forward to Nov. 2.
I don’t support this proposition, but I want to point out that it does not change the number of signatures required. You should really read the proposition. The change to the number of signatures required is a formality – it just replaces the phrase “per centum” to “percent”. This aspect of the proposition does nothing to change the actual signatures required.
Thanks, we were well aware of it. That’s the main reason we oppose this prop.. Had they proposed to reduce a fair number of signatures required to go along with this, then it might’ve stood a better chance of being voted in favor of.
The FBI is investigating a toxic substance found inside a package that was sent to the office of Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, a spokesman for the congressman said.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/10/22/arizona.congressman.toxic.package/index.html?hpt=Sbin
Quayle’s communications director – Jay Heiler
“You can see the sleight of hand in the statement he put out today. Now he puts out quotes that he’s not even attributing to Ben Quayle,” said Jay Heiler, Quayle communications director.
http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/arizona-capitol-times/mi_8079/is_20100908/commentary-arizonas-3rd-congressional-district/ai_n55353539/
Who is that sitting behind and to the left of Papa Bush? That’s right, none other than Papa Quayle:
Dan Quayle was the VP, he’s supposed to sit there.
Right, this clip was in response to Stacey’s post above about Heiler working for Ben Quayle, you know, that whole “The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” thing.
New Jersey Toll Roads Waste $43 Million in Driver Cash
Union contracts allow New Jersey toll collectors to pocket millions in tolls.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3299.asp
This is really pathetic. I wouldn’t vote for anyone who’s for toll roads even if they’re against photo enforcement.
Ran into Karen Finley tonight in Scottsdale – got a photo of her all gussied up:
CameraFRAUD.com
Phoenix, AZ
1,121 Volunteers
Check out this Meetup Group →
California: Class Action Lawsuit Hits Federal Court
Federal court hears class action lawsuit seeking refund of every red light camera ticket issued in 59 California cities.
http://thenewspaper.com/news/33/3302.asp
[…] like to thank everyone who read our original post, “Vote No on Prop 112.” With more than 1,000 views leading up to election day, it’s clear that you were able […]