Be it enacted by the People of the State of Arizona:

The Constitution of Arizona is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon and on proclamation of the Governor:

Section 1. Article VII, Section 10, Constitution of Arizona, is amended to read:

This proposition would effectively require that all candidates for office appear on a single ballot at the primary election and would allow any registered voter to vote in that primary. Under current law, only voters who have designated themselves on their voter registration forms as a member of one of the four major political parties (Democrat, Libertarian, Reform or Republican) are eligible to vote in the party’s primary election.

Proposition 106 would apply to any primary election that uses public funds, but not for elections for officers within a political party.

OPEN PRIMARY INITIATIVE (YES)

The open primary is based upon a simple proposition: people should be able to vote for the best person for the job, period. The current electoral system has been manipulated by and for the two major political parties. Due to gerrymandering by the Legislature, most elections are either decided before they are held, or dominated by extremist candidates who know they can be elected by appealing to a very narrow group of voters. The result has been elected officials who are out of step with the basic desires and needs of the people.

Under the open primary, political parties will do very well if they have the best candidates with the best ideas. However, they will not do well simply because they have rigged the system to their advantage. The open primary is about more choices and more power to the people themselves. It has worked well for decades in other states, producing a better cross-section of candidates and a higher level of voter participation. Nowhere has any subterfuge of the process been documented. To the contrary, the open primary in other states has done what it will do in Arizona: it has opened the political process to more people and made it more difficult for the extremists or special interests to dominate the process.

You should vote YES on the OPEN PRIMARY INITIATIVE.

The best way to vote "none of the above" in elections where a good selection of candidates is not present on the ballot, is to open up Arizona elections as wide as our landscape. Open primaries, particularly the version that will be created by Proposition 106, will give voters a wider menu of candidates, while still retaining party designations on the ballot for those voters who want to vote along party lines. Without this change, Arizona elections will continue to produce candidates from the odd margins of political thought, rather than from the mainstream. Arizona Common Cause volunteers strongly urge Arizona voters to vote "YES" on Proposition 106, which is vastly superior to the legislative version listed elsewhere on this ballot.

Under Arizona’s current closed primary election system, more than 300,000 voters who, like me, have declined to state a party preference are not allowed to vote for any candidates in a primary election. It is true, even though those candidates will end up representing those of us who are not allowed to participate.

It is frustrating to be a member of the world’s greatest democracy but live in a state where I am not even given a voice or a choice in primary elections. It’s time Arizona joined 26 other states who offer more voters more choices through some form of open primary election system.

Closed primaries create a political climate where unfair and dishonest campaign practices can thrive. Vote "yes" to open primary elections and bring fairness to Arizona politics.

The Phoenix Law Enforcement Association believes the most important reason to support open primaries is because it gives voters a real choice and a real voice for a change.

Arizona’s present closed primary is one of the most restrictive in the country. A closed system gives unfair influence over the election process to party bosses and activist party factions allowing small blocks of hard-line voters to determine the outcome of many elections.

The closed system provides ample opportunity to manipulate an election. It also encourages political dirty tricks such as partisan redistricting.

Open primaries will increase voter turnout because candidates will be forced to focus on issues not partisanship. It will give independent voters – currently excluded – the right to participate with everyone else.

The Phoenix law Enforcement Association urges you to vote "yes" and change Arizona government for the better.

Paid for by Open Primary Elections Now Coalition; Grant Woods & Paul Johnson, Co-Chairmen

A "YES" vote to open primary elections will empower women to run for and win public elective office.

Under the current closed primary system, primary elections are determined by less than 6% of the population. Because only party members can vote in closed primary elections, the nominees of each party are often chosen by an elite group of voters from their party, in order to represent the extreme platform positions of that party, rather than the more moderate views of the population as a whole. These party selected candidates are often financed by their party or a special interest group in the general election. This "closed system", run by a very few party loyalists and special interest groups, has discouraged women and other moderates from running for elected office. As a result, women who could win in a general election, never get on the general election ballot, because they cannot win their party’s nomination.

A totally open primary system will give women a more level playing field. In fact, Washington State, where open primaries have been conducted for over 50 years, has the highest percentage of women in the legislature of any state. Women candidates are more likely to run knowing that they will be judged on their qualifications and views – not on their ties to the party leadership and special interests. It’s only fair since elected officials should reflect the views of and be accountable to all of the voters, not just the leadership of a particular political party. An open primary will allow women a fair chance at being elected by appealing to the voters in general, rather than to party loyalists and special interests.

Paid for by Open Primary Elections Now Coalition; Grant Woods & Paul Johnson, Co-Chairmen

Proposition 106, is the Wealthy Politician Act or WAPPA. 106 will require our elected leaders to raise more campaign funds to communicate with a broader spectrum of the electorate. 106 leads us in the opposite direction of true campaign reform, and doesn’t deserve your support.

Proposition 106 will force candidates to raise more campaign funds, because they will have to communicate with more voters. Under our current Primary system Republican and or a Democratic candidate mails their election materials to a list of similarly identified partisan voters. Under 106, whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican candidate you will have to mail your material to all registered voters thereby doubling the cost of your campaign.

106 actually empowers special interests that are capable of raising enormous amounts of campaign funds which enable a candidate to communicate with a larger portion of the electorate. 106 is bad reform and doesn’t deserve your support.

Proposition 106 is extreme, unfair and unnecessary. It will double the cost of elections and make it harder for all but the very rich to run for office. It deserves to be defeated.

Proposition 106 is extreme because it will destroy Arizona’s system for selecting candidates for nomination. Under Proposition 106 our existing primary election would be replaced by what would be in essence an additional general election. Forcing candidates to run in two general elections will increase the cost of elections dramatically and make it harder, not easier, for regular people to run for office.

Proposition 106 is also unfair. People registered as Independents or in minor parties should be able to participate in the primary election process in a meaningful way. Proposition 103 achieves this goal by allowing these people to cast votes in either Democrat, Republican, Reform or Libertarian primaries. By contrast, Proposition 106 destroys the existing primary elections by allowing Democrats to vote in Republican primaries and Republicans to vote in Democrat primaries. This is unfair and will corrupt the process resulting in the nomination of the weakest, not the strongest and best candidates.

Finally, Proposition 106 is unnecessary. The problem with the current primary system is that Independents are not allowed to vote. Proposition 103 solves this by allowing Independents and those registered in other minor parties to vote in the Democrat, Republican, Reform or Libertarian primary.

Voters who want a fair system that does not double the cost of elections should vote "No" on Proposition 106 and "Yes" on Proposition 103.

Paid for by John Shadegg for Congress

Argument AGAINST Proposition 106

Arizona had open primaries once, and it was a very good system -- not the shameful imitation you have before you here. But politicians abandoned that system in favor of the one we have today, for one simple reason: they wanted taxpayers -- you -- to pay for their primary elections.

Libertarians are against taxpayer-funded party primaries, as were the authors of the Arizona Constitution. Parties should choose their candidates at their own expense and by their own methods, ensuring that their party philosophies are truly represented by the individuals they choose. Only then should the state-funded nominating election give voters the opportunity to choose from among all candidates of all parties, sending on only the top vote-earners (of whatever parties) to compete in the general election.

The "open primary" scheme proposed here would leave us with the same sad situation we now face: one candidate from each qualifying party will be on the ballot for each office, and many voters will abandon the independent or third-party candidates they’d like to support, feeling that they have to vote for the least objectionable major party candidate. The only thing gained here would be the chance for political parties to try undermining their opposition. How? By voting in large numbers for the weakest candidates in an opposing party’s primary, for starters.

Now, there’s a sad picture: only lackluster candidates in the general election because the cream of the crop has been defeated in their own primaries by outsiders!

A real open primary system would guarantee that only the candidates genuinely favored by the voters can be on the general election ballot. What a concept!

Vote "NO." Let's wait for real open primary reform. For more information about this position, or any other ballot item, please visit http://www.lpaz.org.

John Buttrick Rex Warner Ray Price
Libertarian Candidate for Libertarian Candidate for Libertarian Candidate for
State Representative, U.S. Senator Treasurer
District 25 Goodyear Scottsdale
Phoenix

Gary Fallon Tom Rawles Robert Anderson
Libertarian Candidate for Libertarian Candidate for Libertarian Candidate for
State Senator, District 24 Governor U.S. Congress, District 6
Phoenix Mesa Phoenix

Kent Van Cleave Fran Van Cleave Ernest Hancock
Libertarian Candidate for Chairman Chairman
State Senator, District 25 Arizona Libertarian Party Maricopa County
Phoenix Phoenix Libertarian Party
Phoenix

Actually, Proposition 106 is the controversial "blanket" primary system, adopted in very few states. A "blanket" primary created chaos in California’s 1998 primary race for governor. Instead of reducing special interest politics, the need for money and the influence of mass media, the blanket primary brought out these elements at their worst as candidates sought voters from opposing parties. With Proposition 106, cross-over voting would become common, particularly for voters of one party whose candidate in the primary was uncontested. The better, "true" open primary system is Proposition 103, which would not permit registered party voters to ignore their own choice of party.

In these days of voter apathy, the reality is that the Democratic and Republican parties are the chief generators of political interest particularly for races which are not well publicized. A blanket primary system will damage a two-party system which has existed for over 200 years.

If a "blanket" primary system is adopted, voters will be the losers because political debate will be stifled. Candidates will hesitate to express strong positions on issues. The two political parties will become more difficult to distinguish and voters will have less choice. Candidates of great personal wealth will enjoy the largest advantage because they can better afford to appeal to the many new eligible primary voters.

Vote "No" on blanket primary Proposition 106; Yes on true "open" primaries; Proposition 103.

AMENDING ARIZONA CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW EVERY REGISTERED VOTER, REGARDLESS OF THE VOTER’S POLITICAL AFFILIATION, TO VOTE IN PRIMARY ELECTIONS FOR ANY CANDIDATE OF THE VOTER’S CHOICE FOR EACH OFFICE AND WITHOUT A DECLARATION OF ALLEGIANCE TO A POLITICAL PARTY. THE PROPOSITION DOES NOT APPLY TO ELECTION OF OFFICERS OF A POLITICAL PARTY.

A "yes" vote shall have the effect of allowing every registered voter to vote for any candidate of the voter’s choice for each office, regardless of the voter’s political affiliation and without a declaration of allegiance to a political party; does not apply to election of officers of a political party.

A "no" vote shall have the effect of retaining the current Primary Election system, permitting only those voters who are registered in a recognized political party to vote for candidates on the ballot of the political party in which they are registered.