2006 Ballot Proposition Guide |
PROPOSITION 300
OFFICIAL TITLE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1031
ENACTING AND ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE PEOPLE OF A
MEASURE RELATING TO PUBLIC PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY.
TEXT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona,
the House of Representatives concurring:
1. Under the power of the referendum, as vested in the
Legislature, the following measure, relating to public
program eligibility, is enacted to become valid as a law
if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the
Governor:
AN ACT
AMENDING SECTIONS 15-191.01, 15-232, 15-1803, 46-801 AND
46-803, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING TITLE 15,
CHAPTER 14, ARTICLE 2, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY
ADDING SECTION 15-1825; RELATING TO PUBLIC PROGRAM
ELIGIBILITY.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of
Arizona:
Section 1. Section 15-191.01, Arizona Revised Statutes,
is amended to read:
15-191.01. Family literacy program; procedures;
curriculum; eligibility plan
A. The family literacy program is established in the
state board of education through the division of early
childhood education programs to increase the basic
academic and literacy skills of eligible parents and
their preschool children in accordance with this
article. The state board of education shall establish
family literacy projects as part of the overall program
at locations where there is a high incidence of economic
and educational disadvantage as determined by the state
board of education in consultation with the department
of economic security and, as appropriate, other state
agencies.
B. The state board of education shall adopt procedures
necessary to implement the family literacy program.
C. The state board of education shall establish
guidelines for requiring family literacy program
participants to engage in community service activities
in exchange for benefits received from the program.
Participants shall be allowed to choose from a variety
of community and faith based service providers that are
under contract with the department to provide community
service opportunities or program services. Participants
shall be allowed and encouraged to engage in community
services within their own communities. Participants
shall be allowed to fulfill the requirements of this
subsection by providing community services to the
program from which they received services.
D. The state board of education shall submit an annual
report by December 31 to the governor, the speaker of
the house of representatives and the president of the
senate regarding the community service activities of
family literacy program participants pursuant to
subsection C, including information on the number of
participants, the types of community service performed
and the number of hours spent in community service
activities.
E. Local education agencies and adult education programs
funded by the department of education are eligible for
grants if the state board of education determines that a
high percentage of adults in the county, the local
school district or the targeted local school service
area have not graduated from high school. Selection
criteria for grant awards shall include at a minimum the
educational needs of the adult population, the incidence
of unemployment in the county, district or local
targeted school service area, the degree to which
community collaboration and partnership demonstrate the
ability to bring additional resources to the program and
the readiness and likelihood of the proposing
organizations to establish a successful family literacy
project.
F. Each project team shall include representatives from
each of the following:
1. One or more local school districts or the county
school superintendent's office.
2. An adult education provider funded by the division of
adult education or a provider that complies with the
policies, academic standards, performance outcomes,
assessment and data collection requirements of adult
education as prescribed by the division of adult
education.
3. A private or public early childhood education
provider.
4. Any other social service, governmental or private
agency that may provide assistance for the planning and
operation of the project.
G. In addition to the grants prescribed in subsection H,
the state board of education shall authorize two grants
to existing literacy programs in this state that can
offer training and serve as models and training
resources for the establishment and expansion of other
programs throughout this state. Existing literacy
programs shall submit a grant application to the state
board of education in the same manner as prescribed in
subsection K.
H. The state board of education shall authorize
additional grants through the division of early
childhood education programs in areas of educational and
economic need.
I. Selected projects shall use either:
1. A nationally recognized family literacy model such as
models developed by the national center for family
literacy or its successor.
2. A model that, in the determination of the project
team and the state board of education, is superior to a
nationally recognized family literacy model.
J. Eligible parents shall be instructed in adult basic
education and general educational development. Preschool
children shall receive instruction in developmentally
appropriate early childhood programs. Other planned,
structured activities involving parents and children in
learning activities may be established as a part of the
curriculum.
K. Each grant application shall include a plan to
address at least the following:
1. Identification and recruitment of eligible parents
and children.
2. Screening and preparation of parents and children for
participation in the family literacy program.
3. Instructional programs and assessment practices that
promote academic and literacy skills and that equip
parents to provide needed support for the educational
growth and success of their children.
4. A determination that at least ten but no more than
twenty parents with children will be eligible for and be
enrolled in the family literacy program at all times, or
that the family literacy programs shall document efforts
to continually recruit eligible families.
5. Provision of child care through either private or
public providers.
6. A transportation plan for participants.
7. An organizational partnership involving at a minimum
a common school, a private or publicly funded preschool
provider and an adult education program funded by the
department of education or by an outside funding source.
L. THIS SECTION SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO
RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN.
M. THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER
31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE
BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARENTS WHO APPLIED
TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROGRAM UNDER THIS ARTICLE AND THE
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARENTS WHO WERE NOT ELIGIBLE UNDER THIS
ARTICLE BECAUSE THE PARENT WAS NOT AN ELIGIBLE PARENT AS
DEFINED IN SECTION 15-191, PARAGRAPH 1, SUBDIVISION (c).
Sec. 2. Section 15-232, Arizona Revised Statutes, is
amended to read:
15-232. Division of adult education; duties
A. There is established a division of adult education
within the department of education, under the
jurisdiction of the state board for vocational and
technological OF education, which shall:
1. Prescribe a course of study for adult education in
school districts.
2. Make available and supervise the program of adult
education in other institutions and agencies of this
state.
3. Adopt rules for the establishment and conduct of
classes for immigrant and adult education, including the
teaching of English to foreigners, in school districts.
4. Devise plans for establishment and maintenance of
classes for immigrant and adult education, including the
teaching of English to foreigners, stimulate and
correlate the Americanization work of various agencies,
including governmental, and perform such other duties as
may be prescribed by the state board of education and
the superintendent of public instruction.
5. Prescribe a course of study to provide training for
adults to continue their basic education to the degree
of passing a general equivalency diploma test or an
equivalency test approved by the state board of
education.
B. THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SHALL PROVIDE CLASSES
UNDER THIS SECTION ONLY TO ADULTS WHO ARE CITIZENS OR
LEGAL RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES OR ARE OTHERWISE
LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES. THIS SUBSECTION
SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, RELIGION,
GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN.
C. THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER
31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE
BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ADULTS WHO APPLIED
FOR INSTRUCTION AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ADULTS WHO WERE
DENIED INSTRUCTION UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE THE
APPLICANT WAS NOT A CITIZEN OR LEGAL RESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES OR WAS NOT OTHERWISE LAWFULLY PRESENT IN
THE UNITED STATES.
Sec. 3. Section 15-1803, Arizona Revised Statutes, is
amended to read:
15-1803. Alien in-state student status
A. An alien is entitled to classification as an in-state
refugee student if such person has been granted refugee
status in accordance with all applicable laws of the
United States and has met all other requirements for
domicile.
B. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION REFORM AND
IMMIGRANT RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1996 (P.L. 104-208; 110
STAT. 3009), A PERSON WHO WAS NOT A CITIZEN OR LEGAL
RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR WHO IS WITHOUT LAWFUL
IMMIGRATION STATUS IS NOT ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS
AN IN-STATE STUDENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15-1802 OR
ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS A COUNTY RESIDENT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 15-1802.01.
C. EACH COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY SHALL REPORT ON
DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
STUDENTS WHO WERE ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS AN
IN-STATE STUDENT AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO
WERE NOT ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS AN IN-STATE
STUDENT UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE THE STUDENT WAS NOT A
CITIZEN OR LEGAL RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR IS
WITHOUT LAWFUL IMMIGRATION STATUS.
Sec. 4. Title 15, chapter 14, article 2, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended by adding section 15-1825, to read:
15-1825. Prohibited financial assistance; report
A. A PERSON WHO IS NOT A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES,
WHO IS WITHOUT LAWFUL IMMIGRATION STATUS AND WHO IS
ENROLLED AS A STUDENT AT ANY UNIVERSITY UNDER THE
JURISDICTION OF THE ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS OR AT ANY
COMMUNITY COLLEGE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF A COMMUNITY
COLLEGE DISTRICT IN THIS STATE IS NOT ENTITLED TO
TUITION WAIVERS, FEE WAIVERS, GRANTS, SCHOLARSHIP
ASSISTANCE, FINANCIAL AID, TUITION ASSISTANCE OR ANY
OTHER TYPE OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THAT IS SUBSIDIZED OR
PAID IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITH STATE MONIES.
B. EACH COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY SHALL REPORT ON
DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
STUDENTS WHO APPLIED AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS
WHO WERE NOT ENTITLED TO TUITION WAIVERS, FEE WAIVERS,
GRANTS, SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE, FINANCIAL AID, TUITION
ASSISTANCE OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
THAT IS SUBSIDIZED OR PAID IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITH
STATE MONIES UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE THE STUDENT WAS
NOT A CITIZEN OR LEGAL RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR
NOT LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES.
C. THIS SECTION SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO
RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN.
Sec. 5. Section 46-801, Arizona Revised Statutes, is
amended to read:
46-801. Definitions
In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Caretaker relative" means a relative who exercises
responsibility for the day-to-day physical care,
guidance and support of a child who physically resides
with the relative and who is by affinity or
consanguinity or by court decree a grandparent,
great-grandparent, sibling of the whole or half blood,
stepbrother, stepsister, aunt, uncle, great-aunt,
great-uncle or first cousin.
2. "Cash assistance" has the same meaning prescribed in
section 46-101.
3. "Child" means a person who is under thirteen years of
age.
4. "Child care" means the compensated service that is
provided to a child who is unaccompanied by a parent or
guardian during a portion of a twenty-four hour day.
5. "Child care assistance" means any money payments for
child care services that are paid by the department and
that are paid for the benefit of an eligible family.
6. "Child care home provider" means a person who is at
least eighteen years of age, who is not the parent,
guardian, caretaker relative or noncertified relative
provider of a child needing child care and who is
certified by the department to care for four or fewer
children for compensation with child care assistance
monies.
7. "Child care providers" means child care facilities
licensed pursuant to title 36, chapter 7.1, article 1,
child care group homes certified pursuant to title 36,
chapter 7.1, article 4, child care home providers,
in-home providers, noncertified relative providers and
regulated child care on military installations or for
federally recognized Indian tribes.
8. "Eligible family" means CITIZENS OR LEGAL RESIDENTS
OF THE UNITED STATES OR INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE OTHERWISE
LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES AND WHO ARE
parents, legal guardians or caretaker relatives with
legal residence in this state and children in their care
who meet the eligibility requirements for child care
assistance.
9. "Federal poverty level" means the poverty guidelines
that are issued by the United States department of
health and human services pursuant to section 673(2) of
the omnibus budget reconciliation act of 1981 and that
are reported annually in the federal register.
10. "In-home provider" means a provider who is certified
by the department to care for a child of an eligible
family in the child's own home and is compensated with
child care assistance monies.
11. "Noncertified relative provider" means a person who
is at least eighteen years of age, who provides child
care services to an eligible child, who is by affinity
or consanguinity or by court decree the grandparent,
great-grandparent, sibling not residing in the same
household, aunt, great-aunt, uncle or great-uncle of the
eligible child and who meets the department's
requirements to be a noncertified relative provider.
12. "Parent" or "parents" means the natural or adoptive
parents of a child.
Sec. 6. Section 46-803, Arizona Revised Statutes, is
amended to read:
46-803. Eligibility for child care assistance
A. The department shall provide child care assistance to
eligible families who are attempting to achieve
independence from the cash assistance program and who
need child care assistance in support of and as
specified in their personal responsibility agreement
pursuant to chapters 1 and 2 of this title.
B. The department shall provide child care assistance to
eligible families who are transitioning off of cash
assistance due to increased earnings or child support
income in order to accept or maintain employment.
Eligible families must request this assistance within
six months after the cash assistance case closure. Child
care assistance may be provided for up to twenty-four
months after the case closure and shall cease whenever
the family income exceeds one hundred sixty-five per
cent of the federal poverty level.
C. The department shall provide child care assistance to
eligible families who are diverted from cash assistance
pursuant to section 46-298 in order to obtain or
maintain employment. Child care assistance may be
provided for up to twenty-four months after the case
closure and shall cease whenever the family income
exceeds one hundred sixty-five per cent of the federal
poverty level.
D. The department may provide child care assistance to
support eligible families with incomes of one hundred
sixty-five per cent or less of the federal poverty level
to accept or maintain employment. Priority for this
child care assistance shall be given to families with
incomes of one hundred per cent or less of the federal
poverty level.
E. The department may provide child care assistance to
families referred by child protective services and to
children in foster care pursuant to title 8, chapter 5
to support child protection.
F. The department may provide child care assistance to
special circumstance families whose incomes are one
hundred sixty-five per cent or less of the federal
poverty level and who are unable to provide child care
for a portion of a twenty-four hour day due to a crisis
situation of domestic violence or homelessness, or a
physical, mental, emotional or medical condition,
participation in a drug treatment or drug rehabilitation
program or court ordered community restitution. Priority
for this child care assistance shall be given to
families with incomes of one hundred per cent or less of
the federal poverty level.
G. In lieu of the employment activity required in
subsection B, C or D of this section, the department may
allow eligible families with teenaged custodial parents
under twenty years of age to complete a high school
diploma or its equivalent or engage in remedial
education activities reasonably related to employment
goals.
H. The department may provide supplemental child care
assistance for department approved education and
training activities if the eligible parent, legal
guardian or caretaker relative is working at least a
monthly average of twenty hours per week and this
education and training are reasonably related to
employment goals. The eligible parent, legal guardian or
caretaker relative must demonstrate satisfactory
progress in the education or training activity.
I. Beginning March 12, 2003, the department shall
establish waiting lists for child care assistance and
prioritize child care assistance for different
eligibility categories in order to manage within
appropriated and available monies. Priority of children
on the waiting list shall start with those families at
one hundred per cent of the federal poverty level and
continue with each successive ten per cent increase in
the federal poverty level until the maximum allowable
federal poverty level of one hundred sixty-five per
cent. Priority shall be given regardless of time spent
on the waiting list.
J. The department shall establish criteria for denying,
reducing or terminating child care assistance that
include:
1. Whether there is a parent, legal guardian or
caretaker relative available to care for the child.
2. Financial or programmatic eligibility changes or
ineligibility.
3. Failure to cooperate with the requirements of the
department to determine or redetermine eligibility.
4. Hours of child care need that fall within the child's
compulsory academic school hours.
5. Reasonably accessible and available publicly funded
early childhood education programs.
6. Whether an otherwise eligible family has been
sanctioned and cash assistance has been terminated
pursuant to chapter 2 of this title.
7. Other circumstances of a similar nature.
8. Whether sufficient monies exist for the assistance.
K. Families receiving child care assistance under
subsection D or F of this section are also subject to
the following requirements for such child care
assistance:
1. Each child is limited to no more than sixty
cumulative months of child care assistance. The
department may provide an extension if the family can
prove that the family is making efforts to improve
skills and move towards self-sufficiency.
2. Families are limited to no more than six children
receiving child care assistance.
3. Copayments shall be imposed for all children
receiving child care assistance. Copayments for each
child may be higher for the first child in child care
than for additional children in child care.
L. The department shall review each case at least once a
year to evaluate eligibility for child care assistance.
M. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE
30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET
COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FAMILIES WHO APPLIED FOR
CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FAMILIES
WHO WERE DENIED ASSISTANCE UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE
THE PARENTS, LEGAL GUARDIANS OR CARETAKER RELATIVES WHO
APPLIED FOR ASSISTANCE WERE NOT CITIZENS OR LEGAL
RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES OR WERE NOT OTHERWISE
LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES.
N. THIS SECTION SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO
RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN.
M. O. Notwithstanding section 35-173, monies
appropriated for the purposes of this section shall not
be used for any other purpose without the approval of
the joint legislative budget committee.
N. P. The department shall refer all child care subsidy
recipients to child support enforcement and to local
workforce services and provide information on the earned
income tax credit.
2. The Secretary of State shall submit this proposition
to the voters at the next general election as provided
by article IV, part 1, section 1, Constitution of
Arizona.
ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Proposition 300 would make the following changes related
to eligibility, enforcement and reporting for certain
state funded services:
1. Provides that only United States citizens, legal
residents or persons otherwise lawfully present in this
country are eligible to participate in adult education
classes offered by the Arizona Department of Education.
2. Provides that in accordance with the federal Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996, a person who is not a United States citizen or
legal resident and who does not otherwise possess lawful
immigration status in this country may not be classified
as an in-state student or county resident for community
college or state university tuition purposes.
3. Provides that a state university or community college
student who is not a United States citizen and who does
not otherwise possess lawful immigration status in this
country is not entitled to waivers, grants or any other
financial assistance paid in whole or part with state
funds.
4. Restricts eligibility for child care assistance from
the Arizona Department of Economic Security to parents,
guardians and caretakers who are United States citizens,
legal residents or persons otherwise lawfully present in
this country.
5. Requires that the family literacy program, the adult
education class requirements, the state university and
community college financial assistance requirements and
the child care assistance program be enforced without
regard to race, religion, gender, ethnicity or national
origin.
6. Requires that the state agencies administering the
provisions of Proposition 300 report statistics
regarding the number of persons denied participation in
the above described programs due to citizenship or
immigration status.
ARGUMENTS "FOR" PROPOSITION 300
Arizona is currently giving away millions of your tax
dollars as subsidies to illegals. Vote YES on Prop 300
to end illegal taxpayer subsidies.
Arizona colleges and universities have seen large
tuition increases over the last few years. US citizens
from other states attending Arizona schools have to pay
the full cost of tuition. However, citizens of foreign
countries, who break the law to enter Arizona illegally,
are given taxpayer subsidized tuition.
It's not fair; it's not right. Vote YES on Prop 300 to
save taxpayers millions in subsidies for illegals.
A US citizen, single mother, and Arizona resident who
needs help with child care costs may not get help and
have to go on a waiting list because the program is full
of illegals. Taxpayers are funding free daycare for
illegals so they can work at a job that's illegal for
them to have.
2004's "Protect Arizona Now" was supposed to end these
kinds of public benefits to illegals. However, Attorney
General Goddard and Governor Napolitano craftily created
loopholes to allow illegals to continue to receive
taxpayer funded services. The people spoke loudly,
clearly, and were ignored.
Last year, we passed a bill to close these loopholes,
and Governor Napolitano promptly VETOED it (HB2030). Now
you have a chance to override the Governor's veto.
We have many needs in Arizona; if we end taxpayer
subsidies for illegals, we will save millions of tax
dollars that could benefit US citizens.
How can we expect anyone to follow immigration law if
Arizona keeps giving away the benefits of citizenship
and legal migration to those who ignore our laws? It's
time to stop spending our tax dollars subsidizing
illegal behavior. Close the loopholes, vote YES on Prop
300.
Sen. Dean Martin, Sponsor, Prop 300, Phoenix
Ballot argument FOR Proposition 300
(public program eligibility)
State programs in adult education and welfare are
designed to help Arizonans who are struggling to develop
their job skills or support their families. These
assistance programs are provided by the state using
millions of tax dollars from hard-working men and women
who want their taxes spent on improving their
communities. These programs, however, should not be made
available to those who are not legal residents of
Arizona or who are not citizens of the United States.
This referendum prohibits the state government from
offering adult education classes, tuition waivers, or
childcare assistance to illegal aliens. By offering
these services to illegal aliens, it increases the
burden on our state programs and robs our own citizens
of services they've paid for with their taxes. Above
all, free state services for all takes away the
incentive for illegal aliens to become full citizens and
legitimate members of American society. It is vital that
we spend our tax dollars on helping Arizonans and not
aid and abet illegal aliens.
The Honorable Russell Pearce, Arizona House of Representatives, Mesa
Paid for by "Russell Pearce 2004"
I am a staunch proponent of this Ballot Measure. It is
only reasonable to clarify that the tax dollars of our
citizens and legal residents should not be used to
support those who have chosen to violate our laws and
our sovereignty.
It is indefensible that we should be charging students
who come to Arizona for education from other states a
large amount of money more than we charge students who
have defied our laws by their illegal presence in our
state.
The American sense of fairness dictates that we should
not be subsidizing students who are here illegally in
college level and adult education programs at the
expense of the taxpayers of Arizona.
I ask you to join me in voting FOR this measure that
restores a sense of fairness in this area. **Paid for by
Goldwater for Governor Committee.**
Don Goldwater, Goldwater for Governor, Laveen
ARGUMENTS "AGAINST" PROPOSITION 300
The Arizona Farm Bureau opposes proposition 300.
This proposition comes from the frustration over the
failure of the federal government to act responsibly and
comprehensively on securing our border and reforming the
immigration system. But the fallacy of this measure is
the same as when politicians call for penalties on
employers who unknowingly hire workers who are not work
authorized. Employers are required to obtain forms of
identification when hiring. They are not allowed under
federal law to question documents. Discrimination
charges come from the U.S. Justice Department if they
do.
Some would like for employers to become immigration
policemen without legal and reliable methods to
determine the validity of documents. This proposition
wants state and school personnel making clerical
decisions to become immigration police, without the
proper tools.
This proposition is not the answer. Securing the border,
reforming work visa permits and identifying the millions
of those in this country without proper documentation is
what will eliminate the frustration for both employers
and the public.
Kevin Rogers, President, Arizona Farm Bureau, Mesa
James W. Klinker, Chief Administrative Officer, Arizona Farm Bureau, Mesa
Paid for by "Arizona Farm Bureau"
The Arizona chapter of the National Organization for
Women (NOW) supports equality and fairness for all
people. We believe it is time for Arizonans to face the
reality that, no matter what some may wish, those who
are not in our country legally are not going to
disappear if we deny them education or other benefits
enjoyed by our citizens, as proposed by Proposition 300.
The provisions relating to education, which would deny
adult education classes to those not here legally and
prohibit colleges and community colleges from giving
resident status, scholarship assistance, and the like to
such students, fly in the face of our state's need for
an educated workforce to attract new jobs and lay the
foundation of our economic future. Denying an education
to any group guarantees that we will continue to witness
the growth of a permanent underclass that will
ultimately sap our economic strength.
Students who have succeeded academically and qualify to
attend an institution of higher education should be
assisted in this endeavor, not punished for their
immigration status (which is often not their own doing).
We should welcome their potential contributions to our
state. The benefits of such a policy are exemplified by
the robotics team at Carl Hayden High School, which in
2004 took first place in a prestigious competition,
ahead of MIT, and this year placed second.
Similarly, the provision that would prohibit parents or
other caretakers who are not legal residents or citizens
from obtaining childcare assistance, presumably so they
can work or attend school, relegates these parents and
their children to a permanently disadvantaged status.
This is punitive and illogical and will drain our
resources in ways that are much more damaging.
Arizona NOW urges you to vote for Arizona's future and
therefore to vote No on Proposition 300.
Karen Van Hooft, State Coordinator, Policy/Spokesperson, Arizona NOW, Scottsdale
Eric Ehst, State Coordinator, Political Action, Arizona NOW, Phoenix
Paid for by "Arizona NOW"
We urge your NO vote on Proposition 300. In the struggle
for survival, some immigrant parents bring their
children to the U. S. and the children are here without
legal documents. The U. S. Supreme Court has held that
these children shall not be denied a public education.
Some of these immigrant children have advanced to a
Community College or University. The mean spirited
proponents of Proposition 300 want to end the ability of
these children to progress in Arizona's public higher
education system. Proposition 300 will prohibit the
granting of in-state resident tuition status to any such
person at a Community College or University. A Senate
compromise allowing undocumented children to be granted
in-state tuition status if the student had been in
Arizona for at least six years and if the parents had
filed income taxes for those six years was removed in
the House. The proponents have no interest in sound
public policy, but rather to be mean spirited because
they can.
Proposition 300 also denies Adult Education classes to
immigrants without legal status. The parents of American
citizens will be barred from attending adult literacy
classes that not only benefit them, but benefit all of
us. By improving their language and work skills, they
are able to climb the ladder of success to better
positions at their work.
The proposal is wrought with biases and prejudices that
should not be allowed to continue in Arizona. A
resounding "NO" on this proposal is needed to maintain
civility and justice in our state.
We urge Arizona voters to maintain their sensibilities
and not allow another divisive and destructive measure
to be added to our statutes.
Please vote "NO" on Proposition 300.
Jorge Luis Garcia, State Senator, Chairman, Legislative Latino Caucus, Tucson
Ben Miranda, State Representative, Chairman, Legislative Latino Caucus, Phoenix
Paid for by Jorge Luis Garcia
NAIC Opposes Prop 300
The Northern Arizona Interfaith Council believes that
Proposition 300 (Public Program Eligibility) does not
serve the best interest of families and communities in
Northern Arizona. We oppose Prop 300 because passage
will undermine our efforts to expand childcare for
working families, encourage our school age children to
attend college and teach English to those wanting to
learn.
Prop 300 misses the mark if it intends to help with the
illegal immigration problem. In fact, because it makes
learning English less accessible to motivated adults,
Prop 300 moves our communities in the wrong direction.
We are especially disturbed by the potential of this
proposition to negatively impact children and youth.
Increasing the availability of childcare in our area is
very important to businesses as well as individual
families. Prop 300 moves us in the wrong direction by
restricting access to childcare for many Northern
Arizona Families.
NAIC asks that you vote "No" on 300.
Linda Martinez, Co-Chair, Northern Arizona Interfaith Council, Sedona
Lucas Gomez, Treasurer, Northern Arizona Interfaith Council, Sedona
Paid for by "Linda M. Martinez"
Yuma County Interfaith Opposes Proposition 300
Proposition 300 will deny successful youth access to
education
Current law already requires that children must be
citizens to receive a childcare subsidy. This proposal
will strip American children of their rights.
Proposition 300 will deny successful youth access to
higher education preventing them from contributing to
the economic growth of Yuma County
In Yuma County, only 14% of high school graduates
continue to some form of higher education. This
proposition will create even more barriers to
developing a strong workforce.
Our children and youth in Yuma County will suffer by
the unintended consequences of being denied access to
education.
Proposition 300 will deny hard working adults access to
basic education programs
Stripping funding from Adult Education programs will
prevent adults interested in a higher quality of life
from going to school. This will negatively impact the
future financial health of Yuma County.
Vote NO on Proposition 300.
Msgr. Richard O'Keeffe, Yuma County Interfaith Co-Chair, Yuma
Mercedes Ruiz, Board Member, Yuma County Interfaith, Somerton
Paid for by "Yuma County Interfaith Sponsoring Committee"
Valley Interfaith Project urges you to vote NO on Prop
300
Prop 300 is damaging to young children, college-bound
students and hard-working Arizonans.
Prop 300 places additional roadblocks to higher
education for successful students.
Many talented and promising students would be denied
in-state tuition status at universities and community
colleges, even if they have lived most of their lives
in Arizona and their parents are tax-paying residents
of this state.
This proposition claims to save state funds by denying
access to financial aid to those without legal status,
even though the vast majority of financial aid already
requires students to prove their legal status.
Prop 300 denies childcare benefits to children who are
American citizens.
Arizona law already requires that children must be
citizens to receive a childcare subsidy. Prop 300
denies even American children of their rights based on
their parents' legal status.
Prop 300 shuts out hard working adults from basic
education programs.
Denies many immigrant parents the opportunity to learn
English, which they know is essential for full
participation in American society.
Most of the 35,000 people that benefit from adult
education programs in Arizona are employed, pay taxes,
and are the parents of American citizens. Adult basic
education is an investment in our economy: it improves
our current workforce and helps parents help their
children, especially English-learners, succeed in
school.
Prop 300 imposes unfunded mandates on service providers.
It requires taxing reporting procedures from all the
agencies affected by this proposition, driving up
costs for additional staffing and document storage.
This unfunded mandate will divert state funds from
valuable education and harm all students.
Marcie Escobedo, Chair, Phoenix
Richard White, Co-chair, Scottsdale
Paid for by "Valley Interfaith Project"
The Arizona Interfaith Network opposes Proposition 300
(Public Program Eligibility) and we urge you to vote
"No" on 300.
AIN is an organization of 170 churches, schools,
non-profits, businesses and unions throughout Arizona.
We are Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, Jewish and
Muslim. We have researched Proposition 300 and
discovered that it will hurt families, especially
families with children. Proposition 300, if passed, will
create problems for many families and communities while
solving none.
Proposition 300 will, if passed:
Roadblock many families needing childcare;
Deny individuals seeking self-improvement the
opportunity to learn English;
Derail the ambitions of many high school students
seeking higher education.
Proposition 300 will, if passed:
Punish children, including citizen children;
Hurt families, including families with citizen
children;
Undermine communities, including communities promoting
use of the English language.
Prop 300 violates our belief that childcare for working
families is better than leaving children home alone;
that talented high school age youth getting to college
is a good thing; and that adults learning English is
good for themselves, their families and their
communities.
Some advocates claim this proposition will help with the
"illegal immigration problem". Our research has proven
this is false.
We respectfully ask that you read Prop 300 carefully and
discuss it with others. If you do so, I believe that you
will join us in voting "No" on 300.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this
matter.
Richard H. White, President, Scottsdale
Bonnie Danowski, Secretary, Scottsdale
Paid for by "Arizona Interfaith Network"
We, the members of the Coalition for Latino Political
Action hereby ask the voters of Arizona to vote no on
Proposition 300, which denies equal access to education
for immigrants; many of which were brought to this
country as children.
Many children of immigrants have had no other life but
here in the United States and having been in this
education system their whole lives are fluent in
English. If this ugly proposition passes, they will be
turned away from equally attaining a higher education.
We are losing out on the possibilities that these
children can flourish in our society as nurses, doctors,
lawyers and scientist. They are bright and eager to go
to school. Let's not deny them this opportunity and vote
no against this mean-spirited proposition.
Vote no on proposition 300.
Lydia Guzman, Chairman, The Coalition for Latino Political Action, Glendale
Delia Torres, Co-Chair, The Coalition for Latino Political Action, Glendale
Paid for by "Lydia Guzman"
If Prop. 300 passes, children, youth and hard-working
Arizonans will suffer.
Prop. 300 would deny childcare to children who are
American citizens.
Current law already requires that children must be
citizens to receive a childcare subsidy. This proposal
would strip American children of their rights.
Prop. 300 would deny access to higher education to
successful youth who could contribute to the economic
growth of our state.
Even if students have lived in Arizona most of their
lives and graduated from Arizona high schools, they
would be denied in-state university tuition, making
higher education beyond the reach of many deserving
students.
The vast majority of financial aid is federal and
already requires students to give their social
security or eligible non-citizen identification
numbers to prove their legal status.
The cumbersome reporting requirements of this bill
would increase staffing and storage costs at community
colleges and universities. This is an unfunded mandate
that will divert funds from instruction and harm all
students.
Prop. 300 would deny hard working adults access to basic
education programs.
Adult education programs throughout the state serve
35,000 people. Most adult education students are
employed, are paying taxes, and are the parents of
American citizens. Adult basic education is critical
for developing the adult workforce and preparing
parents to better help their children succeed in
school.
This bill would prohibit many immigrant parents from
learning English, which they know is essential for
full participation in American society.
By restricting parents' access to English language
learning opportunities, SCR 1031 dramatically
undermines Arizona's substantial financial commitment
to help Arizona's 160,000 non-English speaking
children in K-12 learn English.
Andrea Robson, Co-chair, TucsonErnesto Lujan, Treasurer, Tucson
Paid for by "Pima County Interfaith Council"
BALLOT FORMAT
REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE
OFFICIAL TITLE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1031
ENACTING AND ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE PEOPLE
OF A MEASURE RELATING TO PUBLIC PROGRAM
ELIGIBILITY.
DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
PROVIDES ONLY CITIZENS OR LEGAL RESIDENTS OF THE
UNITED STATES: ARE ENTITLED TO IN-STATE STUDENT OR
COUNTY RESIDENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY
COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY PURPOSES; ARE ENTITLED TO
TUITION/FEE WAIVERS OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND
CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE; MAY PARTICIPATE IN FAMILY
LITERACY PROGRAMS, IMMIGRANT AND ADULT EDUCATION
CLASSES.
A "yes" vote shall have the effect of making only
citizens or legal residents of the United States
eligible to [1] participate in state subsidized
immigrant and adult education classes, [2] receive
in-state student or county residency status for
community college and university purposes, [3]
receive state subsidized tuition/fee waivers and
financial assistance, [4] receive state subsidized
child care assistance, [5] participate in state
sponsored family literacy programs; and requiring
the Board of Education, community colleges and
universities, and the Department of Economic
Security to report the number of ineligible
persons applying for these programs and
assistance. YES
A "no" vote shall have the effect of retaining the
current laws regarding state sponsored family
literacy programs, state subsidized immigrant and
adult education classes, community college and
university residency requirements, state
subsidized tuition/fee waivers and financial
assistance, and child care assistance. NO
The Ballot Format displayed in HTML reflects only the text of the Ballot Proposition and does not reflect how it will appear on the General Election Ballot.
Spelling, grammar, and punctuation were reproduced as submitted in the "for" and "against" arguments. This text only version of the proposition guide may not include striking, underlining, emphasis and bolding of words in the proposition language, or in "for" or "against" arguments.
Next Proposition
Back to Table of Contents