By Howard Fischer
Twitter: @azcapmedia

PHOENIX — Senate Republicans are making another bid to dilute the Voter Protection Act that Arizonans approved to keep legislators from tinkering with what they approve at the ballot.

The latest version does not seek outright appeal of the provision that bars repeal of voter-approved initiatives. And it allows only changes that “further the purpose” of the original measure, and only with a three-fourths vote of both the House and Senate.

Instead, SCR 1034 would give lawmakers permission, by a simple majority, to effectively rewrite or repeal an entire voter-enacted law if any part, no matter how small, were declared illegal or unconstitutional by a court.

Potentially more significant, if the voter-approved measure actually raised money, lawmakers would be free to divert the dollars from the program for which it was originally intended and instead use them anywhere else.

Sen. Martin Quezada, D-Glendale, said proponents were being “hypocritical.”

He pointed out that a staff attorney regularly reviews all legislatively proposed measures. And it is not uncommon for that person to tell lawmakers the measure is unconstitutional or that, if challenged in court, it likely would not survive.

“And we just move it right along,” Mr. Quezada said.

Compare that, he said, with initiatives that often deal with very complex issues because the Republican-controlled legislature will not. As a safety valve of sorts, each contains a “severance clause,” spelling out that if one part of the measure ultimately is voided by a court, the balance remains in full force and effect.

SCR 1034, which has gained preliminary Senate approval, would change all that, allowing a single flawed provision to undermine the rest of the measure.

“It would allow us to ignore the will of the voters and change the entire initiative because one small part is found unconstitutional,” Mr. Quezada said. “So we are basically doing the opposite of what the Voter Protection Act wants us to do, which is to respect the will of the voters.”

But Sen. Vince Leach, R-Tucson, who is pushing the measure, said he does not see his plan as going against the will of the voters.

“Voters are assuming, probably because they have not checked, that what was put before them to sign is, in fact, constitutional,” he said. And Mr. Leach said if people had known that up front “they probably wouldn’t have signed it.”

SCR 1034 still requires a final roll-call vote in the Senate before going to the House. But, ultimately, as a constitutional amendment, the last word would be up to voters in 2022.

The Voter Protection Act is a direct outgrowth of a 1996 ballot measure that would have allowed doctors to prescribe marijuana to patients. Rather than go along, however, lawmakers effective repealed the measure the following year, insisting voters did not really understand what they were approving.

So proponents turned around in 1998 and got voters to approve the constitutional bar against future legislatures second-guessing what voters really wanted.

What Leach is proposing is not unique. GOP legislators have been trying off and on since 1998 to trim its scope or repeal it outright.

One measure several years ago, for example, would have allowed lawmakers to annul anything approved at the ballot as long as they do it by the same margin the measure was enacted. So if a proposal passed by a 55-45% margin, it would take just 33 members of the 60 member House and 17 of 30 senators, far short of the 45 and 23 now required.

More significant, it would have removed the requirement that the changes “further the purpose” of what voters approved.

They also have proposed outright repeal. None of these have succeeded.

But Republicans who control the House and Senate have had better luck with changes to the make the process more difficult, including a mandate that initiatives can be kept off the ballot if there is not “strict compliance” with every aspect of the laws governing such campaigns. That replaced verbiage that said citizen initiative need to be only in “substantial compliance” with election laws.

There also are ongoing efforts to make it harder for initiatives to be approved, including one proposal this year that would require the approval of at least 55% of those going to the polls.