On February 13, the Arizona House Federalism, Property Rights & Public Policy Committee passed HCR 2022. If this bill passes the legislature, it would amend the State Constitution, so would go to a public vote in November 2018. It says that no more primaries are permitted for U.S. Senate. Instead, the only nominees in the November ballot for U.S. Senate would be four individuals chosen by state legislators. The bill does not explain whether write-ins would still be allowed in November for U.S. Senate.
The sponsors are Representative Travis Grantham (R-Gilbert) and Mark Finchem (R-Oro Valley). The committee vote was 6-3.
The bill is clearly in violation of Williams v Rhodes, the U.S. Supreme Court decision which said that states cannot limit the general election ballot to just Republican and Democratic nominees. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.
Tyrants at work — attempted subversion of the 17th Amdt.
Where is the reborn Union Army/Navy to liberate ALL 50 States from the gerrymander HACK tyrants in each rotted State ???
Sound Democracy General Quarters
This is NO drill.
PR and AppV
Since when do gerrymander oligarchs/tyrants pay any attention to SCOTUS opinions ???
It seems like they’re trying to have a half-assed hybrid of the state legislature appointing the Senators. Like they were prior to the 17th amendment.
It does not say that the only candidates on the November ballot would be the four individuals chosen by state legislators. There is nothing in the current Arizona Constitution about placement of candidates on the general election ballot by means other than primary, or whether write-in votes are permitted.
@Demo Rep,
Wasn’t the 17th Amendment an attempt to subvert federalism? Read Federalist 62.
Remember how the newly elected President Obama said that he had not talked to the Governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, for several years and seemed to indicate that this was salutary. Might it be better to eliminate the Senate, and simply have the State legislatures ratify any bills passed by the House?
Basic election stuff now must be in ALL constitutions due to the worse and worse rigging of elections by the party hack gerrymander oligarch gangsters.
The AZ machination is like having Stalin or Hitler top hacks select the candidates
— esp see 1917-1991 old commie regime ballots in so-called elections.
JR
Each State is a NATION-STATE – last para of 1776 DOI, 1787 Const Art VII.
The USA regime is a limited Federal regime mainly for military security against internal and external tyrants — monarchs / oligarchs — and limited economy stuff – money, etc.
Again – The ROT in the 1787 top secret convention was due to an EVIL late DARK AGE conspiracy of the small States and slave States-
A. Slave = 3/5 person for USA Reps apportionment math
B. Each State — 2 USA Senators
C. Electoral College math.
Abolish the minority rule USA Senate and Electoral College
— both of which produced the about 750,000 DEAD in 1861-1865 — esp the paired free/slave State admissions in 1791 onwards – until 1857-1861 crisis.
*****
Uniform definition of Elector-Voter in ALL of the USA
PR and AppV
Total separation of powers in ALL regimes.
Due to the accumulated Donkey communism and Elephant fascism since 1929 —
Divide the USA into 2 or more totally separate Federal regimes — with possible total independence for CA, TX, etc.
— to reduce Civil WAR 2 chances.
See map of water/river basin areas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
The near total ROT producing the 17th Amdt.
Jim, that is what I thought at first, until I read the last part of the bill about special US Senate elections. That seems to say the only candidates who could be on the ballot would be the 2 Dems and 2 Reps chosen by the legislature. I acknowledged that the bill is still vague about write-ins.
@Richard Winger,3
The second section of the resolution is modifying a different section of the constitution. Look at the current constitution Article VII, Sections 10 and 17. Imagine that you believe that the constitution forbids independent nominations. If Sections 10 and 17 are read with that belief, then they could be interpreted as not permitting that to happen. Section 17 is awkwardly written and literally says the purpose of a special general election is to select a “candidate for representative”.
The video of the committee hearing is interesting. Only the 1st video from February 13 is relevant, and you can skip directly to the hearing on HCR 2022.
The sponsor said that HCR 2022 has nothing to do with the 17th Amendment. That is so disingenuous that it might as well be characterized a lie. Anyhow, somewhere near the beginning he slips in that write-ins and the Green types could participate (which I would translate as he doesn’t know how anyone else gets on the ballot and he didn’t care). He also suggested the caucuses could nominate an independent.
I doubt that the constitution makes provision for legislative caucuses. So in theory the Libertarian Caucus could also make two nominations. Presumably, the general election would be decided by plurality. If I were the Republicans, I would make Nancy Pelosi one of the nominees (and suggest that if she won, would be the time to determine if she was an Arizona resident). I doubt that there is anything that prevents contingent legislation that only goes into effect in a constitutional amendment is ratified. Assuming that an amendment goes into effect immediately upon passage, passage could leave a void in the election statutes. Considering the health of John McCain this is unwise.
Representative Isela Blanc made a comment that she doubted whether they were responsive to the city councils, etc. of the area they represented. Arizona has the least differentiated election of the two houses of any state. The same districts are used, and all legislators serve two year terms. Having the two separate offices simply serves to let candidates game the term limits and toggle back and forth between the two offices. But could Arizona provide for indirect election of senators?