On June 21, the Arizona Supreme Court released an opinion in Arizona Petition Partners LLC v Thompson, CR-22-0154. It said that existing Arizona law does not ban paying initiative circulators a bonus if they are high producers. Also, the law does not ban paying high-producers a higher hourly wage.
The state court of appeals had ruled that the law does ban bonuses, and does ban paying a higher wage to high-producers. It had then declared the law to be so restrictive as to be unconstitutional. But because the State Supreme Court did not interpret the law to be highly restrictive, it said the law is constitutional.
So, it is still illegal to pay initiative circulators on a per-signature basis in Arizona, but there are ways for initiative proponents to reward high-performance workers. The opinion is twelve pages and is unanimous.
A very interesting ruling.
ONE MORE REASON TO HAVE ONE PERSON/ELECTOR/VOTER NOM/ISSUE PETS.
Does anyone agree with AZ about that? If so, why?
Keep in mind I don’t even think there should be any petitions at all, but they exist, so I’d like to understand what people here think would make them better or worse. But only if they are able and willing to discuss why they believe whatever they believe. Otherwise, what’s the point?
Note: I’ve tried with AZ enough times to establish it won’t help to ask, which is why I’m asking other people.
I don’t know if I agree with him or not. Personally I don’t care how many signatures are on a form or see how or why it would make a difference. Maybe it does, but if so, why?
This is still a bad ruling. There is no legitimate reason initiative nd referendum petition circulators in Arizona can’t be paid per signatures. Note that it is still legal in Arizona to pay per signature on petitions for candidates, parties and for recalls, as well as for voter registrations.
Seems like quite a waste.