Group Files Criminal Complaint Over Nearly 40k Fraudulent Prop 140 Signatures

Group Files Criminal Complaint Over Nearly 40k Fraudulent Prop 140 Signatures

By Matthew Holloway |

The Arizona Free Enterprise Club has filed an official complaint with Attorney General Kris Mayes and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell requesting they take legal action on the almost 40,000 duplicate signatures that were uncovered during the legal challenges to Proposition 140, the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act.

Proposition 140, which would have imposed a mixed system of Ranked Choice Voting and jungle primaries for future elections in Arizona, was defeated in the November election with almost 60% of the vote share.

During the unsuccessful legal challenge against Prop 140’s fraudulent signature gathering in April Smith v. Fontes, a court-appointed Special Master found that, of the original 41,387 pairs of signatures challenged, a total of 37,657 or approximately 99%, were in fact duplicates. Removing these duplications would have driven the proposition 3,300 signatures short of the of the minimum qualification to appear on the Nov. 5th ballot.

The Special Master, Retired Arizona Superior Court Judge Christopher Skelly, found that “Plaintiffs had proved by clear and convincing evidence that 37,657 signatures were duplicates— that the same person had signed more than once.”

Indeed the evidence showed that 253 people signed the petitions five times or more and one individual signed no less than 15 times.

In a letter to Mayes and Mitchell, Scot Mussi, president of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club wrote, “Double or even triple-signing the same initiative petition over the span of several months may well evince merely carelessness or forgetfulness. Signing one’s name five, ten, or even fifteen times, however, is not susceptible to that excuse.”

“There is certainly, at the very least, ample reason to believe that the individuals identified in Exhibit A knowingly violated Arizona law. I accordingly request that your respective offices open an investigation and pursue all appropriate criminal charges.”

You can read the complaint here. You can see the exhibit of duplicate signatures here.

In August, the AZFEC criticized the group behind Proposition 140, the “Make Elections Fair PAC,” with a strong condemnation that the group, which is sought to import “California-style elections to our state—got very creative in their signature gathering efforts. In fact, you could say that in many ways, they excelled in duplicating their work. And that’s exactly why Prop 140 should be invalidated.”

Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.

Prop 140 Committee Burns Millions In A Failed Attempt To California Our Arizona

Prop 140 Committee Burns Millions In A Failed Attempt To California Our Arizona

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

How do you waste $15 million? Just ask the folks over at the Make Elections Fair Committee. Last week, their insane attempt to force a California-style elections system of ranked choice voting and jungle primaries went down in flames. Prop 140 failed miserably with nearly 60 percent of the electorate voting “No.” And it wasn’t for lack of funding.

With a huge amount of money coming from the pockets of out-of-state billionaires, the Make Elections Fair Committee spent at least $15 million—giving them a 20:1 spending advantage. That’s right. For every $1 spent trying to defeat the initiative, the Prop 140 committee spent $20 trying to pass it! And they still lost by a wide margin!

That’s legendary. If any business idea ever failed that badly, it would be banished and never spoken of again. And that’s exactly what should happen with ranked choice voting and its ugly cousin jungle primaries (which was already overwhelmingly rejected by Arizona voters back in 2012)…

>>> CONTINUE READING >>> 

Prop 140 Goes Down In Flames In Arizona While Other States Also Reject Ranked-Choice Voting

Prop 140 Goes Down In Flames In Arizona While Other States Also Reject Ranked-Choice Voting

By Daniel Stefanski |

An attempt to transform Arizona’s elections systems on Tuesday night fell well short after voters went to the polls.

Proposition 140, which would have imposed a mixed system of Ranked Choice Voting and jungle primaries for future elections in Arizona, was defeated with almost 60% of the vote share, as of Wednesday evening.

“We are so grateful for the Arizonans who stood up to oppose this radical transformation of our elections systems,” said Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, co-chairs of the No on Prop 140 Committee. “Voters of all political persuasions wisely concluded that Prop 140 would do irreparable harm to our state if enacted. Arizona elections must be free, fair, and transparent, and that is what our system remains after this just result.”

One of the measure’s fiercest opponents, Scot Mussi, the President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, praised the outcome. He said, “Prop 140 was one of the worst ideas to ever be proposed in our great state, and it is fitting that it met its demise from a vast majority of Arizonans. Radical leftists, out-of-state billionaires, and scheming consultants tried to hoodwink voters into adopting this failed system, spending millions of dollars and duplicating signatures to qualify for the ballot. We are so pleased that millions of Arizonans did their homework and said ‘hell no’ to, what would have been, a disastrous transformation of our elections system. California can keep their destructive policies and systems on their side of the state line.”

The organization behind Prop 140, Make Elections Fair Arizona, did not appear to issue a statement as of Wednesday on its website or social media platforms. Immediately following the close of polls on Tuesday night, its account promised to be “back online soon with an Election Day campaign update,” but that does not seem to have materialized yet.

In a Wednesday press release, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club highlighted the defeat of Ranked Choice Voting questions in several states in Tuesday’s General Election. Those results were as follows:

  • Colorado: Proposition 131 was defeated with almost 55% of the vote
  • Idaho: Proposition 1 was defeated with almost 70% of the vote
  • Montana: Both CI-126 & 127 were defeated
  • Oregon: Measure 117 was defeated with almost 60% of the vote
  • South Dakota: Amendment H was defeated with more than 65% of the vote
  • Nevada: Question 3 was defeated with almost 54% of the vote
  • Alaska: Measure 2, which repeals the state’s ranked choice voting system, appears headed toward passage

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Rank Choice Voting Is Unfair And Undemocratic

Rank Choice Voting Is Unfair And Undemocratic

By Christy Narsi |

This November, Proposition 140, the Make Elections Fair Arizona Act, will be on the ballot. Prop. 140, if passed, would create a Rank-Choice Voting (RCV) system, where voters rank candidates in order of preference. Supporters of the proposition claim it will incentivize candidates to reach out to as many voters as possible, regardless of party affiliation and “liberate us from the grip of partisan primary elections.” 

But will it really make Arizona elections more fair? 

RCV may seem logical on the surface, but in reality, it introduces a complex vote tabulation system that lacks transparency and often leads to weird election outcomes. 

In most elections, a voter casts a single ballot for the candidate he or she likes most. With RCV’s ranking system, if one candidate receives more than 50 percent of first place votes, the election is over and the candidate with the most votes wins. If, however, no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the votes, election officials conduct a series of closed-door instant runoffs by eliminating the candidate with the fewest first place votes and redistributing those votes to the second choices on those ballots. This process continues (eliminating the last place finisher and redistributing his or her votes) until a faux majority is created for a single candidate. 

Today, there is bipartisan support for ensuring every vote counts. Yet RCV guarantees the opposite, and instead will create confusion, dropped votes, and a convoluted system of ballot counting that does not represent the will of the people. 

“Ranked Choice Voting can lead to bizarre outcomes where a person who was the first choice of very few voters can still win,” explained Independent Women’s Law Center’s Jennifer C. Braceras. Democratic principles are actually sidelined as RCV encourages candidates and interest groups to play games and try to manipulate outcomes by introducing additional candidates to divert attention from stronger opponents, rather than try to simply bolster their own support.

A study of ballot data from New York City’s 2013 and 2017 general election, and of New York City’s 2021 Democrat mayoral primaries, showed “ballot errors in RCV elections are particularly high in areas with lower levels of education, lower levels of income, higher minority populations, and a higher share of limited English proficient voters.”

Policymakers should be working to make voting easier and more accessible for all Arizonans. Therefore, we should reject schemes such as RCV that make voting more complicated, less accessible, and less transparent. 

Voting should be simple: one person, one legal vote; may the best person win. RCV violates this principle by allowing some voters to effectively cast more than one ballot while excluding other voters whose ballots were exhausted prior to the ultimate run-off. RCV is a dangerously complex process that confuses voters and disincentivizes participation. This is a real threat to our democratic process. 

Christy Narsi lives in Surprise, AZ. She is the National Chapter Director at Independent Women’s Network (IWN). Christy is passionate about developing and empowering women who make an impact in their communities.

Prop 140 Seeks To Enact California-Style Election System In Arizona

Prop 140 Seeks To Enact California-Style Election System In Arizona

By Daniel Stefanski |

Arizona may soon be faced with an overhaul of its election system if a current ballot measure passes this November.

In the upcoming General Election, state voters will decide the fate of Proposition 140, which would transform Arizona’s election system into what has been referred to as “a California-style election scheme built around ranked-choice voting and jungle primaries.”

According to the No on 140 campaign, which is being co-chaired by Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and former Arizona State Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, if passed by voters, Prop 140 would:

  • “Allow one partisan politician (the Arizona Secretary of State) to decide how many candidates qualify for the general election ballot for every single contest, including his or her own race.
  • Result in some races where candidates from only one political party appear on the general election ballot.
  • Force voters to navigate two completely different voting systems on the same ballot, with some races requiring voters to rank candidates under a rank choice voting system and others that do not.
  • Increase tabulation errors, create longer lines at the polls, and significantly delay election results.”

Just recently, this opposition group released a bipartisan list of organizations from around Arizona that were encouraging their followers to vote against Proposition 140. These groups included the Coconino County Democrats, the Gila County Democratic Party, Heritage Action for America, Goldwater Institute, Republican Party of Arizona, League of Women Voters, and the Libertarian Party of Arizona.

In a piece for the Goldwater Institute, Gould wrote, “Americans are understandably concerned about the current acrimony and division in politics. But rather than addressing this problem in a focused, thoughtful manner, Prop 140 takes a sledgehammer to the Arizona Constitution by imposing ranked choice voting and jungle primaries on Arizonans.”

Trent England, the founder and executive director of Save Our States and co-chairman of the Stop RCV Coalition, added, “Ranked-choice voting makes the entire election process more complicated and less transparent. That is why so many places that have tried RSV have gotten rid of it – something Alaska voters are poised to do this year. Yet the onslaught continues, thanks to just a few billionaires who would make our elections worse.”

Thanks to a heated legal battle that ping-ponged between the state’s supreme court and superior court, both sides have an extremely limited window to make their case to voters why Arizona should or should not enact this system to replace our current elections operations.

Last week, the Arizona Supreme Court made its final ruling in a matter concerning tens of thousands of duplicate signatures that threatened to upend this measure for voter consideration. Despite a special master’s determination that 99% of the signatures were, in fact, duplicates, the state’s high court allowed Prop 140 to go forward before the Arizona electorate. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club accused the proponents of this proposition of “obstruct[ing] and delay[ing] the review of the duplicate signatures for over a month.”

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.