Arizona Voters To Decide On Limiting Governor’s Emergency Powers With Prop 135

Arizona Voters To Decide On Limiting Governor’s Emergency Powers With Prop 135

By Staff Reporter |

Just over four years past the initial outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the government flexes of authority that went with it, Arizona voters, come November, will decide on whether the governor should have less powers in an emergency.

Proposition 135 would amend the Arizona Constitution to terminate the governor’s emergency powers automatically after 30 days — except in those emergencies related to war, fire, or flood — and thereafter require the legislature to approve any extensions of emergency powers. Those approvals could be granted indefinitely, and the legislature could issue certain limits to the governor’s powers.

The proposition would also require the governor to call a special legislative session to address whether to terminate or alter his or her emergency powers should one-third of the House and one-third of the Senate request it. Should the legislature reject an extension of emergency order, the governor may not call one. 

Effectively, the legislature would have an even greater check and balance on the executive.

Current law allows the governor’s emergency powers to last up to 120 days before requiring legislative approval for extensions.

Arizona Horizon premiered a debate on the opposing and supportive arguments for Prop 135 earlier this month. 

Will Humble, executive director of the Arizona Public Health Association (APHA) and former director of Arizona Department of Health Services, and Greg Blackie from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) represented the leading arguments on either side of the issue. 

Blackie, in favor of Prop 135, stressed that emergencies should be limited in their time frame, and that the “police powers” of the state shouldn’t be indefinite, as they effectively became under COVID-19.  

“Emergencies by definition, are temporary, and so the response should also be temporary, especially the powers delegated to the governor,” said Blackie. “This measure simply provides reasonable limits by providing termination after 30 days unless the legislature chooses to extend those powers further.”

Humble responded that the current, 120-day limit with 30-day permissions of extension from the legislature was sufficient to address emergencies, as exercised under former Governor Doug Ducey during the initial outbreak. In fact, Humble said that he wished that the initial term limit of 120 days were longer. 

“I don’t think 30 days is long enough,” said Humble. “All of these agencies have these emergency response plans and they can’t execute those plans if they lose that authority and that authority could be lost because of partisan reasons.”

Humble alluded to the prolonged government response to addressing COVID-19 as the need for the governor to have more than 30 days to sustain an emergency order.

“I could live with a quarter of the year to figure out the emergency,” said Humble. “Let’s say you had a biological agent that was released [then] you’d have a much longer period than 30 days that you would need to implement some of these measures to help control.”

Humble also opposed Prop 135 being a constitutional amendment, citing the difficulty of amending the constitution.

But Blackie responded, “But this is the issue of what should be in the Constitution. This is a question about how our government operates and separation of powers. And that belongs in the Constitution, the framework of government. When can the governor take large sums of legislative power, and then what is the legislative check on that. It belongs in the Constitution because it fundamentally answers questions about how our government is to operate.”

AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.