Good evening and welcome to Arizona Horizon.

I'm Ted Simons.

We begin tonight by hearing arguments for and against proposition 144 which would enshrine a number of election regulations in the state constitution.

Those regulations include new restrictions on early and Mail-In voting.

And speaking in support of prop one.

44 is attorney James Rogers and speaking in opposition to the measure.

State Representative Oscar de Los Santos, good to have you both here.

Thank you so much for joining us.

James, I want to start with you.

What exactly does prop 144 call for?

Well, the first thing it does is it enshrines the Constitution the principle that only citizens should be able to register for vote to vote.

It also says that only citizens can vote, and that the elections in Arizona should be decided by the votes of eligible citizen voters.

The next big thing it does is it says that foreign money can't be used to influence Arizona elections.

It also requires that all counties have to allow voters to tabulate their votes at the election sites on Election day, and it also require voter ID for all forms of voting in the state.

Let's go through these one by one.

Let's start with the idea that only citizens can registe and vote in Arizona elections.

Why not put that in the Constitution?

Ted, it already is in the state constitution, and prop 144 is a Trojan hors that uses things that sound good and that are popular, like the citizen only voting, like the prohibition on foreign money in our elections, things that everybody basically agrees with to sneak in a provision that effectively ends or makes it really, really difficult to vote by mail.

Voting by mai is how roughly 80% of Arizonans choose to cast their ballot, and prop 144 is going to infringe on the freedom of the people to do that.

Is thi I mean, are these other aspects I mean, the foreign contribution?

First of all, what does that mean for national contributions to elections here in Arizona?

It means that foreigners can't spend money to influence elections in our state, and that is not in the Constitution, and that's not in Arizona law.

The register to vote provision is actually not in the Constitution.

There's a law that says that, but it's never been enshrined in the Constitution.

So that ensures that the legislature can't ever change that law.

Just to be clear, the prohibition on foreign money in U.S.

elections is already federal law.

And what you didn't hear him contest was the fact that citizens, no citizens, no non-citizens, excuse me, in Arizona, are voting in 2020, Attorney General Mark Brnovich a very conservative Republican, undertook an investigation of voting in Arizona because there wer a lot of claims from far right extremists who said that there was all kinds of fraud in our elections.

He spent over 10,000 hour of attorneys and investigators looking into that.

Over $2.5 million of taxpayer money was spent on on that investigation.

You know what he found, Ted?

Absolutely nothing.

Okay.

The idea that, again, fo national influence, non-citizens voting and registering here first of all, is that an issue?

Secondly, if it's already state and or federal law, what's the point of putting this in front of voters and getting it i the Constitution where it stays?

Well, so there's two issues we've been talking about.

So on the foreign foreigners voting in Arizona elections since that time, the federal government has opened up a database that DHS has that lets county recorders check their voter rolls against federal databases, and they have found foreigners registered to vote.

The Yavapai County recorder just came out and listed the number that she had that she's found.

And County Recorde Justin Heap is also found on the prohibition on federal funds or foreign funding influencing our elections.

It is true the federal government prohibit foreign money from influencing electoral electoral contest for candidates.

There is no prohibition, federal or state law that prohibits federal or foreign dollars from influencing ballot propositions.

So this very ballot proposition will be voting on actually, foreigners can spend money to influence that.

And there's nothing illegal about that right now under stat or federal law.

Respond, please.

Okay.

Nobody' contesting these propositions.

Nobody believes that non-citizens should be voting in our elections.

Nobody believes that foreign actors should be influencing our elections.

The problem with this is that they are using this as a Trojan horse to sneak in a provision that, again, effectively ends vote by mail in Arizona.

That is the key problem with this proposition.

The propositio calls for government issued ID necessary to cas an early ballot to vote by mail.

You need this.

How does that work?

What the proposition says is that the legislature will work out the exact rules of how that's implemented, and it's not a Trojan horse to end early voting.

Other states have these restrictions, have these same requirements.

Florida requires proof of ID to vote, and they use Mail-In voting.

Nevada just voted on a very similar proposition in 20 2024, and it passed by over 70%.

Real quickly.

How does Florida.

How did sick with Florida' as they're already doing this.

How do they do that?

Would you have to send in some signature send in your driver's license?

What do you do if you're only voting by mail and you need to show your ID?

Well, this proposition won't copy Florida's proposition.

What it will do is it will say the legislature will figure out what's right for Arizona.

So what will happen is once this proposition passes, is all the stakeholders can get together.

Citizens can give their input, the legislators will discuss this and they'll figure ou what works best for Arizonans, because obviously Arizonans do like to vote by mail, and no one's trying to stop that or trying to contest that.

Why is that a bad idea?

What you just heard is pass it first and then find out what's in it.

That is an extremely dangerous precedent to set.

We don't kno if you're going to have to write your Social Security number on your ballot or your ballot envelope.

We don't kno if you're going to have to send in your actual driver's license or ID, and then have it mailed back weeks later.

We don't kno if you have to make a photocopy.

Who owns a photocopy machine of your driver's license?

Does it have to be front and back?

Does it have to be in color?

We don't know.

Does it have to be notarized?

We don't know.

Are you is your personal identifyin information going to be exposed?

We don't know.

These are the questions that unfortunately the proponents of prop 144 can't answer.

And again this is not an issue.

There was a national study that looked at over 10 million ballots that were cast by mail.

They were found for instances of fraudulent voting.

So it's really a solution.

Looking for, excuse me, solution looking for a problem.

Why is this necessary?

Why are we putting this in front of voters?

Why did this get past the legislature in term of sending it to the vote?

Why?

This is what Arizonans want.

Like I said, when you look at the opinion polls, people want secure elections.

This gets us secure elections.

And when it has been put in front of voters in front of a very similar state in Nevada, 70 plus percent of the voters wanted it.

This is this this is not something where you pass it to find out what's in it, what's in it is what's there and what wil how it will, will be implemented will be decided by the voter through their representatives.

And so these scare tactics of talking about writing your Social Security number, that no one's saying that that's what's going to happen and that's not in the provision, then that won't be required.

If this something like this is needed to help with the eroding trust in elections, is it a bad thing to d something to ease that erosion?

We all want trust in our elections, and we should have a trust in our elections.

Right now, our election system is safe it is strong and it is secure.

You already need to prove your identity and your citizenship when you register to vote and when you return your mail in ballot.

There are several layers of security and safety that exists to make sure that there is no fraud.

So, for example, you have to sign your ballot envelope that is sent to the county.

At the county, you have trained officials who compare that signature to previous samples of your signature.

If there's a question about the veracity of your signature, it goes to a trained manager.

And then there are bipartisan teams, Republicans and Democrats who tabulate the votes.

So the idea that there is a flaw in our election system is not true.

What would be better to instill confidence in our elections is if right wing extremists stop trying to sow doubt and discord, and actually accepted the election results?

What is the proo and the evidence, if you will, that this is neede because elections aren't secure?

How are elections right now to ask?

How are they not secure?

Well, the representative talked about a study about only four ballots.

That's just not true.

When you look at the the rate of invalidation for signature of no matches, for signatures, it's in the single digit percentages just in Arizona.

And that grows to a broader point.

The only way that we wait the identity of an early voter is through their signature.

We have to show ID to get on a plane.

We have to show ID to open a bank account.

You have to show ID to to buy alcohol.

Can you imagine if you just had to match your signature for those things?

In no part of our life do we accept that just a signature as an authentication of identity.

And certainly for voting, one of the most sacred things we do in our democracy, it requires more than just a signature to authenticate.

Respond, please.

We already show ID to register to vote, and we must prove our citizenship to vote.

So it is simply not true that this doesn't exist.

It already exists.

The need to be a citizen to vote in our elections already exists.

There is already a federal law that bans foreign actor from influencing our elections.

So again, this is just a very big Trojan horse to try to end vote by mail here in Arizona.

The idea that there is eroding trust.

And the representative did mention this.

There's been a lot of criticism of the election process.

And that in and of itsel can erode trust if there's not.

And it doesn't seem like there has been proof that these elections are not secure.

Why would this be necessary and why would this help the situation?

Well.

Part of the legitimacy of a democrac is the trust that people have, that their elections are secure.

So the more we can do to instill that trust, the better our democracy functions.

And this proposition does more than just the provisions tha the representative talked about.

It also requires on site tabulation of all ballots of that optio being available on Election Day.

And that's a key provision that actually gives us faster election results.

What this does is it gives us something close to a Florida style of elections, where we have fast results that people can be secure, that that the system functions securely.

Yeah.

The idea of faster results here.

A lot of people talk about that.

Everyone complains about how long it takes to get the final tally in.

Why not do something about that?

Look, we all want three thing when it comes to our elections safety and security, fas results, and accurate results.

I am totally in favor of the option of of voters tabulating their results on site.

The problem, again, is that they're using ideas that could be good or that are popular in order to sneak in this very dangerous provision that's going to end vote by mail.

So again, I have no problem with many of the provisions in proposition 144.

The main issue is that they're using them to disguise their true intent which is to attack vote by mail.

80% of Arizonans choose to vote by mail.

If those people are not given that option, they're going to start voting by mail or excuse me, voting on Election Day.

The lines are going to be out of control.

We simply don't need this.

And he cannot cite any single instance of voter fraud in Arizona.

That is, you know, swinging elections here.

James, last word on this.

Florida and Nevada have this have similar provisions that require ID to vote.

They have Mail-In voting.

We can do the same thing here.

And it's not going to end the world because 80% of Arizona's vote by mail and Arizonans, the legislature will adopt the rules that will implement how ID is required for voting.

There's not going to be some great change that's going to disenfranchize them, because the legislators are going to do something that gives those 80% of the people the right to continu to vote the way that they like.

James Rogers, again, thank you so much, Representative Oscar de la Santos.

Thank you as well.

Again, proposition 144.

Good to have you both here.

Thanks for joining us.

Thank you.

Thanks.