History
Arizona acquired statewide initiative, referendum, and recall rights at
the time of statehood in 1912. Equity mentions “Hon. A. C. Baker of
Phoenix” as a leader of the local direct democracy movement.
The first initiative was for women’s suffrage, and it passed by a margin
of greater than two to one on November 5, 1912. Two years later, in 1914,
a total of 15 initiatives qualified for the Arizona ballot: a record for initiative
use in that state.
Organized labor that year was successful in passing four initiatives: one
to prohibit blacklisting of union members; a second establishing an “old
age and mothers’ pension”; a third establishing a state government
contract system, printing plant, and banking system, and a fourth
requiring that businesses limit employment of non-citizens. Voters passed a
fifth initiative barring the governor and legislature from amending or
repealing initiatives.
The legislature responded with a constitutional amendment to make it
harder to pass initiatives. This amendment however, could take effect only
if approved by voters. The Arizona Federation of Labor waged a
campaign against the measure, and voters defeated it by a narrow
margin in 1916.
Arizona government reforms passed by voter initiative include
changes in reapportionment (1918 and 1932), changes in the court
system (1960 and 1974), created the voter registration system known as
“Motor Voter” (1982), which allows applicants for driver’s license renewal
to simultaneously register to vote and adopted campaign finance reform
in (1986 and 1998). Also in 1988, the voters adopted an initiative that
made English the official language and adopted term limits for state
legislators in 1992.
Arizonans owe many of their reforms to John Kromko. Kromko, like
most Arizonans, is not a native; he was born near Erie, Pennsylvania, in
1940 and moved to Tucson in the mid-1960s. He was active in protests
against the Vietnam War, and in the 1970s and 1980s he was elected to
the lower house of the state legislature several times. By night, he was a
computer-programming instructor; by day, he was Arizona’s “Mr. Initiative.”
Kromko’s first petition was a referendum drive to stop a Tucson city
council ordinance banning topless dancing. (He explains with a touch of
embarrassment that he was fighting for the principle of free speech.) In
1976 Kromko was among the handful of Arizonans who, in cooperation
with the People’s Lobby Western Bloc campaign, succeeded in putting
on the state ballot an initiative to phase out nuclear power. The initiative
lost at the polls, but Kromko’s leadership on the issue got him elected to
his first term in the legislature.
Once elected, he set his sights on abolishing the sales tax on food, a
“regressive” tax that hits the poor hardest. Unsuccessful in the legislature,
Kromko launched a statewide initiative petition and got enough
signatures to put food tax repeal on the ballot. The legislature, faced with
the initiative, acted to repeal the tax.
After the food tax victory, Kromko turned to voter registration reform.
Again the legislature was unresponsive, so he launched an initiative
petition. He narrowly missed getting enough signatures in 1980, and he
failed to win re-election that year. Undaunted, he revived the voter
registration campaign and turned to yet another cause: Medicaid
funding. Arizona in 1981 was the only state without Medicaid, since the
legislature had refused to appropriate money for the state’s share of this
federal program.
In 1982, with an initiative petition drive under way and headed for
success, the legislature got the message and established a Medicaid
program. Kromko and his allies on this issue, the state’s churches, were
satisfied and dropped their petition drive. The voter registration initiative,
now under the leadership of Les Miller, a Phoenix attorney, and the state
Democratic Party, gained ballot placement and voter approval. In the
ensuing four years, this “Motor Voter” initiative increased by over 10
percent the proportion of Arizona’s eligible population who were
registered to vote.
Kromko, re-elected to the legislature in 1982, took up his petitions
again in 1983 to prevent construction of a freeway in Tucson that would
have smashed through several residential neighborhoods. The initiative
was merely to make freeway plans subject to voter approval, but Tucson
officials, seeing the campaign as the death knell for their freeway plans,
blocked its placement on the ballot through various legal technicalities.
Kromko and neighborhood activists fighting to save their homes refused to
admit defeat. They began a new petition drive in 1984, qualified their
measure for the ballot, and won voter approval for it in November 1985.
Arizona’s moneyed interests poured funds into a campaign to unseat
Kromko in 1986. Kromko not only survived but also fought back by
supporting a statewide initiative to limit campaign contributions,
sponsored by his colleague in the legislature, Democratic State
Representative Reid Ewing of Tucson. Voters passed the measure by a two
to one margin.
Kromko’s initiative exploits have made him the most effective
Democratic political figure, besides former governor Bruce Babbitt, in this
perennially Republican-dominated state. And Babbitt owes partial credit
for one of his biggest successes—enactment of restrictions on the toxic
chemical pollution of drinking water—to Kromko. Early in 1986 Kromko
helped organize an environmentalist petition drive for an anti-toxic
initiative, while Babbitt negotiated with the legislature for passage of a
similar bill. When initiative backers had enough signatures to put their
measure on the ballot, the legislature bowed to the pressure and passed
Babbitt’s bill.
Since 1992 several other major initiatives have passed in the state
including the banning of cockfighting in 1998 and in 2000 the requirement
that all public school instruction be conducted in English. Also in 2000, the
voters of Arizona defeated an attempt by the state legislature to require a
two-thirds vote of the people before any animal protection initiative could
be adopted. This legislative assault on the process was in retaliation to the
success of the animal protection movement in the state – however, the
voters would have nothing to do with it.
Excerpted from the Initiative & Referendum Almanac by M. Dane Waters.