Description of Arizona's open primaries ballot measure is not fair, judge rules

It's back to the drawing board for a panel of lawmakers whose description of a proposal to reform candidate elections was rejected Monday as "misleading."

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Melissa Iyer Julian ruled in favor of supporters of the Make Elections Fair Act, who argued the lawmakers' wording emphasized actions the act would allow, while downplaying what would it require. Julian wrote that wording also portrayed the way things would work in a backward manner, effectively putting the cart before the horse and confusing voters.

Make Elections Fair proposes to abolish partisan primaries and instead create a state primary system open to all contenders for public office.

The act then suggests that anywhere from two to eight candidates would advance from an open primary, although it leaves it to the Legislature, the secretary of state or the voters at large to determine how many names to put on the general election ballot.

Julian agreed that the proposed description of the act for a statewide publicity pamphlet would wrongly lead voters to think they would have to rank candidates in all elections and that the candidate with the most votes would not necessarily win.

"Contrary to the analysis' implication, the initiative does not require the use of voter ranking in declaring an election winner in all instances," Julian wrote. Rather, it allows for ranked-choice voting — a controversial electoral method in some circles — but only if the Legislature or other officials decide more than the top two finishers in a primary should be put on the general election ballot.

Julian ordered the Arizona Legislative Council, which consists of 14 lawmakers, to rework the language in the pamphlet. Lawmakers must have new language in place by Aug. 29, the deadline for finalizing the publicity pamphlet.

Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, said lawmakers would appeal Julian's ruling.

On Friday, the election measure got another win when a different superior court judge determined it did not violate the "separate amendment" rule in the Arizona Constitution by proposing several interrelated changes. That judge also found the 200-word description that will be printed on the ballot was accurate.

What is unclear is whether the measure will have enough valid voter signatures to qualify for the November ballot. That is the subject of an ongoing proceeding in yet another lawsuit challenging the effort to open primaries to all voters.

The Make Elections Fair Act also would create a level playing field for independent candidates and those who run under a party label. Currently, independent candidates are at a disadvantage compared to partisan candidates.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Description of Arizona's open primaries ballot measure is not fair, judge rules