2006 Ballot Proposition Guide
Issued by the Arizona Secretary of State's Office

PROPOSITION 300
OFFICIAL TITLE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1031
ENACTING AND ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE PEOPLE OF A MEASURE RELATING TO PUBLIC PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY.
TEXT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:
1. Under the power of the referendum, as vested in the Legislature, the following measure, relating to public program eligibility, is enacted to become valid as a law if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:
AN ACT
AMENDING SECTIONS 15-191.01, 15-232, 15-1803, 46-801 AND 46-803, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING TITLE 15, CHAPTER 14, ARTICLE 2, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING SECTION 15-1825; RELATING TO PUBLIC PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Section 15-191.01, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
15-191.01. Family literacy program; procedures; curriculum; eligibility plan
A. The family literacy program is established in the state board of education through the division of early childhood education programs to increase the basic academic and literacy skills of eligible parents and their preschool children in accordance with this article. The state board of education shall establish family literacy projects as part of the overall program at locations where there is a high incidence of economic and educational disadvantage as determined by the state board of education in consultation with the department of economic security and, as appropriate, other state agencies.
B. The state board of education shall adopt procedures necessary to implement the family literacy program.
C. The state board of education shall establish guidelines for requiring family literacy program participants to engage in community service activities in exchange for benefits received from the program. Participants shall be allowed to choose from a variety of community and faith based service providers that are under contract with the department to provide community service opportunities or program services. Participants shall be allowed and encouraged to engage in community services within their own communities. Participants shall be allowed to fulfill the requirements of this subsection by providing community services to the program from which they received services.
D. The state board of education shall submit an annual report by December 31 to the governor, the speaker of the house of representatives and the president of the senate regarding the community service activities of family literacy program participants pursuant to subsection C, including information on the number of participants, the types of community service performed and the number of hours spent in community service activities.
E. Local education agencies and adult education programs funded by the department of education are eligible for grants if the state board of education determines that a high percentage of adults in the county, the local school district or the targeted local school service area have not graduated from high school. Selection criteria for grant awards shall include at a minimum the educational needs of the adult population, the incidence of unemployment in the county, district or local targeted school service area, the degree to which community collaboration and partnership demonstrate the ability to bring additional resources to the program and the readiness and likelihood of the proposing organizations to establish a successful family literacy project.
F. Each project team shall include representatives from each of the following:
1. One or more local school districts or the county school superintendent's office.
2. An adult education provider funded by the division of adult education or a provider that complies with the policies, academic standards, performance outcomes, assessment and data collection requirements of adult education as prescribed by the division of adult education.
3. A private or public early childhood education provider.
4. Any other social service, governmental or private agency that may provide assistance for the planning and operation of the project.
G. In addition to the grants prescribed in subsection H, the state board of education shall authorize two grants to existing literacy programs in this state that can offer training and serve as models and training resources for the establishment and expansion of other programs throughout this state. Existing literacy programs shall submit a grant application to the state board of education in the same manner as prescribed in subsection K.
H. The state board of education shall authorize additional grants through the division of early childhood education programs in areas of educational and economic need.
I. Selected projects shall use either:
1. A nationally recognized family literacy model such as models developed by the national center for family literacy or its successor.
2. A model that, in the determination of the project team and the state board of education, is superior to a nationally recognized family literacy model.
J. Eligible parents shall be instructed in adult basic education and general educational development. Preschool children shall receive instruction in developmentally appropriate early childhood programs. Other planned, structured activities involving parents and children in learning activities may be established as a part of the curriculum.
K. Each grant application shall include a plan to address at least the following:
1. Identification and recruitment of eligible parents and children.
2. Screening and preparation of parents and children for participation in the family literacy program.
3. Instructional programs and assessment practices that promote academic and literacy skills and that equip parents to provide needed support for the educational growth and success of their children.
4. A determination that at least ten but no more than twenty parents with children will be eligible for and be enrolled in the family literacy program at all times, or that the family literacy programs shall document efforts to continually recruit eligible families.
5. Provision of child care through either private or public providers.
6. A transportation plan for participants.
7. An organizational partnership involving at a minimum a common school, a private or publicly funded preschool provider and an adult education program funded by the department of education or by an outside funding source.
L. THIS SECTION SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN. M. THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARENTS WHO APPLIED TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROGRAM UNDER THIS ARTICLE AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARENTS WHO WERE NOT ELIGIBLE UNDER THIS ARTICLE BECAUSE THE PARENT WAS NOT AN ELIGIBLE PARENT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 15-191, PARAGRAPH 1, SUBDIVISION (c).
Sec. 2. Section 15-232, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
15-232. Division of adult education; duties
A. There is established a division of adult education within the department of education, under the jurisdiction of the state board for vocational and technological OF education, which shall:
1. Prescribe a course of study for adult education in school districts.
2. Make available and supervise the program of adult education in other institutions and agencies of this state.
3. Adopt rules for the establishment and conduct of classes for immigrant and adult education, including the teaching of English to foreigners, in school districts.
4. Devise plans for establishment and maintenance of classes for immigrant and adult education, including the teaching of English to foreigners, stimulate and correlate the Americanization work of various agencies, including governmental, and perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the state board of education and the superintendent of public instruction.
5. Prescribe a course of study to provide training for adults to continue their basic education to the degree of passing a general equivalency diploma test or an equivalency test approved by the state board of education.
B. THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SHALL PROVIDE CLASSES UNDER THIS SECTION ONLY TO ADULTS WHO ARE CITIZENS OR LEGAL RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES OR ARE OTHERWISE LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES. THIS SUBSECTION SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN.
C. THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ADULTS WHO APPLIED FOR INSTRUCTION AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ADULTS WHO WERE DENIED INSTRUCTION UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE THE APPLICANT WAS NOT A CITIZEN OR LEGAL RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR WAS NOT OTHERWISE LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES.
Sec. 3. Section 15-1803, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
15-1803. Alien in-state student status
A. An alien is entitled to classification as an in-state refugee student if such person has been granted refugee status in accordance with all applicable laws of the United States and has met all other requirements for domicile.
B. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION REFORM AND IMMIGRANT RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1996 (P.L. 104-208; 110 STAT. 3009), A PERSON WHO WAS NOT A CITIZEN OR LEGAL RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR WHO IS WITHOUT LAWFUL IMMIGRATION STATUS IS NOT ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS AN IN-STATE STUDENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15-1802 OR ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS A COUNTY RESIDENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15-1802.01.
C. EACH COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO WERE ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS AN IN-STATE STUDENT AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO WERE NOT ENTITLED TO CLASSIFICATION AS AN IN-STATE STUDENT UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE THE STUDENT WAS NOT A CITIZEN OR LEGAL RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR IS WITHOUT LAWFUL IMMIGRATION STATUS.
Sec. 4. Title 15, chapter 14, article 2, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 15-1825, to read: 15-1825. Prohibited financial assistance; report
A. A PERSON WHO IS NOT A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES, WHO IS WITHOUT LAWFUL IMMIGRATION STATUS AND WHO IS ENROLLED AS A STUDENT AT ANY UNIVERSITY UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS OR AT ANY COMMUNITY COLLEGE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF A COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT IN THIS STATE IS NOT ENTITLED TO TUITION WAIVERS, FEE WAIVERS, GRANTS, SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE, FINANCIAL AID, TUITION ASSISTANCE OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THAT IS SUBSIDIZED OR PAID IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITH STATE MONIES.
B. EACH COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO APPLIED AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO WERE NOT ENTITLED TO TUITION WAIVERS, FEE WAIVERS, GRANTS, SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE, FINANCIAL AID, TUITION ASSISTANCE OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THAT IS SUBSIDIZED OR PAID IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITH STATE MONIES UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE THE STUDENT WAS NOT A CITIZEN OR LEGAL RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR NOT LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES.
C. THIS SECTION SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN. Sec. 5. Section 46-801, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
46-801. Definitions
In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Caretaker relative" means a relative who exercises responsibility for the day-to-day physical care, guidance and support of a child who physically resides with the relative and who is by affinity or consanguinity or by court decree a grandparent, great-grandparent, sibling of the whole or half blood, stepbrother, stepsister, aunt, uncle, great-aunt, great-uncle or first cousin.
2. "Cash assistance" has the same meaning prescribed in section 46-101.
3. "Child" means a person who is under thirteen years of age.
4. "Child care" means the compensated service that is provided to a child who is unaccompanied by a parent or guardian during a portion of a twenty-four hour day.
5. "Child care assistance" means any money payments for child care services that are paid by the department and that are paid for the benefit of an eligible family.
6. "Child care home provider" means a person who is at least eighteen years of age, who is not the parent, guardian, caretaker relative or noncertified relative provider of a child needing child care and who is certified by the department to care for four or fewer children for compensation with child care assistance monies.
7. "Child care providers" means child care facilities licensed pursuant to title 36, chapter 7.1, article 1, child care group homes certified pursuant to title 36, chapter 7.1, article 4, child care home providers, in-home providers, noncertified relative providers and regulated child care on military installations or for federally recognized Indian tribes.
8. "Eligible family" means CITIZENS OR LEGAL RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES OR INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE OTHERWISE LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES AND WHO ARE parents, legal guardians or caretaker relatives with legal residence in this state and children in their care who meet the eligibility requirements for child care assistance.
9. "Federal poverty level" means the poverty guidelines that are issued by the United States department of health and human services pursuant to section 673(2) of the omnibus budget reconciliation act of 1981 and that are reported annually in the federal register.
10. "In-home provider" means a provider who is certified by the department to care for a child of an eligible family in the child's own home and is compensated with child care assistance monies.
11. "Noncertified relative provider" means a person who is at least eighteen years of age, who provides child care services to an eligible child, who is by affinity or consanguinity or by court decree the grandparent, great-grandparent, sibling not residing in the same household, aunt, great-aunt, uncle or great-uncle of the eligible child and who meets the department's requirements to be a noncertified relative provider.
12. "Parent" or "parents" means the natural or adoptive parents of a child.
Sec. 6. Section 46-803, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
46-803. Eligibility for child care assistance
A. The department shall provide child care assistance to eligible families who are attempting to achieve independence from the cash assistance program and who need child care assistance in support of and as specified in their personal responsibility agreement pursuant to chapters 1 and 2 of this title.
B. The department shall provide child care assistance to eligible families who are transitioning off of cash assistance due to increased earnings or child support income in order to accept or maintain employment. Eligible families must request this assistance within six months after the cash assistance case closure. Child care assistance may be provided for up to twenty-four months after the case closure and shall cease whenever the family income exceeds one hundred sixty-five per cent of the federal poverty level.
C. The department shall provide child care assistance to eligible families who are diverted from cash assistance pursuant to section 46-298 in order to obtain or maintain employment. Child care assistance may be provided for up to twenty-four months after the case closure and shall cease whenever the family income exceeds one hundred sixty-five per cent of the federal poverty level.
D. The department may provide child care assistance to support eligible families with incomes of one hundred sixty-five per cent or less of the federal poverty level to accept or maintain employment. Priority for this child care assistance shall be given to families with incomes of one hundred per cent or less of the federal poverty level.
E. The department may provide child care assistance to families referred by child protective services and to children in foster care pursuant to title 8, chapter 5 to support child protection.
F. The department may provide child care assistance to special circumstance families whose incomes are one hundred sixty-five per cent or less of the federal poverty level and who are unable to provide child care for a portion of a twenty-four hour day due to a crisis situation of domestic violence or homelessness, or a physical, mental, emotional or medical condition, participation in a drug treatment or drug rehabilitation program or court ordered community restitution. Priority for this child care assistance shall be given to families with incomes of one hundred per cent or less of the federal poverty level.
G. In lieu of the employment activity required in subsection B, C or D of this section, the department may allow eligible families with teenaged custodial parents under twenty years of age to complete a high school diploma or its equivalent or engage in remedial education activities reasonably related to employment goals.
H. The department may provide supplemental child care assistance for department approved education and training activities if the eligible parent, legal guardian or caretaker relative is working at least a monthly average of twenty hours per week and this education and training are reasonably related to employment goals. The eligible parent, legal guardian or caretaker relative must demonstrate satisfactory progress in the education or training activity.
I. Beginning March 12, 2003, the department shall establish waiting lists for child care assistance and prioritize child care assistance for different eligibility categories in order to manage within appropriated and available monies. Priority of children on the waiting list shall start with those families at one hundred per cent of the federal poverty level and continue with each successive ten per cent increase in the federal poverty level until the maximum allowable federal poverty level of one hundred sixty-five per cent. Priority shall be given regardless of time spent on the waiting list.
J. The department shall establish criteria for denying, reducing or terminating child care assistance that include:
1. Whether there is a parent, legal guardian or caretaker relative available to care for the child.
2. Financial or programmatic eligibility changes or ineligibility.
3. Failure to cooperate with the requirements of the department to determine or redetermine eligibility.
4. Hours of child care need that fall within the child's compulsory academic school hours.
5. Reasonably accessible and available publicly funded early childhood education programs.
6. Whether an otherwise eligible family has been sanctioned and cash assistance has been terminated pursuant to chapter 2 of this title.
7. Other circumstances of a similar nature.
8. Whether sufficient monies exist for the assistance.
K. Families receiving child care assistance under subsection D or F of this section are also subject to the following requirements for such child care assistance:
1. Each child is limited to no more than sixty cumulative months of child care assistance. The department may provide an extension if the family can prove that the family is making efforts to improve skills and move towards self-sufficiency.
2. Families are limited to no more than six children receiving child care assistance.
3. Copayments shall be imposed for all children receiving child care assistance. Copayments for each child may be higher for the first child in child care than for additional children in child care.
L. The department shall review each case at least once a year to evaluate eligibility for child care assistance.
M. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL REPORT ON DECEMBER 31 AND JUNE 30 OF EACH YEAR TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FAMILIES WHO APPLIED FOR CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FAMILIES WHO WERE DENIED ASSISTANCE UNDER THIS SECTION BECAUSE THE PARENTS, LEGAL GUARDIANS OR CARETAKER RELATIVES WHO APPLIED FOR ASSISTANCE WERE NOT CITIZENS OR LEGAL RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES OR WERE NOT OTHERWISE LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES.
N. THIS SECTION SHALL BE ENFORCED WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, RELIGION, GENDER, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN.
M. O. Notwithstanding section 35-173, monies appropriated for the purposes of this section shall not be used for any other purpose without the approval of the joint legislative budget committee.
N. P. The department shall refer all child care subsidy recipients to child support enforcement and to local workforce services and provide information on the earned income tax credit.
2. The Secretary of State shall submit this proposition to the voters at the next general election as provided by article IV, part 1, section 1, Constitution of Arizona.

ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Proposition 300 would make the following changes related to eligibility, enforcement and reporting for certain state funded services:
1. Provides that only United States citizens, legal residents or persons otherwise lawfully present in this country are eligible to participate in adult education classes offered by the Arizona Department of Education.
2. Provides that in accordance with the federal Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, a person who is not a United States citizen or legal resident and who does not otherwise possess lawful immigration status in this country may not be classified as an in-state student or county resident for community college or state university tuition purposes.
3. Provides that a state university or community college student who is not a United States citizen and who does not otherwise possess lawful immigration status in this country is not entitled to waivers, grants or any other financial assistance paid in whole or part with state funds.
4. Restricts eligibility for child care assistance from the Arizona Department of Economic Security to parents, guardians and caretakers who are United States citizens, legal residents or persons otherwise lawfully present in this country.
5. Requires that the family literacy program, the adult education class requirements, the state university and community college financial assistance requirements and the child care assistance program be enforced without regard to race, religion, gender, ethnicity or national origin.
6. Requires that the state agencies administering the provisions of Proposition 300 report statistics regarding the number of persons denied participation in the above described programs due to citizenship or immigration status.

ARGUMENTS "FOR" PROPOSITION 300
Arizona is currently giving away millions of your tax dollars as subsidies to illegals. Vote YES on Prop 300 to end illegal taxpayer subsidies. Arizona colleges and universities have seen large tuition increases over the last few years. US citizens from other states attending Arizona schools have to pay the full cost of tuition. However, citizens of foreign countries, who break the law to enter Arizona illegally, are given taxpayer subsidized tuition. It's not fair; it's not right. Vote YES on Prop 300 to save taxpayers millions in subsidies for illegals. A US citizen, single mother, and Arizona resident who needs help with child care costs may not get help and have to go on a waiting list because the program is full of illegals. Taxpayers are funding free daycare for illegals so they can work at a job that's illegal for them to have. 2004's "Protect Arizona Now" was supposed to end these kinds of public benefits to illegals. However, Attorney General Goddard and Governor Napolitano craftily created loopholes to allow illegals to continue to receive taxpayer funded services. The people spoke loudly, clearly, and were ignored. Last year, we passed a bill to close these loopholes, and Governor Napolitano promptly VETOED it (HB2030). Now you have a chance to override the Governor's veto. We have many needs in Arizona; if we end taxpayer subsidies for illegals, we will save millions of tax dollars that could benefit US citizens. How can we expect anyone to follow immigration law if Arizona keeps giving away the benefits of citizenship and legal migration to those who ignore our laws? It's time to stop spending our tax dollars subsidizing illegal behavior. Close the loopholes, vote YES on Prop 300.
Sen. Dean Martin, Sponsor, Prop 300, Phoenix

Ballot argument FOR Proposition 300
(public program eligibility)
State programs in adult education and welfare are designed to help Arizonans who are struggling to develop their job skills or support their families. These assistance programs are provided by the state using millions of tax dollars from hard-working men and women who want their taxes spent on improving their communities. These programs, however, should not be made available to those who are not legal residents of Arizona or who are not citizens of the United States. This referendum prohibits the state government from offering adult education classes, tuition waivers, or childcare assistance to illegal aliens. By offering these services to illegal aliens, it increases the burden on our state programs and robs our own citizens of services they've paid for with their taxes. Above all, free state services for all takes away the incentive for illegal aliens to become full citizens and legitimate members of American society. It is vital that we spend our tax dollars on helping Arizonans and not aid and abet illegal aliens.
The Honorable Russell Pearce, Arizona House of Representatives, Mesa
Paid for by "Russell Pearce 2004"

I am a staunch proponent of this Ballot Measure. It is only reasonable to clarify that the tax dollars of our citizens and legal residents should not be used to support those who have chosen to violate our laws and our sovereignty. It is indefensible that we should be charging students who come to Arizona for education from other states a large amount of money more than we charge students who have defied our laws by their illegal presence in our state. The American sense of fairness dictates that we should not be subsidizing students who are here illegally in college level and adult education programs at the expense of the taxpayers of Arizona. I ask you to join me in voting FOR this measure that restores a sense of fairness in this area. **Paid for by Goldwater for Governor Committee.**
Don Goldwater, Goldwater for Governor, Laveen

ARGUMENTS "AGAINST" PROPOSITION 300
The Arizona Farm Bureau opposes proposition 300. This proposition comes from the frustration over the failure of the federal government to act responsibly and comprehensively on securing our border and reforming the immigration system. But the fallacy of this measure is the same as when politicians call for penalties on employers who unknowingly hire workers who are not work authorized. Employers are required to obtain forms of identification when hiring. They are not allowed under federal law to question documents. Discrimination charges come from the U.S. Justice Department if they do. Some would like for employers to become immigration policemen without legal and reliable methods to determine the validity of documents. This proposition wants state and school personnel making clerical decisions to become immigration police, without the proper tools. This proposition is not the answer. Securing the border, reforming work visa permits and identifying the millions of those in this country without proper documentation is what will eliminate the frustration for both employers and the public.
Kevin Rogers, President, Arizona Farm Bureau, Mesa
James W. Klinker, Chief Administrative Officer, Arizona Farm Bureau, Mesa
Paid for by "Arizona Farm Bureau"

The Arizona chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) supports equality and fairness for all people. We believe it is time for Arizonans to face the reality that, no matter what some may wish, those who are not in our country legally are not going to disappear if we deny them education or other benefits enjoyed by our citizens, as proposed by Proposition 300. The provisions relating to education, which would deny adult education classes to those not here legally and prohibit colleges and community colleges from giving resident status, scholarship assistance, and the like to such students, fly in the face of our state's need for an educated workforce to attract new jobs and lay the foundation of our economic future. Denying an education to any group guarantees that we will continue to witness the growth of a permanent underclass that will ultimately sap our economic strength. Students who have succeeded academically and qualify to attend an institution of higher education should be assisted in this endeavor, not punished for their immigration status (which is often not their own doing). We should welcome their potential contributions to our state. The benefits of such a policy are exemplified by the robotics team at Carl Hayden High School, which in 2004 took first place in a prestigious competition, ahead of MIT, and this year placed second. Similarly, the provision that would prohibit parents or other caretakers who are not legal residents or citizens from obtaining childcare assistance, presumably so they can work or attend school, relegates these parents and their children to a permanently disadvantaged status. This is punitive and illogical and will drain our resources in ways that are much more damaging. Arizona NOW urges you to vote for Arizona's future and therefore to vote No on Proposition 300.
Karen Van Hooft, State Coordinator, Policy/Spokesperson, Arizona NOW, Scottsdale
Eric Ehst, State Coordinator, Political Action, Arizona NOW, Phoenix
Paid for by "Arizona NOW"

We urge your NO vote on Proposition 300. In the struggle for survival, some immigrant parents bring their children to the U. S. and the children are here without legal documents. The U. S. Supreme Court has held that these children shall not be denied a public education. Some of these immigrant children have advanced to a Community College or University. The mean spirited proponents of Proposition 300 want to end the ability of these children to progress in Arizona's public higher education system. Proposition 300 will prohibit the granting of in-state resident tuition status to any such person at a Community College or University. A Senate compromise allowing undocumented children to be granted in-state tuition status if the student had been in Arizona for at least six years and if the parents had filed income taxes for those six years was removed in the House. The proponents have no interest in sound public policy, but rather to be mean spirited because they can. Proposition 300 also denies Adult Education classes to immigrants without legal status. The parents of American citizens will be barred from attending adult literacy classes that not only benefit them, but benefit all of us. By improving their language and work skills, they are able to climb the ladder of success to better positions at their work. The proposal is wrought with biases and prejudices that should not be allowed to continue in Arizona. A resounding "NO" on this proposal is needed to maintain civility and justice in our state. We urge Arizona voters to maintain their sensibilities and not allow another divisive and destructive measure to be added to our statutes.
Please vote "NO" on Proposition 300.
Jorge Luis Garcia, State Senator, Chairman, Legislative Latino Caucus, Tucson
Ben Miranda, State Representative, Chairman, Legislative Latino Caucus, Phoenix
Paid for by Jorge Luis Garcia

NAIC Opposes Prop 300
The Northern Arizona Interfaith Council believes that Proposition 300 (Public Program Eligibility) does not serve the best interest of families and communities in Northern Arizona. We oppose Prop 300 because passage will undermine our efforts to expand childcare for working families, encourage our school age children to attend college and teach English to those wanting to learn. Prop 300 misses the mark if it intends to help with the illegal immigration problem. In fact, because it makes learning English less accessible to motivated adults, Prop 300 moves our communities in the wrong direction. We are especially disturbed by the potential of this proposition to negatively impact children and youth. Increasing the availability of childcare in our area is very important to businesses as well as individual families. Prop 300 moves us in the wrong direction by restricting access to childcare for many Northern Arizona Families.
NAIC asks that you vote "No" on 300.
Linda Martinez, Co-Chair, Northern Arizona Interfaith Council, Sedona
Lucas Gomez, Treasurer, Northern Arizona Interfaith Council, Sedona
Paid for by "Linda M. Martinez"

Yuma County Interfaith Opposes Proposition 300
Proposition 300 will deny successful youth access to education
Current law already requires that children must be citizens to receive a childcare subsidy. This proposal will strip American children of their rights. Proposition 300 will deny successful youth access to higher education preventing them from contributing to the economic growth of Yuma County In Yuma County, only 14% of high school graduates continue to some form of higher education. This proposition will create even more barriers to developing a strong workforce. Our children and youth in Yuma County will suffer by the unintended consequences of being denied access to education.
Proposition 300 will deny hard working adults access to basic education programs
Stripping funding from Adult Education programs will prevent adults interested in a higher quality of life from going to school. This will negatively impact the future financial health of Yuma County. Vote NO on Proposition 300.
Msgr. Richard O'Keeffe, Yuma County Interfaith Co-Chair, Yuma
Mercedes Ruiz, Board Member, Yuma County Interfaith, Somerton
Paid for by "Yuma County Interfaith Sponsoring Committee"

Valley Interfaith Project urges you to vote NO on Prop 300
Prop 300 is damaging to young children, college-bound students and hard-working Arizonans. Prop 300 places additional roadblocks to higher education for successful students. Many talented and promising students would be denied in-state tuition status at universities and community colleges, even if they have lived most of their lives in Arizona and their parents are tax-paying residents of this state. This proposition claims to save state funds by denying access to financial aid to those without legal status, even though the vast majority of financial aid already requires students to prove their legal status. Prop 300 denies childcare benefits to children who are American citizens. Arizona law already requires that children must be citizens to receive a childcare subsidy. Prop 300 denies even American children of their rights based on their parents' legal status. Prop 300 shuts out hard working adults from basic education programs. Denies many immigrant parents the opportunity to learn English, which they know is essential for full participation in American society. Most of the 35,000 people that benefit from adult education programs in Arizona are employed, pay taxes, and are the parents of American citizens. Adult basic education is an investment in our economy: it improves our current workforce and helps parents help their children, especially English-learners, succeed in school. Prop 300 imposes unfunded mandates on service providers. It requires taxing reporting procedures from all the agencies affected by this proposition, driving up costs for additional staffing and document storage. This unfunded mandate will divert state funds from valuable education and harm all students.
Marcie Escobedo, Chair, Phoenix
Richard White, Co-chair, Scottsdale
Paid for by "Valley Interfaith Project"

The Arizona Interfaith Network opposes Proposition 300 (Public Program Eligibility) and we urge you to vote "No" on 300.
AIN is an organization of 170 churches, schools, non-profits, businesses and unions throughout Arizona. We are Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, Jewish and Muslim. We have researched Proposition 300 and discovered that it will hurt families, especially families with children. Proposition 300, if passed, will create problems for many families and communities while solving none. Proposition 300 will, if passed:
Roadblock many families needing childcare; Deny individuals seeking self-improvement the opportunity to learn English; Derail the ambitions of many high school students seeking higher education. Proposition 300 will, if passed: Punish children, including citizen children; Hurt families, including families with citizen children; Undermine communities, including communities promoting use of the English language.
Prop 300 violates our belief that childcare for working families is better than leaving children home alone; that talented high school age youth getting to college is a good thing; and that adults learning English is good for themselves, their families and their communities. Some advocates claim this proposition will help with the "illegal immigration problem". Our research has proven this is false. We respectfully ask that you read Prop 300 carefully and discuss it with others. If you do so, I believe that you will join us in voting "No" on 300.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this matter.
Richard H. White, President, Scottsdale
Bonnie Danowski, Secretary, Scottsdale
Paid for by "Arizona Interfaith Network"

We, the members of the Coalition for Latino Political Action hereby ask the voters of Arizona to vote no on Proposition 300, which denies equal access to education for immigrants; many of which were brought to this country as children. Many children of immigrants have had no other life but here in the United States and having been in this education system their whole lives are fluent in English. If this ugly proposition passes, they will be turned away from equally attaining a higher education. We are losing out on the possibilities that these children can flourish in our society as nurses, doctors, lawyers and scientist. They are bright and eager to go to school. Let's not deny them this opportunity and vote no against this mean-spirited proposition. Vote no on proposition 300.
Lydia Guzman, Chairman, The Coalition for Latino Political Action, Glendale
Delia Torres, Co-Chair, The Coalition for Latino Political Action, Glendale
Paid for by "Lydia Guzman"

If Prop. 300 passes, children, youth and hard-working Arizonans will suffer. Prop. 300 would deny childcare to children who are American citizens. Current law already requires that children must be citizens to receive a childcare subsidy. This proposal would strip American children of their rights. Prop. 300 would deny access to higher education to successful youth who could contribute to the economic growth of our state. Even if students have lived in Arizona most of their lives and graduated from Arizona high schools, they would be denied in-state university tuition, making higher education beyond the reach of many deserving students. The vast majority of financial aid is federal and already requires students to give their social security or eligible non-citizen identification numbers to prove their legal status. The cumbersome reporting requirements of this bill would increase staffing and storage costs at community colleges and universities. This is an unfunded mandate that will divert funds from instruction and harm all students. Prop. 300 would deny hard working adults access to basic education programs. Adult education programs throughout the state serve 35,000 people. Most adult education students are employed, are paying taxes, and are the parents of American citizens. Adult basic education is critical for developing the adult workforce and preparing parents to better help their children succeed in school. This bill would prohibit many immigrant parents from learning English, which they know is essential for full participation in American society. By restricting parents' access to English language learning opportunities, SCR 1031 dramatically undermines Arizona's substantial financial commitment to help Arizona's 160,000 non-English speaking children in K-12 learn English.
Andrea Robson, Co-chair, TucsonErnesto Lujan, Treasurer, Tucson
Paid for by "Pima County Interfaith Council"

BALLOT FORMAT
REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE
OFFICIAL TITLE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1031
ENACTING AND ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE PEOPLE OF A MEASURE RELATING TO PUBLIC PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY.
DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
PROVIDES ONLY CITIZENS OR LEGAL RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES: ARE ENTITLED TO IN-STATE STUDENT OR COUNTY RESIDENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY PURPOSES; ARE ENTITLED TO TUITION/FEE WAIVERS OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE; MAY PARTICIPATE IN FAMILY LITERACY PROGRAMS, IMMIGRANT AND ADULT EDUCATION CLASSES.
A "yes" vote shall have the effect of making only citizens or legal residents of the United States eligible to [1] participate in state subsidized immigrant and adult education classes, [2] receive in-state student or county residency status for community college and university purposes, [3] receive state subsidized tuition/fee waivers and financial assistance, [4] receive state subsidized child care assistance, [5] participate in state sponsored family literacy programs; and requiring the Board of Education, community colleges and universities, and the Department of Economic Security to report the number of ineligible persons applying for these programs and assistance. YES
A "no" vote shall have the effect of retaining the current laws regarding state sponsored family literacy programs, state subsidized immigrant and adult education classes, community college and university residency requirements, state subsidized tuition/fee waivers and financial assistance, and child care assistance. NO

The Ballot Format displayed in HTML reflects only the text of the Ballot Proposition and does not reflect how it will appear on the General Election Ballot. Spelling, grammar, and punctuation were reproduced as submitted in the "for" and "against" arguments. This text only version of the proposition guide may not include striking, underlining, emphasis and bolding of words in the proposition language, or in "for" or "against" arguments.

Next Proposition

Back to Table of Contents


JANICE K. BREWER
Arizona Secretary of State

Disclaimer

© September 2006