MODERATOR RICH DUBEK: Thank you, very much. Speaking against Proposition 111 is Joe Sigg, who is a Member of the Arizona Farm Bureau.
MR. JOE SIGG: I get the idea of a Lieutenant Governor. I get the idea that voters have some expectation of four years of continuity when they elect a Governor.
A Lieutenant Governor for Arizona may be a very good idea, but not the way Proposition 111 is written. It's language and argue exceeds the illumination of its headlights. I quote Bob Rob, columnist for the Arizona Republic. “I've been a participant or close observer of the Arizona politics for over three decades. Proposition 111 is one of the most poorly thought out ballot propositions I've seen during that long stretch, and believe me, that's not an easy list to crack.”
The Arizona Farm Bureau opposes Proposition 111 for three reasons. One, it forces partisan primary victors to run as a team. This idea of forcing people who may not like one another, or the others policies, can run as a team just because they're the same political party, deserves another look.
Two, the Chief Election Officer that as the Secretary of State, becomes the Lieutenant Governor, and as a team member subservient to the Governor. This idea of having the Chief Elections Officer tied so closely to the Governor, deserves another look. There may come a time when the elector will appreciate a clear separation of powers.
Three, the language of Proposition 111 precludes a run by an independent, because it would prescribe by constitutional language, a process determined by party and primary. Independents have neither. Obviously, you can't block by process independents running for obvious -– running for office. Obviously, that's unconstitutional. Obviously, that would likely prompt a Court case, which the state would lose, at which time the elector will think, why didn't we think through that before?
Well, we can think through that now, and vote no on Proposition 111.
MODERATOR RICH DUBEK: Thank you, very much.