'Montgomery slate' rumor far-fetched

(PNI) From the political notebook:

Politics are full of wild rumors and conspiracy theories. Some even turn out to be true.

One running rampant through Arizona political circles is that there is a dark-money slate of candidates in Republican primaries for statewide office. The slate supposedly consists of Doug Ducey for governor, Justin Pierce for secretary of state, Mark Brnovich for attorney general and Hugh Hallman for treasurer.

"Dark money" is an epithet for campaign speech whose source of funding is obscure or undisclosed.

Supposedly huge sums of money from the vast right-wing conspiracy throughout the country will flow into Arizona to ensure the election of this dark-money slate.

The supposed mastermind and maestro of this attempt to hijack the Republican primary is none other than Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery. Some are calling it the Montgomery slate.

Now, Montgomery is a politician of some promise and has done a good job of calming the infighting in county government. I don't know whether this is a good or a bad thing to say about him. But, in terms of this conspiracy, Montgomery just ain't that important or influential.

Montgomery has some standing in county politics. He's a minor figure in state politics, with considerable upside potential. But right now, at the state level, he hardly makes anyone shake in their boots. On the national level, he's a cipher.

The notion that Montgomery can summon big bucks from around the country for statewide candidates in Arizona is implausible, to put it mildly.

I don't doubt independent expenditure campaigns will play in the Republican primary, and some of them will have obscure financing. But the notion that some large, national effort will focus on down-ballot state offices in Arizona strikes me as implausible. The vast right-wing conspiracy has considerably bigger fish to fry in the 2014 election than who is Arizona's state treasurer.

Opponents of HB 2305, the multifaceted election law bill, apparently have succeeded in getting sufficient signatures to refer it to the 2014 ballot, keeping it from going into effect. Supporters of the law will flyspeck signatures for a potential challenge, but this appears to have been a remarkably well-run signature-gathering campaign.

If it indeed is on the ballot, the prospects of the opponents prevailing are strong. I say that as someone who generally supports the law.

There are a lot of parts to HB 2305, ranging from removing those who don't use them from early ballot lists to changing the standard for legal compliance with statutory requirements for initiatives.

If there is an election, it is unlikely voters will focus in any detail on the specific provisions of HB 2305, adding up whether the good outweighs the bad. Instead, it will be an overall framing battle.

Supporters of the law will frame it as protecting the integrity of elections and providing for their smoother administration. Opponents will frame the measure as voter suppression and dirty dealing by the Legislature.

Opponents are likely to win this framing battle for two reasons: First, they are more committed and are likely to have greater resources. Second, supporters will have the burden of the "yes" vote. In referendums, a "yes" vote is to uphold the law. In contested ballot measure campaigns, the" no" side wins most of the time.

Most of HB 2305's election law changes would be nice but they aren't vital, with one exception. The bill would have stopped the practice of political activists collecting early ballots in bulk and delivering them to the polls.

Democratic Party and Latino political activists defend the practice as increasing voter participation. But it smacks of ward-heeling and is ripe for fraud. In the last election, the Maricopa County Recorder's Office reported two incidents of people going door-to-door collecting early ballots and falsely claiming to be election officials.

The Legislature should repeal HB 2305 and re-enact the prohibition on collecting early ballots in bulk as a stand-alone measure. If there is to be a ballot fight, it should be over something worth fighting about.

Reach Robb at robert.robb@arizonarepublic.com.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here