You are on page 1of 30

Executive Summary

In Arizona, political figuresfrom statewide elected officials and state legislators to county
recorders and election directors on the local levelhave introduced voter suppression policies
that make it increasingly difficult for minority voters to exercise their rights to vote. The
motivation behind these efforts often has been partisan, with some officials ostensibly
restricting access to the ballot for their political benefit. Sadly, some of these officials also have
made racially charged comments that further call into question their ability to administer
elections in a fair and equitable manner.

Arizona introduced strict voter ID and proof-of-citizenship requirements in 2004, after the
approval of Proposition 200. Although the legality of the states proof-of-citizenship law is still
being debated, the 2004 requirements have placed a disproportionate burden on Arizonas
Latino and Native American voters. More recently, the state has banned the practice of
collecting and dropping off early ballots for voters, which had become a common tool for voter
outreach groups that aimed to increase minority turnout, especially in rural areas.

Research has shown that voter suppression policies, like forcing residents to show identification
before casting a ballot, and needing to show documentary proof of their U.S. citizenship in
order to register to vote, disproportionately affect minorities, senior citizens, the disabled, and
low-income voters.

While politicians tout rampant voter fraud as the rationale behind such restrictive policies, in
reality there is no evidence of widespread, fraudulent voting taking place in Arizona or in any
other state. Instead, Arizona officials who advocate for voter suppression policies appear to
have political motivations for disenfranchising minority voters, who are more likely to vote
Democratic in elections.

Voter suppression efforts in Arizona are being pushed by prominent statewide elected officials,
like Secretary of State Michele Reagan, who sponsored controversial voter suppression bills as a
state senator and continued to promote them after taking office as Arizonas top elections
official. Governor Doug Ducey is also responsible for signing controversial voter suppression
measures into law after Republican state legislators sent them to his desk.

Most voter suppression policies originate in the state legislature, with county recorders and
elections directors responsible for administering elections locally according to state law.
Therefore, state legislators and county-level officials have great power and responsibility for
shaping voting and election policies. Unfortunately, some Arizona state and county officials
support voter suppression policies that disenfranchise minority voters.

Suppression policies make it unnecessarily burdensome for them to exercise their
constitutional rights to vote. Advocates for these policies exist at all levels of Arizonas
government. Their seemingly partisan and racially charged motivations for restricting ballot

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 1


access should not be overlooked when evaluating their proposals to make voting less accessible
for Arizonans.

This report examines recent voter suppression initiatives in Arizona, shedding light on the
players behind these efforts and the problematic motivations that shape their decisions.
Statewide elected officials and several state legislators notable for voter suppression actions
were investigated, as were county recorders and election directors in some of Arizonas most
populous counties. Additionally, this report examines influential voter suppression groups with
right-wing ties and obviously partisan goals that have worked in Arizona to disenfranchise
minority voters.

Voter Suppression in Arizona


Arizona has a problematic history of disenfranchising minority voters. Until the U.S. Supreme
Court overturned a key provision of the Voting Rights Act in 2013, it was one of sixteen states
required to clear all changes to voting laws with the federal government because of its history
of suppressing the votes of Latino and Native American voters.

For much of the 20th century, Arizona used discriminatory literacy tests--and informal
harassment at the polls to prevent Latinos and Native Americans from casting their ballots.1
Since 1975, when the state fell under coverage by the Voting Rights Act, the federal
government has blocked twenty-two attempted changes to voting and elections in Arizona
because they were deemed to be discriminatory.2 Today, Latinos are still underrepresented in
Arizonas electorate: about 31 percent of Arizonans are Hispanic, but Latinos only make up 18
percent of registered voters.3

Voter Restrictions in Arizona

Voter Identification Requirements

Arizona voters approved Proposition 200 in 2004, which implemented strict voter ID and proofof-citizenship requirements in the state. Since the proposition was approved, Arizona requires
voters to show approved identification at the polls and requires residents to provide
documentary proof of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote.

Arizona accepts the following photo IDs:

Valid Arizona Driver License
Valid Arizona Non-Operating Identification Card
Tribal Enrollment Card or Other Form of Tribal Identification
Valid United States Federal, State, or Local Government Issued Identification

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 2


If a voter does not have a photo ID, they can instead show two pieces of accepted non-photo
identification that include the voters name and address. Arizona accepts the following nonphoto IDs:

Utility Bill Dated Within 90 Days of the Election
Bank or Credit Union Statement Dated Within 90 Days of the Election
Valid Arizona Vehicle Registration
Indian Census Card
Property Tax Statement
Tribal Enrollment Card or Other Form of Tribal Identification
Arizona Vehicle Insurance Card
Recorders Certificate
Valid United States Federal, State, or Local Government Issued Identification
Any Mailing to the Elector Marked Official Election Material4

If a voter fails to show the required identification at the polls, they may cast a conditional
provisional ballot. The ballot will only be counted if the voter returns to the polling location
before 7:00 p.m. on Election Day or returns to the county elections office within five business
days after a general election or three business days after any other election with their required
ID.

It should be noted that photo ID laws have been shown to disproportionately affect minority,
elderly, disabled, and low-income voters, who face greater obstacles obtaining identification in
order to vote. A study conducted by political scientists at the University of California at San
Diego analyzed voter turnout between 2008 and 2012 and found substantial drops in turnout
for minorities under strict voter ID laws. Obtaining a photo ID can be costly and the
bureaucratic process can be especially difficult for low-income and elderly voters who may not
have birth certificates because they were born at home instead of in a hospital.5 In fact, more
than twenty-one million Americans do not have government-issued photo IDs and a
disproportionate number of them are minority, low-income, and elderly voters.6

Proof-of-Citizenship Requirements

In addition to instituting a strict voter ID law in the state, Proposition 200 also made Arizona the
first state to require residents to show proof of citizenship in order to register to vote.

Arizona residents registering to vote using the state form are required to attach a photocopy of
one the following:

Birth Certificate (with Supporting Legal Documentation, i.e., a Marriage Certificate, if the
Registrant Has Since Changed Their Legal Name)
Pertinent Pages of Passport
U.S. Naturalization Documents

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 3


Tribal Certificate of Indian Blood or Tribal or Bureau of Indian Affairs Affidavit of Birth

Registrants with a valid Arizona drivers license or state-issued identification card are only
required to provide the license number on the voter registration form, as they would have
already shown citizenship documentation when obtaining the card from the state. Naturalized
citizens can also write their Alien Registration Number on the form, while tribal members can
write their Indian Census Number, Bureau of Indian Affairs Card Number, Tribal Treaty Card
Number, or Tribal Enrollment Number on the form in lieu of photocopied documentation.7

The requirement to prove U.S. citizenship was widely criticized by voting rights advocates. Nina
Perales, an attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF),
which challenged Prop. 200, argued that the law forced residentsespecially minoritiesto
jump through hoops in order to register to vote. She argued that the law particularly
affected newly naturalized U.S. citizens whose voter registrations were rejected because they
received their drivers licenses when they were green-card holders and were still coded as
non-citizens through the Arizona Department of Transportation's Motor Vehicle Division after
providing their license number.8

MALDEF found that since the proof-of-citizenship requirements have been implemented, over
31,500 applicants have been rejected for failing to provide the additional paperwork required.9

Although state election officials claimed that the requirements were necessary to prevent voter
fraud, an analysis by the Arizona Republic found that voter fraud cases involving illegal
immigrants are nearly non-existent, and have been since before the changes to voter-ID
requirements were enacted in 2004.10

Ongoing Proof-of-Citizenship Legal Battle

Arizonas proof-of-citizenship requirement was partially struck down in a series of federal court
rulings that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that
Arizona cannot require residents to prove their citizenship if they register using the Federal
Voter Registration Form, which requires residents only to attest to their status as a U.S.
citizenship. The Federal Voter Registration Form was created by the National Voter Registration
Act of 1993the motor voter lawand must be accepted by law in all fifty states.11

Despite this partial victory for supporters of voting rights, Arizona has created a problematic
bifurcated system in which eligible voters who have registered to vote with the Federal Form
and have not provided documentary proof-of-citizenship are allowed only to vote in federal
elections; they are prohibited from voting in state and local elections. Voters who have not
proven their U.S. citizenship while registering to vote receive separate ballots at the polls,
which list only federal races, excluding all state and local races and referendums.

The bifurcated system is another way Arizona has made voting even more complicated, with
disproportionate effects on low-income and minority voters, including the states Native
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 4


American population. The system also has made elections more expensive: before it was
implemented in the 2014 elections the change was anticipated to cost $250,000 in Maricopa
County alone.12

Arizonans seeking to register to vote also may be unaware of the option of using the Federal
Form, which does not ask for the documentary proof of citizenship required by the state form.
In 2012, an officer in the Maricopa County recorders office explained that if a voter attempts to
register to vote without proof of citizenship, the office is not required to inform them of the
option to register using the Federal Form, although it is required to provide it if it is directly
requested.13

State officials have stressed that the bifurcated system is temporary, but are likely to continue
pushing to require proof of citizenship even for registrants using the Federal Form. However, a
recent federal appeals court case has made it less likely Arizona will succeed in that endeavor.

In January 2016, Brian Newby, the newly appointed executive director of the Election
Assistance Commission (EAC), an independent commission responsible for federal voter
registration standards, made the unilateral decision that residents of Alabama, Kansas, and
Georgia could no longer register to vote using the Federal Form without showing
documentation of U.S. citizenship. The action was panned by voting rights advocates, as well as
by one of the EACs own commissioners, who said Newbys action contradicted both policy and
precedent at the EAC.14 Newby and the EAC were sued by the League of Women Voters and
other voting rights groups and on September 9, 2016, the U.S. District Court of Appeals
enjoined the enforcement of decisions of [EAC] Executive Director, Brian D. Newby, approving
requests by Kansas, Alabama, and Georgia to add a proof of citizenship requirement to the
state-specific instructions that accompany the National Mail Voter Registration Form. In
reaching the decision, the court made clear that enforcing Newbys unilateral decision would
result in irreparable harm.15

Prior to working for the EAC, Brian Newby worked as a county election commissioner in Kansas
under Secretary of State Kris Kobach, an anti-immigration activist notorious for promoting voter
suppression policies across the country. Kobach manages and promotes the Interstate
Crosscheck program, a list of almost seven million potential double voters that has been
criticized for being highly inaccurate.16 The program is used in a number of states, including
Arizona. The program consolidates voter information from participating states for crossreference with the goal of identifying voters who may be voting illegally in multiple states. The
program, however, has been criticized for its inaccuracy after flagging millions of mismatched,
potential double-voters. The program often flags voters based on only first and last names,
ignoring middle names, suffixes, and birthdates. In cases where voter information includes the
last four digits of their Social Security numbers, those numbers are purposely ignored,
increasing the chances of erroneously matched voter information.17 Critics of the program have
also noted that Crosscheck flags minority voters at disproportionate rates.18

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 5


Arizona officials have denied that the program targets minorities, despite evidence to the
contrary. That narrative is absolutely ridiculous. That is not why we would be involved in any
state Crosscheck program, said Secretary of State Michele Reagan. We are involved in that to
keep our lists clean, to offer an additional service to voters to help them out, and to make sure
that people aren't voting in two states.19

Election Administration Issues

Early Voting in Arizona

Early voting in Arizona begins twenty-six days before the election and ends the Friday before
Election Day. Voters can cast their ballots either by mail or in-person at any early voting
location in the county where they are registered.

Since 2007, voters have been able to request to put their names on the Permanent Early Voting
List, which is managed by the recorder in each Arizona county. Voters on the Permanent Early
Voting List automatically receive an early ballot in the mail prior to each election. Otherwise,
voters must request an early ballot before each election. Since the Permanent Early Voting List
has been introduced, early voter turnout and voter turnout has greatly increased in Arizona.20

Restrictions on Felon Voting

Under Arizona law, one-time convicted felons automatically regain their right to vote after
completing their sentence and paying all associated fines. Repeat felony offenders (even nonviolent offenders), however, must wait until they have completed both their sentence and
parole, and paid all associated finesoften no small feat for ex-felons reintegrating into society
after jail time. After that, they are required to wait two years before applying for voting
registration, which a judge can accept or deny on a case-by-case basis.

State Senator Martin Quezada has repeatedly proposed legislation that would restore voting
rights for all ex-felons even if they havent paid off their fines. His bill did not even get a hearing
in the Republican-majority Arizona Legislature. They have been trying to suppress the vote as
much as humanly possible, Quezada said. They only want certain people voting.21

Voter Suppression from the Top Down


Secretary of State Michele Reagan



Secretary of State Michele Reagan has promoted and enforced problematic voter suppression
policies in Arizona as the states top election official, as well as earlier in her political career.

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 6


Spearheaded Voter Suppression Legislation in Arizona Legislature

Before being elected secretary of state in 2014, Michele Reagan served as a state
representative and then a state senator.

SB 1261: Purged Voters from the Permanent Early Voting List

Reagan sponsored SB 1261 in 2013, which was widely opposed by voting rights advocates as a
voter suppression bill that would disproportionately affect minority voters.

The bill sought to remove voters from the Permanent Early Voting List if they had failed to vote
by mail in the previous primary and general elections, and then didnt respond within thirty
days to a mailed notice to explicitly state that they wanted to remain on the list. The voter
would remain registered to vote but would no longer have the option of having a ballot mailed
to them.

The bill also contained a provision that made it a felony for anyone to alter a voter registration
form in any way. Barbara Klein of The League of Women Voters called the provision
excessively severe, noting that it would apply to a volunteer who cleaned up a sloppy form,
such as by adding a zip code to a voters address or spelling out a place name that had been
abbreviated.22

SB 1261 was opposed by the Arizona Voters Coalition, whose members included the League of
Women Voters of Arizona, the Inter-Tribal Council, and Mi Familia Vota. Coalition members
argued that automatically purging voters from the early voting list would suppress voter
participation and that voters should be able to opt out of the early voting list, otherwise their
names should remain active. Daria Ovide, a spokesperson for Central Arizonans for a
Sustainable Economy, noted that mail-in ballots have grown in popularity in Arizona, especially
among minority voters, because they eliminate any chance of being challenged at the polls.23

SB 1003: Banned Groups from Collecting and Delivering Ballots

Reagan also sponsored SB 1003, another voter suppression bill that drew even more ire from
Latino groups and voting rights advocates. The bill sought to make it extraordinarily difficult for
community groups and political organizations to collect and submit early ballots, a practice
common among grassroots groups that focused on Latino outreach, which registered
thousands of Latino voters and collected their ballots to deliver to the polls.

Saying she found the practice appalling, Reagan argued that allowing volunteers or members
of partisan groups to collect and deliver ballots could encourage voter fraud. However,
supporters of the bill were unable to identify any voter fraud prosecutions stemming from such
circumstances, as the ballots were always signed and sealed before being handed over to
members of the groups that delivered them to the polls.24

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 7


David R. Berman, senior research fellow with Arizona State Universitys Morrison Institute for
Public Policy, argued that the bill could be pretty devastating to voter turnout in rural
communities.25 Sen. Jack Jackson, Jr., who represented Navajo and Hopi tribal areas, stated that
the bill could have a devastating impact on Native American communities, and that many
members of our tribal communities live in remote areas and depend on help to deliver their
early ballots.26

The bill was protested by Latino advocacy groups, who used the practice to mobilize Latino
voters. As noted by Brendan Walsh, who registered voters for Central Arizonans for a
Sustainable Economy, A lot of people trust us more than the U.S. mail to take in their
ballots.27 Arizona Republic columnist E. J. Montini cited SB 1003 as an example of the
Republican-majority Arizona Legislature moving along legislation that seems to be aimed at
creating barriers for minority voters.28

HB 2305: Frankenstein Bill of Reagans Voter Suppression Proposals

The controversial portions of the two voter suppression bills sponsored by Reagan in 2013, SB
1261 and SB 1003, were later bundled into one piece of legislation, HB 2305, which was widely
criticized as a voter suppression law aimed at disenfranchising minority voters. One Arizona
Republic columnist called it the worst voter-suppression law ever passed in Arizona.29

HB 2305 included controversial provisions from Reagans previous bills: automatically removing
voters from the Permanent Early Voting List and prohibiting organizations from collecting and
delivering early ballots. The bill also tightened requirements for citizen initiatives and increased
the number of signatures needed for third-party candidates to get on the Arizona ballot.

The bill narrowly passed the Arizona Legislature, with Republican Senator Steve Pierce casting
the decisive vote for its approval. Pierce had initially voted against the legislation but changed
his mind after receiving a call from Daniel Scarpinato, the national spokesman for the National
Republican Congressional Committee, who presumably convinced him to cast his vote in favor
of the voter suppression bill. One fellow Republican senator said that Pierce told him he was
under pressure from [Speaker of the U.S. House John] Boehners office and the NRCC to
support HB 2305. Pierce denied the accusation as nasty rumors and Scarpinato claimed that
he called Pierce about the bill as a friend, saying that his interest was as an Arizonan. It
wasnt a [National Republican Congressional] Committee thing.30

Former Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill into law in June 2013. Her spokesperson called the
legislation common sense, and said that concerns that the legislation would disenfranchise
voters were overblown.31

The law was so controversial, however, that it was repealed before being fully implemented.

The Protect Your Right to Vote Committee, a coalition of over twenty-five nonprofits, including
the League of Women Voters and Mi Familia Vota, organized against the bill, gathering enough
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 8


signatures to put the bill to a popular vote on the November 2014 ballot. The Committee
argued that the bill would disproportionally impact newly registered Latino voters who are not
likely vote if removed from the Permanent Early Voting List, and would ban the efforts of
groups that collect and deliver ballots to the polls, which help elderly, homebound, disabled
and economically disadvantaged citizens to participate in elections.32

The Protect Your Right to Vote Committee collected 146,000 signatures to put HB 2305 on the
ballot as a referendum. When it became clear that the challenge to the controversial voter
suppression bill would appear on the November 2014 ballot for decision by the public, the
Arizona Legislature passed a repeal of HB 2305, which Governor Jan Brewer signed in February
2014. Republican lawmakers preferred the repeal to an anticipated total public defeat.

Although Arizona voters narrowly avoided the implementation of HB 2305, the Protect Your
Right to Vote Committee responded angrily to the rejection of the referendum by Governor
Brewer and the Arizona Legislature. We, as voters, stood up and earned the right to make this
decision ourselves, said Julie Erfle, chairwoman of the Committee. This issue was always
about politicians trying to pick their voters, trying to take away our choices.33

Endorsed by Voter Suppression Advocate Kris Kobach for Secretary of State

While running for Arizona secretary of state in 2014, Reagan landed the endorsement of an
even more controversial political figure: Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.

Kobach is a leading advocate of voter suppression and anti-immigrant policies, which he
promotes and defends in states around the country. He manages and promotes the Interstate
Crosscheck program, a master list of almost seven million potential double voters that has
been criticized for being highly inaccurate.34 The program is used in a number of states,
including Arizona.

He has worked extensively in Arizona to promote anti-immigration policies, including with thenSen. Russell Pearce to draft SB 1070, which made it a state crime to be in the country illegally
and essentially required local police officers to act as immigration agents.35 SB 1070 was widely
criticized as a justification for racial profiling and the harassment of Latinos in Arizona.

After the law was passed, Kobach helped train law enforcement officers from notorious
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaios department in immigration enforcement, and also
served as his attorney. The U.S. Department of Justice later ruled that Arpaios department
created a pervasive culture of discriminatory bias against Latinos and revoked its authority to
conduct immigration screenings.36

Kobach also helped Sen. Pearce draft legislation to end birthright citizenship.37 Pearce was later
ousted from the Arizona Senate in a 2011 recall election, the year after SB 1070 was passed.

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 9


Secretary of State Reagan supported Kobachs harsh stance on immigration, and noted how she
had voted for SB 1070 when she received Kobachs endorsement. She also said that Kobach was
one of the secretaries of state who returned her calls when she was working on her voter
suppression measures in the Arizona Legislature. They took it seriously, she said. Heres this
girl in Arizona trying to do something.38

Managed Disastrous Elections, Accused of Negligence and Voter Suppression

Since being elected secretary of state in 2014, Reagan has been plagued by criticism of
repeated election administration problems, some of which resulted in suppressing the votes of
minorities in Arizona.

Role in Maricopa County 2016 Presidential Preference Election

Reagan played a role in the disastrous March 2016 presidential preference election in Maricopa
County. The county drastically cut polling places, which disproportionately affected minority
voters in the Phoenix metro area who faced lines as long as five hours.

Although blame for the chaotic election rested largely with county officials who had made the
decision to drastically cut polling locations, Reagan also played a role in the poor decisionmaking that led to the disastrous election.

Reagan admitted she knew of Maricopa Countys plan to set up only sixty polling locations in
the 2016 presidential preference election, compared to the countys two hundred polling
locations in 2012 and more than four hundred in 2008. We put our faith in counties, she said
in explanation for the error, which resulted in some voters not being able to cast a ballot until
after midnight, despite arriving at the polls before their 7:00 p.m. closing times. I wish I had
questioned that sixty were not enough. . . . For that I take responsibility, she said.39

Simultaneously Reagan seemed to skirt responsibility for the problem, arguing that,even if she
had realized there was a problem, she wouldnt have been able to fix it because she couldnt
tell counties what to do, even as Arizonas chief election officer. A reporter pointed out that she
had the authority to override county elections officials, but Reagan disagreed with that
contention.40

May 2016 Special Election Marred with Mistakes

Secretary of State Reagan came under fire yet again for her mismanagement of Arizonas May
2016 special election, which included a competitive ballot measure on education funding. An
Arizona Republic editorial described the election as marred by mistakes that once again
provided ammunition to charge that voters were being intentionally manipulated.41

Prior to the special election, the secretary of states office failed to send publicity pamphlets,
which outlined the arguments for and against the measures on the ballot, to over 200,000
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 10


households in the time frame required by law. Reagans office blamed a vendor for the error
and belatedly sent the pamphlets to the omitted households; the pamphlets began arriving
about two and a half weeks after early voting had already begun. The error affected over
400,000 Arizona voters.42

In addition to the error itself, Reagan did not inform the public about mistake when she learned
of it, waiting two whole weeks to make the error knownafter there was a media report about
the problem.43

According to internal communications obtained as part of a public records request, county
election officials expressed frustration with the disorganized way the publicity pamphlets were
put together by Reagans office. On the day that the secretary of states office was required to
send publicity pamphlet information to their vendor, Deputy State Election Director Janine
Petty sent an e-mail to election officials in Pima County, writing that, We have to get the
household mailing list to the vendor today or Pima will not be included in the first mailings. The
mailing list must contain the mailing address and the precinct designation for each household
with a registered voter.44

Your office needs to coordinate better with the counties when you will need this information,
Pima County Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez responded to the last-minute request from Reagans
office. If today was the deadline for your vendor to need this information you needed to
convey this to the counties so they could all make sure they would have board approval prior to
your deadline. ln addition they would need to give the Recorder's Office time to input this
information into our data bases [sic]. This is the first request that I know that you would need
this information. You all need to plan better.45 Chris Roads, Pima County Deputy Recorder,
added, Had we been given the deadline of when this was needed before this morning, we
could have provided the data to you today but it will be tomorrow before we have it all in the
system. Thats actually rushing the entry since it normally takes two days to get the initial
information in the system and then a full day of second and third checking.46

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich appointed a special investigator to examine how
Reagans office handled the special election, ultimately writing a scathing criticism of her error:
Even if the Secretary of States failure was the result of mere neglect, one thing is certain the
Secretary violated Arizona law. Questions abound; not only how the Secretary of State failed to
fulfill her duties in connection with this elections [sic], but also as to why there was no public
disclosure regarding the failure to timely mail the publicity pamphlets until mere days before
the initial counting of early ballots.47

Reagan brushed off the severity of the error, technically taking responsibility for the publicity
pamphlet blunder but largely blaming a vendor for the mistake and playing down its impact on
the elections integrity. In a blog post titled Sour Grapes, published on the secretary of states
website, she criticized opponents of Proposition 123 who argued that the publicity pamphlet
error may have affected the outcome of their campaign, and denied that the major error
affected 80 percent of voters.48
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 11



According to the Arizona Republic, Reagan did not return a call seeking comment on the
appropriateness of using the states website to air her rebuke of [Arizona State Treasurer Jeff]
DeWit and Prop. 123 critics.49

When she heard that attorney Tom Ryan, who worked with the Proposition 123 opposition
campaign, was planning to file a complaint to delay the election because of the publicity
pamphlet error, Reagan dismissed his concerns about the mistake. Hes going to make a name
for himself as the guy who claims the sky is always falling, Reagan wrote in an e-mail obtained
as part of a public records request. Good. Then if he ever has something legit to complain
about, everyone will ignore him.50

Reagan was further criticized for additional mistakes related to the special election. Her office
provided the incorrect filing instructions to candidates prior to the filing deadline for the 2016
primary election, and failed to notify candidates of the error until nearly two weeks later.

Her office also posted incorrect information on the number of signatures required for
candidates to get on the ballot before the election, which varies based on office, district, and
party. The signatures were recalculated, correcting what the secretary of states technology
manager called a serious mistake, and candidates were notified of the change only two weeks
before the filing deadline.51

Advocated for Dark Money in Arizona Elections

Reagans election director, Eric Spencer, authored a sweeping elections overhaul that passed
the Arizona Legislature and was signed into law by Governor Doug Ducey in March 2016.

SB 1516 was supported by Reagan, but criticized by Democrats in the legislature who argued
that it would usher in greater influence of money in politics while blocking public disclosure.52
The bill greatly weakened Arizonas regulation of anonymous campaign spending, including the
elimination of existing laws that limit how much certain kinds of charities and nonprofits can
spend to influence elections, and the exemption of any group with valid federal nonprofit
status from the IRS from the definition of political committee, regardless of how much
money they spend to influence elections.53

Reagan was called out for supporting SB 1516, partially because she had spoken out against
anonymous campaign spending as a state senator and had made cracking down on dark
money a key point in her 2014 campaign for secretary of state.54 Her position on the issue
changed after benefiting from about $674,000 in dark-money spending by groups called
Arizonas Legacy and the 60 Plus Association during her successful general election
campaign.55

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 12

Governor Doug Ducey



Since taking office in 2015, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey has signed several voter suppression
policies into law.

Made Collecting and Turning in Ballots a Felony

After several failed attempts to push a similar bill through the legislature, including one
proposed by Michele Reagan, the Republican-dominated Arizona Legislature passed a bill that
criminalized collecting and turning in ballots, making it a Class 6 Felony for voter outreach
groups to engage in the practicepunishable by up to a year in prison and a $150,000 fine.
Governor Ducey signed the bill the same day it passed in the Arizona Legislature, putting the
restrictions in place for 2016 general election.56

The bill, HB 2023, prohibited voter outreach groups from collecting and submitting early ballots,
a practice that was common for grassroots groups focusing on Latino outreach, which
registered thousands of Latino voters and collected their ballots for delivery to the polls. The
legislation criminalized such efforts, even with a voters permission, with a few exceptions for
family members and caregivers. The bill was criticized by voting rights advocates and Latino
voter-outreach groups as an attempt to disenfranchise minority voters.

The effort was promoted as a way to combat voter fraud in Arizona. When Ducey signed the
bill, he said in a statement, Voting is a key pillar of our democracy, and added, This bill
ensures a secure chain of custody between the voter and the ballot box.57 However, besides
several unsubstantiated conspiracy theories mentioned by advocates of the law, there is no
evidence of groups tampering with any ballots they were charged to deliver.

Legal Challenge to HB 2023

HB 2023 is currently being challenged in a lawsuit brought by the Democratic Party, which
argues that the ban on groups collecting and returning ballots will have a disproportionately
burdensome impact on Arizonas minority voters. Filed after Arizonas presidential preference
election, the lawsuit also argues that the reduction of polling places in Maricopa County led to
long lines that made it difficult or impossible for some minority voters to cast their ballots.
Maricopa County settled this part of the case in early September, agreeing that the county
would provide enough polling locations in the November 2016 presidential election.58

The lawsuit asks the federal government to block Arizona from enforcing HB 2023, contending
that the law will have a disparate impact on Arizonas Hispanic, African-American, and NativeAmerican populations, who rely disproportionately on the collection of ballots to cast their
early votes. These populations reliance on ballot collecting is directly connected to the long
history of discrimination that they have been subject to in Arizona, which has left them with
less access to transportation; less flexible work schedules; and a higher likelihood of suffering
from poor health and disabilities.59
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 13



The case has already faced two major blows. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to
invalidate Arizonas ban on collecting and returning ballots, and a U.S. District Court Judge ruled
against the plaintiffs challenge to the law that invalidates provisional ballots cast by voters at
the wrong precinct.60 During the 2012 Presidential election, almost 11,000 provisional ballots
were not counted because voters cast their ballots at the wrong precinct.

Cut Funding for Elections

Ducey cut funding for elections in 2015, which some argued contributed to the massive
problems encountered in the 2016 presidential preference election, especially in Maricopa
County.

He signed legislation, passed by the Arizona Legislature in 2015, which cut the reimbursement
rate to counties for their elections by about $6 million. The state had previously reimbursed
100 percent of the cost of the presidential preference election, but Ducey cut that to a previous
rate of $1.25 per registered voter. As a result, the counties received only about $4 million to
conduct the presidential preference election.

Duceys cuts resulted in difficulties for Arizona counties attempts to fully fund their elections.
After the disastrous presidential preference election in Maricopa County, Jenn Marson,
Executive Director of the Arizona Association of Counties, said the $1.25 reimbursement rate
was not enough for counties to cover the full costs of elections, even in earlier years. Counties
were eating a lot of the cost of the election, she said.61

Signed Reagans Dark Money Bill

Governor Ducey signed SB 1516, the sweeping elections overhaul authored by Michele
Reagans election director, Eric Spencer, in March 2016.

The law was touted by Reagans office as a simplification of Arizonas campaign finance and
election laws. SB 1516 greatly weakened Arizonas regulation of anonymous campaign
spending, including the elimination of existing laws that limit how much certain kinds of
charities and nonprofits can spend to influence elections, and the exemption of any group
with valid federal nonprofit status from the IRS from the definition of political committee,
regardless of how much money they are spending to influence elections.62

The law was criticized by Democrats in the legislature, who argued that it would usher in
greater influence of money in politics while blocking public disclosure.63

Voter Suppression Advocates in the Arizona State Legislature

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 14


Some of Arizonas most problematic voter suppression policies have been introduced recently
in the state legislature. These are some of the more notable and problematic legislators who
have worked to disenfranchise voters in Arizona.

State Representative Michelle Ugenti-Rita



State Representative Michelle Ugenti-Rita is the chair of the Arizona House Election committee.
She first ran for a seat in the Arizona Legislature in 2010 after getting involved in the Tea Party
movement.64

She was the primary sponsor of HB 2023, which prohibited groups from collecting and dropping
off early ballots and was signed into law by Governor Ducey in 2016. Ugenti-Rita described the
practice as ballot harvesting and argued that its prohibition was necessary to reduce voter
fraud.65 The bill, which banned a widely used get-out-the-vote practice that increased Latino
voter participation, had to do with voter integrity, she stated. A voter needs to be
responsible for voting, and then turning that vote in via the mailbox or at a polling location.66

Ugenti-Rita has been a vocal opponent of illegal immigration, which was one of her platforms
when she first campaigned for the legislature in 2010. She gave an emphatic speech on the
subject at a Tea Party convention that year, where she said, There will be those who will say
we are intolerant, we are racist. Let them. Theyve said it in the past, and theyll say it now.
She asserted that Illegal immigrants have been bleeding our system and enjoying the fruits of
our labor and Arizona taxpayers are forced to continue to fund our illegal population. She
warned, Do not be fooled. Comprehensive immigration reform is just another word for
amnesty.67

She voiced support for controversial immigration opponents in the state, saying that Arizona
has been blessed by the tireless work and commitment to the rule of law from people like
Sheriff Joe Arpaio,68 the notorious Maricopa County Sheriff whose officers were trained by
anti-immigration activist Kris Kobach in immigration enforcement strategies. The U.S.
Department of Justice later ruled that Arpaios department created a pervasive culture of
discriminatory bias against Latinos and revoked its authority to conduct immigration
screenings. Ugenti-Rita received Arpaios endorsement.69

Ugenti-Rita was an outspoken supporter of former Sen. Russell Pearce, who, with the help of
Kobach, drafted Arizonas controversial anti-immigration law, SB 1070, which made it a state
crime to be in the country illegally and essentially required local police officers to act as
immigration agents.70

Pearce was ousted from the Arizona Senate in a 2011 recall election, the year after SB 1070 was
passed. Prior to his recall, Ugenti-Rita appeared at a rally in his support, saying that Russell was
a champion of the rule of law and servant to the cause of liberty who deserves our
support, our time, our commitment, our attention, our contributions . . . and [the vote.]71

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 15


After the botched 2016 Maricopa County presidential preference election which left voters
standing in lines up to five hours long because of drastically cut polling places, Ugenti-Rita
denounced the flawed election administration that led to problems at the polls. However, she
denied that the problems were a case of voter suppression.

No, I dont think it was a case of voter suppression, she said of the election during an
interview on Arizona PBS. I think it was a case of mismanagement and not understanding the
political dynamic. When the host of the show asked if she was concerned that there were so
few polling places in low income and minority neighborhoods, Ugenti-Rita replied, I didnt
hear anything in the hearing that suggested that was intentional, so Im not necessarily
concerned that there was an effort to do that. What I am concerned about is that there was a
drastic cut in polling locations.72

State Representative Anthony Kern



State Representative Anthony Kern was only elected to the Arizona Legislature in November
2014 but has already become a major advocate for voter suppression policies.

He proposed banning groups from collecting and dropping off early ballots. The proposal
ostensibly targeted groups focused on increasing Latino voter turnout, and revived the same
debate as when similar bills were proposed by State Senator Don Shooter and Michele Reagan
in previous years. This time, however, the proposal ended up being signed into law by Governor
Ducey in 2016.

Kern argued that banning volunteers from collecting ballots would increase confidence in the
election system. Kern said, There are rumors out there of [voter fraud] happening, but I dont
know about any instances in particular.73

Although he was unable to identify any examples of voter fraud, which the proposal was
designed to prevent, Kern argued that his proposal would not disenfranchise any voters.
Weve made it fairly easy for voters to get their vote in. You know, you can vote by mail, bring
it down to the polling place, stand in line at the voting places. So I dont see that happening as
far as people not being able to get their vote in.74

Kern has posted right-wing conspiracy theories related to voter fraud on social media. In 2014,
Kern tweeted a video titled Is this voter fraud? You be the Judge [sic]. The video, originally
posted by the Maricopa County Republican Committee, shows a volunteer returning multiple
absentee ballots to the pollsa practice that Kern later proposed banning but was fully
permissible under Arizona law.75

He also shared a partisan graphic on Facebook in support of photo ID laws, which read,
Democrats are funny. They are going to build a big security wall around their convention and
require photo ID to get in, so they can safely condemn Republicans for wanting to build a
security wall for the country and require photo ID to vote.76
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 16



Kern also has shared numerous posts on social media from Infowars, the website run by fringe
conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. He shared one racially-charged post titled, Video: Black Lives
Matter Rioters Target Whites for Beat Downs. Kern commented on the post, Obama/Hillarys
America!77 He shared another Infowars post titled, Trump: Im running Against Media, Not
Clinton, and wrote that, Media should be accountable for its [sic] blatant pro-Hillary bias.78

Kern shared a graphic posted by right-wing filmmaker Dinesh DSouza, which said, You show
me an American ghetto Ill show you a place where Democrats are in power.79 Kern also
shared a Breitbart news story that claimed Hillary Clintons running mate, Tim Kaine, has
Islamist ties.80

State Senator Don Shooter



State Senator Don Shooter has repeatedly advocated for voter suppression policies in the
Arizona Legislature. Shooter, the former chairman of the Yuma Tea Party, has declared, There
are two things that separate us from tyranny: ballots and guns.81

In 2015 he introduced SB 1339, which would prohibit organizations from collecting and turning
in early ballots and make any violation of the law a felony. The legislation revived arguably the
most controversial piece of 2013s HB 2305, which was supported by then-Senator Michele
Reagan and signed into law by former-Governor Brewer, only to be repealed before a
referendum vote on the 2014 ballot.

Shooter claimed that the bill was necessary to prevent ballot harvesting, although opponents
argued that there were no documented examples of organizations tampering with collected
ballots.

When pressed, Shooter offered a bizarre and unsubstantiated anecdote about people popping
ballots into a microwave with a bowl of water, steaming them open and reviewing the
contents. If the vote isnt agreeable to the person who harvested the ballot, Shooter claimed,
its tossed.82

Shooters effort to criminalize a practice used by Latino groups to increase voter turnout is not
the only thing he has done to offend minority voters in Arizona. He once showed up to a special
session of the Arizona Legislature in, according to a tweet from the Arizona Republics Political
Insider blog, full mariachi dress, cigar in mouth and tequila bottle in holster. An odd festive
mood for unemployment session.83

He said the sombrero and serape he wore was not a mariachi costume but was his usual party
costume and not meant to be disrespectful. He said it was supposed to be funny and
nobody took it seriously.84


SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 17

Arizonas Local Election Board Members



On The Front Lines of Voter Suppression
(and Racially Charged Commentary)

Elections in each Arizona county are managed by the county recorder, who is responsible for
voter registration and overseeing election administration. Each county also has an election
director who administers elections under the recorder. In some counties, the county recorder
or election director has supported problematic politics that resulted in suppressing the votes of
minorities.

Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell



Maricopa County, Arizonas most highly-populated county by far, has been plagued by election
issues and allegations of voter suppression. Helen Purcell has served as its recorder since 1988.

Purcell, a Republican who has liked social media posts from Tea Party and conservative groups,
also voiced support for a voter suppression bill that was introduced in the state legislature. In
2013, she wrote an op-ed with Pima County Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez in support of SB 1261,
which was sponsored by then-Senator Michele Reagan and would remove voters from the
permanent early voting list if they had failed to vote by mail in the previous two federal primary
and general elections, and then didnt respond to a notice within thirty days explicitly stating
their desire to remain on the list. The bill was opposed by voting rights advocates as a voter
suppression bill that would disproportionately affect minority voters.

In support of the SB 1261, Purcell and Rodriguez wrote, Among the accusations have been
charges that these election changes are motivated by racism and an attempt to suppress the
vote of certain ethnic communities. These cynical claims have no basis in fact and fly in the face
of SB 1261s bipartisan and ethnically diverse support. . . . SB 1261 seeks only to ensure the
integrity of Arizona's elections while speeding up ballot tabulation.85

Allegations of Voter Suppression in 2016 Presidential Preference Election

Purcell was largely responsible for Maricopa Countys disastrous presidential preference
election in March 2016, which led to allegations of voter suppression as well as a lawsuit.

Her office mailed thousands of Spanish-language early ballots to Maricopa County voters that
contained a major descriptive error, indicating that Proposition 124 was about education
funding when it was actually about police and firefighters. Purcell announced that her office
would fix the error, although the reprinting and mailing cost an estimated $400,000.86

The severity of that error, however, paled in comparison to Purcells decision to reduce the
number of polling locations down to sixty, compared to two hundred during the 2012

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 18


presidential primary and four hundred in 2008. Although most Arizona counties had a polling
place for every 2,500 eligible voters, Maricopa County only had one polling place for every
twenty-one thousand voters.87

The reduction of polling places was approved by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors on
the advice of Purcell, who touted the cuts as a cost-saving measure and said she believed there
would be more people voting by mail than showing up at the polls.88

The extreme cuts to the number of polling locations in Maricopa County resulted in massive
lines at the polls. Voters waited for up to five hours to cast their ballots, some until after
midnight even though they had arrived before the 7:00 p.m. closing time. At least one polling
place in the county ran out of ballots.89

The reduction of polling locations disproportionately affected minority voters in Maricopa
County. A lawsuit brought by the Democratic Party argued that, The reduction of voting
locations was particularly burdensome on Maricopa Countys Hispanic and African-American
communities, many of which had fewer polling locations than Anglo communities and, in some
instances, no voting locations at all.90

Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton called for an investigation by the Justice Department, noting that
county officials allocated one polling place for every 108,000 residents and Anglo
communities had more polling sites per resident.91

Prior to the 2013 Supreme Court decision that overturned a key preclearance provision of the
Voting Rights Act, Maricopa County would have been required to pre-clear the polling location
cuts with the federal government in order to guarantee that the plan would not negatively
impact minority voters. Purcell was asked if she had considered the impact of the cuts on
minority voters, despite no longer being obligated by the Justice Department to do so. She said
she had not.92

Purcell apologized for the mistake, although not before blaming the long lines at the polls on
the voters for getting in line and on independents casting provisional ballots. Purcells
flawed methodology for determining the number of polling places relied on voters evenly
distributing themselves around the county, including to rural areas, when in practice more
voters went to cast their ballots in the Phoenix metro area.93

Maricopa County Elections Director Karen Osborne said that they tried to keep the presidential
preference as cheap as humans could do it. Purcells office was unable to assert how much
money was saved by cutting the polling places, but Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Gallardo
said the county provided $4.3 million to Purcell's office, but was never told that would not be
enough money to effectively carry out the election.94

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 19


After the disastrous election, the Democratic Party brought a lawsuit against Arizona and
Maricopa County, arguing that the reduction in polling locations disenfranchised minority
voters.

The complaint highlighted how polling places were less accessible in low-income and majorityminority communities. For example, the complaint noted that in primarily Anglo communities
like Cave Creek, there was one polling place per 8,500 residents, while in Phoenix, a majorityminority city where 40.8 percent of its 1.5 million residents are Hispanic, there was only one
polling place allocated per 108,000 residents.95

The U.S. Department of Justice opened an investigation of Purcells office in response to the
election citing allegations of disproportionate burden in waiting to vote on election day in
some areas with substantial racial or language minority populations.96

Accused of Voter Suppression During 2012 Election

Purcells office also made several errors before the 2012 general election that led to allegations
of voter suppression.

The Maricopa County Recorders Office printed the incorrect election date on two thousand
Spanish-language educational bookmarks that were distributed at three office locations and at
voter-outreach events. The Spanish translation on some of the bookmarks listed the general
election date as November 8 instead of the correct date of November 6. Her office also printed
the incorrect election date on fifty other Spanish-language documents, leading critics to allege
that the errors could lead to suppressing Latino voter turnout.

Purcell denied that the misprints on the Spanish-language documents were voter suppression
tactics. Were always very good about checking and double-checking things, and we just didn't
do that enough this time, Purcell said. I certainly would never, ever want to suppress anybody
from voting, including Hispanics.97

She was also criticized by Latino voting groups that collected and dropped off ballots at the
polls after she erroneously said that it was a felony to possess anyone elses early ballot. CBS
affiliate KPHO quoted Purcell as saying that voters should call the police if anyone comes to
their door offering to deliver an early ballot. Purcell claimed she never made that statement
and was referring to reports of someone posing as a county official and offering to deliver
ballots, which would be a felony. KPHO stood by the report, saying that the story was
accurate.98

It took Arizona two weeks after the 2012 general election to count all of their ballots. In
Maricopa County, 450,000 ballots remained uncounted on Election Day. Many of these were
provisional ballots, which were given to any voters on the early voting list who decided to vote
in person instead. According to Mi Familia Vota, the number of Latino voters on the permanent
early voting list had increased in 2012 to 225,000, from 90,000 in 2008.
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 20



The long delay in counting the ballots led to protests by Latino advocates, who argued that the
delay feeds a perception of discrimination against Latino voters given Arizonas history of
intentional voter suppression of minorities. Rodolfo Espino, assistant professor of political
science at Arizona State University, said that the delay creates this sense of illegitimacy. He
added, It could be something really innocent going on here, or something really egregious
going on here. Regardless, its a problem that needs to be addressed. A spokesperson for the
Maricopa County recorders office said they were surprised by the criticism: We just dont
understand it.99

Pima County Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez



Pima County Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez has stressed the importance of purging the voter rolls
as a function of county recorders and has said that cleaning up the voter rolls is a continual
process.100

Rodriguez drastically cut the number of polling places for the 2008 presidential preference
election, which the state helps counties fund. Pima County cut the number of precincts in half
for the election, consolidating its four hundred precincts into only two hundred.101

She has voiced support for voter suppression bills that have been introduced in the state
legislature. In 2013, Rodriguez wrote an op-ed with Maricopa County Recorder Helena Purcell
in support of SB 1261, the bill sponsored by Michele Reagan that would remove voters from the
permanent early voting list if they had failed to vote by mail in the previous two federal primary
and general elections, and didnt respond to a notice within thirty days explicitly stating their
desire to remain on the list. The bill was widely opposed by voting rights advocates as a voter
suppression bill that would disproportionately affect minority voters.

In supporting the legislation, Rodriguez and Purcell wrote, Among the accusations have been
charges that these election changes are motivated by racism and an attempt to suppress the
vote of certain ethnic communities. These cynical claims have no basis in fact and fly in the face
of SB 1261s bipartisan and ethnically diverse support. . . . SB 1261 seeks only to ensure the
integrity of Arizona's elections while speeding up ballot tabulation.102

Mohave County Elections Director Allen Tempert



Allen Tempert serves as the Mohave County Elections Director. The county recorder, Robert
Ballard, was appointed in 2016 to serve temporarily through the end of the year; he is not
running for a full term.

Tempert proposed a plan in 2015 to cut the number of precincts by 65 percent and reduce the
number of polling places to thirty-two. Temperts plan, which was approved by the Mohave
County supervisors, reduced the number of precincts in the county from over seventy to only

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 21


twenty-four. Tempert tied the proposal to buying new voting machine equipment and said it
would create a more efficient election process for voters and election officials, while also
saving the county money.103

Two Mohave County supervisors voiced concern about Temperts plan, with Supervisor Steve
Moss noting, I think we are moving quickly on it. Adding, I would have liked a lot more time
to engage with various stakeholders on it. The plan was opposed by the chairs of both the
county Democratic and county Republican Parties.104

Tempert has spoken out strongly against voter fraud. He said that if he finds out that a voter
cast an early ballot and also cast a provisional ballot at the polls, Im going to the County
Attorneys office. That is the deterrent. Im going to see that theyre going to jail.105

Cochise County Elections Director Katie Howard



Katie Howard serves as the Cochise County elections director. In 2015 she pushed through a
plan to drastically cut the number of polling places in Cochise County by two-thirds. She has
also liked far-right and racially charged posts on social media.

Howard supported a plan to slash the number of polling places in Cochise County by two-thirds.
It was ultimately approved by the county Board of Supervisors in 2015, reducing the number of
polling places from forty-nine down to eighteen under a new process that would allow voters to
cast their ballots at any of the eighteen voting centers.

Howard likes posts by Tea Party and conservative groups on Facebook, including one that
depicted President Obama and read, Its not because youre black, its because youre bad at
your job!106 She has also liked racially charged comments on Facebook, including one in which
someone said an image of an African man in tribal dress was a pic is of Obama on spring
break.107

Voter Suppression Groups in Arizona

True the Vote & Verify the Vote



True the Vote, a Houston-based organization that advocates for voter suppression policies and
engages in fear-mongering about virtually nonexistent election fraud, has worked to
disenfranchise voters across the nation, as well as in Arizona specifically.

Founded by Tea Party activist Catherine Engelbrecht, True the Vote has been extremely
successful in promoting voter suppression policies around the country and its work has
bolstered legislative efforts in at least thirty-seven states to require voter ID at the polls.108 The
organization has been criticized for intimidating minority voters at polling places where their

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 22


trained poll watchers aimed to leave no polling place unmanned to guard against election
fraud. True the Vote has advocated for a range of voter suppression policies, including largescale voter purges.109

Verify the Vote

A True the Vote-affiliated group was founded in Arizona before the 2012 election. Verify the
Vote Arizona was formed by Tea Party advocates, including Jennifer Wright, a one-time
candidate for Phoenix mayor who received the endorsement of disgraced Sen. Russell Pearce,
the co-author of Arizonas strict anti-immigration law along with Kris Kobach.110

Verify the Vote worked with True the Vote to validate signatures for Arizona ballot measures in
2012, and also trained poll watchers for Election Day. True the Vote has trained poll watchers
around the country, purportedly as a way to discourage voter fraud at the polls. The group has
been criticized for the aggressive tactics of its trained poll watchers and for sending white poll
watchers to majority-minority neighborhoods. Voting rights groups have noted that white poll
watchers in minority neighborhoods can have a disenfranchising effect on voters even if there
is no direct interaction between them.111

Verify the Vote Arizona, like its national counterpart, trained poll watchers throughout Arizona
before the 2012 election. In Arizona, poll watchers are assigned to polling locations through
their county political party. Verify the Vote leader Jennifer Wright said that poll watchers would
be assigned to problem areas first, but clarified that county political parties would be
responsible for picking those locations.112

Voting rights groups were concerned that poll watchers trained by Verify the Vote would
suppress minority voters on Election Day 2012, although there did not seem to be any major
issues. Arizona Democratic Party Research Director Joaquin Rios said problems caused by the
groups poll watchers never really materialized. Rios added, We heard throughout the day
about isolated incidents here or there. Most of those were secondhand accounts, though.113

Verify the Vote no longer appears be an active group and does not maintain an Internet
presence.


True the Vote: Hardly Nonpartisan

True the Vote claims that it is focused only on ensuring fair elections and is not partisan. The
groups founder, Catherine Engelbrecht, has said, This has never been and never will be about
politics. She added, This is not a partisan effort.114 However, the partisan motivations behind
the group are clear.

True the Vote has been criticized on a national level for focusing its poll watchers and voter
registration challenges on minority communities that traditionally vote Democratic. Even True
the Votes president, Catherine Engelbrecht, acknowledges the partisan motivations behind her
SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 23


groups effort to fight alleged election fraud: You dont need a whole lot of election fraud; you
just need a little bit in the right places to swing an election.115

Conclusion


Officials at all levels of Arizonas government have engaged in what amounts to a long-term
assault on voting rights. Voter suppression policiesrestrictive voter ID and proof-of-citizenship
laws, banning common voter outreach practices, and other policies that make voting less
accessibledisproportionately affect minority voters who should be encouraged to turn out
and exercise their constitutional rights to vote.

Despite what some Arizona officials have expressed, voting is a right, not a privilege. These
officials are failing all Arizona voters when they are motivated by partisanship and engage in
racially charged rhetoric while serving in roles intended to impartially administer elections and
protect voting rights. These policies do not simply make it more difficult for Arizonans to vote--
they strip constitutional rights from largely minority voters, all for the purpose of partisan,
political gain.

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 24

End Notes
1

Garrett Epps, Arizonas Case Against the Voting Rights Act, The Atlantic, September 6, 2011,
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/09/arizonas-case-against-the-voting-rights-act/244548/.
2
Ari Berman, There Were Five-Hour Lines to Vote in Arizona Because the Supreme Court Gutted the Voting Rights Act, The
Nation, March 23, 2016, https://www.thenation.com/article/there-were-five-hour-lines-to-vote-in-arizona-because-thesupreme-court-gutted-the-voting-rights-act/.
3
Andrew Gumbel, Democrats Arizona Lawsuit Turns Eyes to State Plagued by Voting Controversy, The Guardian, April 15
2016, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/15/arizona-voting-rights-lawsuit-election-controversy.
4
Voting In This Election, Arizona Secretary of State website, accessed August 26, 2016,
http://www.azsos.gov/elections/voting-election.
5
Sari Horwitz, Getting a Photo ID So You Can Vote Is Easy. Unless Youre Poor, Black, Latino or Elderly, Washington Post, May
23, 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-yourepoor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html.
6
Oppose Voter ID Legislation Fact Sheet, American Civil Liberties Union website, accessed August 24, 2016,
https://www.aclu.org/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet.
7
Register to Vote or Update Your Current Voter Information, Arizona Secretary of State website, accessed August 26, 2016,
http://www.azsos.gov/elections/voting-election/register-vote-or-update-your-current-voter-information.
8
Michelle Ye Hee Lee, Appeals Court Strikes Down Voter ID Law, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, October 27, 2010,
http://archive.azcentral.com/news/articles/20101027voters1027.html.
9
Arizona Proposition 200 (Gonzalez v. Brewer), Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund website, accessed
September 2, 2016, http://www.maldef.org/voting_rights/litigation/az_prop_200/.
10
Alia Beard Rau, Illegal Immigrant Vote-Fraud Cases Rare in Arizona, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, November 18, 2013,
http://archive.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20131105arizona-immigrant-vote-fraud-rare.html.
11
Robert Barnes Supreme Court Says States May Not Add Citizenship Proof for Voter Registration, Washington Post, June 17,
2013, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-says-states-may-not-add-citizenship-proof-forvoting/2013/06/17/734a1aca-d760-11e2-a9f2-42ee3912ae0e_story.html.
12
Mary Jo Pitzl, Arizona to Have Two-Track Voting System, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, October 8, 2013,
13
Arizona and Feds Clash over Voter Registration, News21, August 12, 2012, http://votingrights.news21.com/article/arizona/.
14
Roxana Hegeman, U.S. Official Requires Citizenship Proof in Three States, Salon, February 4, 2016,
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/04/us_official_requires_citizenship_proof_in_3_states/. Allied Progress has consistently
criticized Brian Newbys decision on the proof-of-citizenship requirement for the Federal Form.
15
League of Women Voters of the United States v. Brian D. Newby, No. 1:16-cv-00236, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 16835 (DC Cir.
September 9, 2016), https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/14C80589DDE01F4F8525802A00009F33/$file/165196CHMJ.pdf.
16
Jamelle Bouie, The Most Brazen Attempt at Voter Suppression Yet, Slate, October 29 2014,
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/10/al_jazeera_america_s_reveals_massive_gop_voter_suppre
ssion_effort_millions.html.
17
Greg Palast, Jim Crow Returns, Millions of Minority Voters Threatened by Electoral Purge, Al Jazeera America, October 29,
2014, http://projects.aljazeera.com/2014/double-voters/index.html.
18
Martha Dalton, Critics Question Georgia's Participation in Crosscheck Voter System, 90.1FM WABE, November 3, 2014,
http://news.wabe.org/post/critics-question-georgias-participation-crosscheck-voter-system.
19
Suzanne Potter and Dallas Heltzell, AZ Officials Deny Crosscheck System Targets Minority Names, Public News Service,
August 31, 2016, http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2016-08-31/civic-engagement/az-officials-deny-crosscheck-systemtargets-minority-names/a53836-1.
nd
20
Policy Analysis and Review of Proposed Legislation, 52 Legislature, First Regular Session, 2015: Early Ballot Mail Date
Change, Arizona Association of Counties website, accessed September 1, 2016,
http://azcounties.org/DocumentCenter/View/777.
21
Kathryn Peifer, Arizona Felons Have Steep Path to Restore Voting Rights, Cronkite News, May 9, 2016,
https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2016/05/09/arizona-felons-have-steep-path-to-restore-voting-rights/.
22
Mary Jo Pitzl, Arizona Panel OKs Bill to Allow Cuts from Early-Voting List, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, February 5, 2013,
http://archive.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20130205arizona-bill-allows-cuts-early-voting-list.html.
23
Linda Valdez, Arizonas 2004 Voter-ID Statute is Biased, Should be Thrown Out, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 16, 2013,
http://archive.azcentral.com/opinions/articles/20130313arizonas-voter-id-statute-is-biased-should-be-thrown-out.html.

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 25

24

Mary Jo Pitzl, Critics Assail Reform Plans for Arizona Elections, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 3, 2013,
http://archive.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20130225arizona-election-reform-plans.html; and E. J. Montini, Despite
Denials, GOP Election Bill Looks a Lot Like Voter Suppression, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 10, 2013.
25
Valdez, Voter-ID Statute Is Biased.
26
Pitzl, Critics Assail Plans.
27
Ibid.
28
Montini, Despite Denials.
29
E. J. Montini, From Third Party to Second-Class Citizen, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, September 23, 2013,
https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-arizona-republic/20130923/281702612411273.
30
Ben Giles, Senator Faced Pressure to Change Deciding Vote on Elections Bill, June 19, 2013,
http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2013/06/19/az-senator-faced-pressure-to-change-deciding-vote-on-elections-bill/.
31
Mary Jo Pitzl, Raft of Election Changes OKd: Brewer Signing Riles Voter Access Advocates, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, June
20, 2013, http://archive.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20130619brewer-signs-controversial-election-bill-into-law.html.
32
Protect Your Right to Vote Committee, Protect Your Right to Vote Delivers 146,000 Signatures to Refer HB2305 to the
Ballot, news release, n.d.,
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/arizonaadvocacynetwork/pages/249/attachments/original/1437429994/protect_your
_right_release.pdf; and Arizona Citizens Force Referendum on GOP Voter Suppression Bill, Halting the Bill for Now,
ThinkProgress, October 30, 2013, https://thinkprogress.org/arizona-citizens-force-referendum-on-gop-voter-suppression-billhalting-the-bill-for-now-d150bf49c6cb#.au53swmfn. The Protect Your Right to Vote Committee does not have a functioning
website.
33
Isiah Kurz, Election-Law Foes Decry Move to Keep It off Ballot, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, February 28, 2014,
http://archive.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20140227election-law-foes-decry-ballot-move.html.
34
Jamelle Bouie, The Most Brazen Attempt at Voter Suppression Yet, Slate, October 29, 2014,
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/10/al_jazeera_america_s_reveals_massive_gop_voter_suppre
ssion_effort_millions.html.
35
Alia Beard Rau and JJ Hensley, Police Weighing Arizona's Immigration Bill's Impact, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, April 22,
2010, http://archive.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/04/22/20100422arizona-immigration-bill-police-impact.html.
36
Suzy Khimm, Kris Kobach, Nativist Son, Mother Jones, March/April 2012,
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/kris-kobach-anti-immigration-laws-sb-1070 and Paul Reyes, Its Just Not
Right: The Failures of Alabamas Self-Deportation Experiment, Mother Jones, March/April 2012,
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/alabama-anti-immigration-law-self-deportation-movement
37
Dave Klepper, Kansas' Kobach Helping Arizona on 'Anchor Babies' Legislation, Kansas City (MO) Star, September 15, 2010,
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24593302.html.
38
Mary Jo Pitzl, Secy of State Candidate Gets Endorsement from SB 1070 Co-Author, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, June 17,
2014, http://www.azcentral.com/story/politicalinsider/2014/06/17/arizona-secretary-state-kobach-endorsement/10674329/.
39
Howard Fischer, State, County Officials Admit Mistakes in Primary Polling, (Tucson) Arizona Daily Star, March 29, 2016,
http://tucson.com/news/state-and-regional/state-maricopa-officials-admit-mistakes-in-primary-day-pollinglocations/article_c4028deb-c22b-5c80-a99d-9d2032c642ec.html.
40
Mary Jo Pitzl, Many Call for Election Reforms, One More Day of Voting because of Long Lines, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic,
March 28, 2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2016/03/28/arizona-secretary-of-state-reagan-saysshe-has-no-sway-over-county-election-snafu/82279150/.
41
Editorial Board, Our View: Michele Reagan Really Needs Some Quality Control, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, June 4, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/06/01/michele-reagan-election-mistakes/85263922/.
42
Mary Jo Pitzl and Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, Lawmakers Passed on Polling-Place Fix as Another Election Error Surfaces,
(Phoenix) Arizona Republic, May 9, 2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/legislature/2016/05/09/arizonalawmakers-bill-polling-locations/84147266/ and and Laurie Roberts, At least 400,000 Early Voters Didnt Get Election Info on
Time, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, May 9, 2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/oped/laurieroberts/2016/05/09/roberts-another-arizona-election-snafu-really/84141588/.
43
Mary Jo Pitzl, Arizona Attorney General Hires Outside Counsel for Reagan Inquiry, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, June 3, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2016/06/02/arizona-attorney-general-hires-outside-counsel-reaganinquiry/85301246/.
44
Janine Petty, e-mail message to F. Ann Rodriguez, March 15, 2016.
45
F. Ann Rodriguez, e-mail message to Janine Petty, March 15, 2016.
46
Chris Roads, e-mail message to Janine Petty, March 15, 2016.
47
E.J. Montini, Montini: Vendor Reminds Michele Reagan, Again, Prop. 123 Screw-Up Was HER Fault, (Phoenix) Arizona
Republic, May 24, 2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2016/05/24/montini-michele-reaganarizona-proposition-123/84856840/.

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 26

48

Michele Reagan, Sour Grapes, AZSOSblog (blog), Arizona Secretary of State website, May 19, 2016,
http://www.azsos.gov/about-office/media-center/azsosblog/899.
49
Mary Jo Pitzl, Michele Reagans Sour Grapes, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, May 20, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/politicalinsider/2016/05/20/michele-reagans-sour-grapes/84660382/.
50
Michele Reagan, e-mail message to Matt Roberts, May 9, 2016.
51
Mary Jo Pitzl, Arizona Secretary of State Quietly Fixes Mistakes, but Delay Could Prove Costly, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic,
May 31, 2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/05/31/arizona-secretary-state-nomination-formmistake/85205014/; and Dan Carroll, e-mail message to Eric Spencer, June 8, 2016.
52
Mary Jo Pitzl, Arizona Dark Money Bill on Its Way to Gov. Doug Ducey, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 30, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/legislature/2016/03/29/arizona-dark-money-bill-its-way-gov-dougducey/82393280/.
53
Howard Fischer, Dark Money Rules Eased in AZ Senate Campaign Finance Bill, (Tucson) Arizona Daily Star, March 8, 2016,
http://tucson.com/news/state-and-regional/dark-money-rules-eased-in-az-senate-campaign-finance-bill/article_809e66e3bbc5-57c7-87d5-b25194abb486.html; and Jeremy Duda, Ducey Signs Campaign Finance Bill Assailed by Critics as Pro-Dark
Money,(Phoenix) Arizona Capitol Times, March 31, 2016, http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2016/03/31/ducey-signs-campaignfinance-bill-assailed-by-critics-as-pro-dark-money/.
54
Fischer, Dark Money Rules Eased.
55
Tim Steller, Steller: Texts Are Sign of Dark-Money Problem, (Tucson) Arizona Daily Star, May 21, 2015,
http://tucson.com/news/local/columnists/steller/steller-texts-are-sign-of-dark-money-problem/article_9e836034-e9dd-5e1a9d00-ffbc95e9d423.html.
56
Andrew Gumbel, Democrats Arizona Lawsuit Turns Eyes to State Plagued by Voting Controversy, The Guardian, April 15
2016, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/15/arizona-voting-rights-lawsuit-election-controversy.
57
Mary Jo Pitzl, Gov. Doug Ducey Signs Bill Banning Ballot Collection, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 10, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2016/03/10/gov-ducey-signs-arizona-bill-banning-ballotcollection/81557626/.
58
Mary Jo Pitzl, Maricopa County settles part of lawsuit from presidential primary, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, September 9,
2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/politicalinsider/2016/09/09/maricopa-county-settles-part-lawsuitpresidential-primary/90144910/.
59
Leslie Feldman v. Arizona Secretary of States Office, No. 2:16-cv-01065-DLR, (AZ Dist. April 15, 2016),
http://kjzz.org/sites/default/files/Feldman%20v%20Secretary%20of%20State%20Complaint.pdf.
60
Howard Fischer, Federal judge: Arizona counties don't have to tally out-of-precinct votes, Arizona Daily Star, October 13,
2016, http://tucson.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/elections/federal-judge-arizona-counties-don-t-have-to-tallyout/article_ef2f21cf-37ac-5a6b-95aa-64b81c74cca0.html.
61
Jeremy Duda, Raucous Crowd Calls for Purcells Resignation in Wake of Presidential Primary Fiasco,(Phoenix) Arizona
Capitol Times, March 28, 2016, http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2016/03/28/election-officials-admit-presidential-primarymistakes/.
62
Fischer, Dark Money Rules Eased; and Duda, Ducey Signs Campaign Finance Bill.
63
Pitzl, Arizona Dark Money Bill.
64
Legislator Profile - Representative Michelle Ugenti, League of Arizona Cities and Towns Legislative Bulletin, no. 15, (April 15,
2011), http://www.azleague.org/Archive/ViewFile/Item/122.
65
From the Chair | Interviews with Election Committee Chairs, National Conference of State Legislatures website, June 21,
2016, http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/from-the-chair-interviews.aspx.
66
Arizona PBS YouTube channel, Election Problems Hearing & Higher Education Challenges, YouTube video, 26:00 , posted
March 30, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_qmx1-BhGc.
67
Rico Razzi Vimeo channel, Michelle Ugenti ::Tea Party Speech on Immigration :: Republican Candidate: Arizona House of
Representatives - District 8, Vimeo video, 11:28, posted April 8, 2010, https://vimeo.com/10785532.
68
Ibid.
69
Khimm, Kris Kobach; and Endorsed by, Recent News: Endorsements/Awards, Michelle Ugenti-Rita campaign website, last
modified October 20, 2015, http://www.michelleugenti.com/recent-news/endorsed-by/.
70
Rau and Hensley, Police Weighing Impact.
71
Marcus Huey YouTube channel, Michelle Ugenti - Pearce Rally, YouTube video, 4:31, posted October 16, 2011,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iAdG7Bbajw.
72
Arizona PBS YouTube channel, Election Problems Hearing & Higher Education Challenges, YouTube video, 26:00, posted
March 30, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_qmx1-BhGc.
73
Hank Stephenson, Glendale lawmaker Kern renews effort to ban ballot harvesting, Arizona Capitol Times, December 28,
2015, accessed September 27, 2016, http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2015/12/28/glendale-lawmaker-kern-renews-effort-toban-ballot-harvesting/.

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 27

74

Ibid.
Anthony Kern Twitter post, November 7, 2014, 12:41 a.m., https://twitter.com/anthonykernAZ; and Maricopa County
Republican Committee YouTube channel, Is this voter fraud? - You be the Judge, YouTube video, 8:47, posted October 16,
2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYGzQXnGzw0.
76
Anthony Kern Facebook page, status of July 23, 2016 (9:19 p.m.), accessed August 30, 2016,
https://www.facebook.com/anthony.kern.378/posts/10206477168834622.
77
Anthony Kern Facebook page, status of August 14, 2016 (11:17 p.m.), accessed August 30, 2016,
https://www.facebook.com/anthony.kern.378/posts/10206627079182287.
78
Anthony Kern Facebook page, status of August 14, 2016 (11:21 p.m.), accessed August 30, 2016,
https://www.facebook.com/anthony.kern.378/posts/10206627111983107.
79
Anthony Kern Facebook page, status of June 5, 2016 (12:10 p.m.), accessed August 30, 2016,
https://www.facebook.com/anthony.kern.378/posts/10206171922043643.
80
Anthony Kern Facebook page, status of July 23, 2016 (4:35 p.m.), accessed August 30, 2016,
https://www.facebook.com/anthony.kern.378/posts/10206476013685744.
81
Mara Knaub. Shooter Proud of Batting Average for Yuma County, Yuma (AZ) Sun, May 21, 2011
82
Mary Jo Pitzl, Arizona Legislature Revives Thwarted Elections Bills, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 25, 2015,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2015/03/26/arizona-legislature-revives-thwarted-electionsbills/70471722/.
83
Mara Knaub, Shooter Shows Up to Special Session in Costume, Yuma (AZ) Sun, June 10, 2011,
http://www.yumasun.com/shooter-shows-up-to-special-session-in-costume/article_667ee4c2-445c-507c-a496be89750e28ae.html.
84
Ibid.
85
F. Ann Rodriguez and Helen Purcell, Rodriguez and Purcell: Integrity in Ariz. Elections, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 22,
2013, http://archive.azcentral.com/opinions/articles/20130321rodriguez-purcell-integrity-ariz-elections.html.
86
Richard Ruelas, Helen Purcell Admits Election Mistakes, Not Corruption, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, June 24, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-best-reads/2016/05/15/helen-purcell-admits-election-day-mistakes-notcorruption/82676630/.
87
Anne Ryman, Rob O'Dell, and Ricardo Cano, Arizona Primary: Maricopa County Had One Polling Site for Every 21,000
Voters, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 23, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/22/live-arizona-primary-coverage-presidential-preferenceelection/82096726/.
88
Yvonne Wingett Sanchez and Caitlin McGlade, Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell Takes Blame for Voter Lines, Says
She Won't Resign, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 23, 2016,
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/23/maricopa-county-recorder-helen-purcell-admits-faultlong-primary-lines/82165730/.
89
Ryman, O'Dell, and Cano, One Polling Site.
90
Tierney Sneed, Five Points On How Dems Say Arizona Screwed Up Its Election, Talking Points Memo, April 18, 2016,
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoints/arizona-democrats-lawsuit.
91
Sanchez and McGlade, She Won't Resign.
92
Pitzl, Many Call for Election Reforms.
93
Ruelas, Election Mistakes, Not Corruption.
94
Editorial Board, Our View: Arizona's Epic Election Fail Must Have Consequences, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 24,
2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/03/24/phoenix-voter-suppression-confidence/82202870/; and
Josselyn Barry and Pita Juarez, Our Turn: Arizona's Perfect Storm of Voter Suppression, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, March 29,
2016, http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2016/03/29/arizona-voter-suppression/82400938/.
95
Feldman v. Arizona Secretary of States Office.
96
Chris Herren, Voting Section Chief, U.S. Department of Justice, to Helen Purcell, 1 April, 2016, KTAR News,
http://ktar.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/DOJ-Letter-to-Maricopa.pdf.
97
Michelle Ye Hee Lee, More Maricopa County Election Materials Have Errors, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, October 24, 2012,
http://archive.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20121023maricopa-county-more-election-materials-errors.html.
98
Evan Wyloge, Maricopa County Elections Office Suffers Series of Mishaps, (Phoenix) Arizona Capitol Times, October 26,
2012, http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/10/26/maricopa-county-elections-office-suffers-series-of-mishaps/.
99
Cindy Carcamo, Arizona Ballots Finally Counted--And Latinos Ask, Why So Long? Los Angeles Times, November 21, 2012,
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/21/nation/la-na-nn-arizona-latinos-voting-20121121.
100
Rhonda Bodfield, Bayless Striving to Tell Voters Who She Is, (Tucson) Arizona Daily Star, August 19, 2002; and Carmen
Duarte, Neighbors Briefs, (Tucson) Arizona Daily Star, October 5, 2008.
75

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 28

101

Arthur H. Rotstein, Independents Trying to Vote, but Ineligible, (Flagstaff) Arizona Daily Sun, February 6, 2008,
http://azdailysun.com/news/state-and-regional/arizona-independents-trying-to-vote-but-ineligible/article_62c58877-82045a11-94fd-3559f829ec0b.html.
102
Rodriguez and Purcell, Integrity in Ariz. Elections.
103
Zachary Matson, Supes OK New Voting Equipment, Precinct Consolidation, Havasu (AZ) News-Herald, August 3, 2015,
http://www.havasunews.com/news/supes-ok-new-voting-equipment-precinct-consolidation/article_e98c6912-3a6f-11e590a3-a39afee0d107.html.
104
Ibid.
105
Neil Young, Technology to Guard Against Multiple Votes, Mohave (AZ) Daily News, March 3, 2016.
106
The Tea Party Facebook page, status of March 14, 2014 (4:00 a.m.), accessed August 31, 2016,
https://www.facebook.com/TheTeaParty.net/photos/687415681313920/.
107
Bikers Inner Circle Facebook page, status of May 28, 2014 (8:23 p.m.), accessed August 31, 2016,
https://www.facebook.com/bikersinnercircle/photos/a.490999160969726.1073741824.138118392924473/649056318497342/.
108
Jane Mayer, The Voter-Fraud Myth; The Man Who Has Stoked Fear About Impostors at the Polls, The New Yorker, October
29, 2012, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/10/29/the-voter-fraud-myth.
109
AJ Vicens and Natasha Khan, Voters Feel Intimidated by Election Observers, Tucson (AZ) Sentinel, August 20, 2012,
http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/nationworld/report/082012_voting_observers/voters-feel-intimidated-by-election-observers/.
110
Lynh Bui, Phoenix Mayor Hopeful Jennifer Wright Pushing for Less Red Tape, (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, July 30, 2011,
http://archive.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/20110730phoenix-mayor-hopeful-jennifer-wright.html.
111
AJ Vicens and Natasha Khan, Election Observers Proliferate at Polls, Washington Post, August 24, 2012,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/election-observers-proliferate-at-polls/2012/08/24/1452c3ba-ed4f-11e1-a80b9f898562d010_story.html.
112
Evan Wyloge, Arizona Voter Fraud Group Preps Election Day Pounce, (Phoenix) Arizona Capitol Times, November 2, 2012,
http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/02/arizona-voter-fraud-group-preps-for-election-day-pounce/.
113
Evan Wyloge, No Voter Intimidation on Election Day, But Still Problems at the Polls, (Phoenix) Arizona Capitol Times,
November 16, 2012, http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/16/no-voter-intimidation-on-election-day-but-still-problems-atthe-polls/.
114
Barry Horstman, Group to Sue for Purge of the Rolls, Cincinnati (OH) Enquirer, August, 27, 2012.
115
Matthew Boyle, Chris McDaniel Rushes to Review Ballots from Tuesdays Election, Breitbart, June 27, 2014,
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/06/27/mcdaniel-rushes-to-review-ballots-from-tuesday-s-election/.

SOMETHINGS ROTTEN | ALLIED PROGRESS | 29