Horizon, Host: Ted Simons

December 9, 2010


Host: Ted Simons

Arizona's Constitution

  |   Video
  • A 100 years ago on this date, leaders of the Arizona territories signed their newly drafted constitution. Ruth McGregor, of the Constitutional Convention Event Committee, talks about the history of Arizona's constitution.
Guests:
  • Ruth McGregor - Constitutional Convention Event Committee
Category: Government

View Transcript
Ted Simons:
A major milestone does a D.A., 100 years ago on this date, leaders of the Arizona territory signed the newly drafted constitution. It was the first step in what they hoped would be a speedy race toward statehood. Is took over a year before Arizona finally became a state. Here to talk about that history and how the constitution is holding up is retired Supreme Court justice, Ruth McGregor. And serves on the Supreme Court's centennial commission. Justice, good to see you again.

Ruth McGregor:
Glad to be here.

Ted Simons:
Give us a background and overview of the history in getting the Arizona territory to a state.
Ruth McGregor:
It was not an easy history for Arizona. Arizona's efforts really started during the civil war and the first -- the first time that Arizona was recognized as a territory was actually by the confederacy. That didn't last long and then Arizona started going through a series of attempts to be recognized as a state. There were a number of roadblocks to that. There was a suspicion that the failure to be recognized was political because the government was Republican and Arizona then was a very democratic state. There were a lot of discussions whether Arizona and New Mexico, which had originally been the same territory and later separated, about whether Arizona, New Mexico, that territory should come in as one state. Which would probably would have been New Mexico. One constitution was adopted and rejected. So Arizona went through a lot of years of trying to get to the point that it could actually be recognized as a state.
Ted Simons:
And now the Organic Act, was that in the civil war days.

Ruth McGregor:
Yes, signed by Abraham Lincoln in 1860.

Ted Simons: And that’s set aside as Arizona territory correct? We're trying to become a state and it doesn't seem to be happening. Why did it happen when it did? Talk about the enabling act first.

Ruth McGregor:
One the things that delayed Arizona was that it require that president Taft approve the constitution that Arizona adopted and there was a lot of discussion and disagreement when Arizona's constitutional convention was meeting and prior to that, about whether Arizona would adopt direct democracy provisions. The initiative and referendum and recall process, particularly of judges. And because it had to be approved by president Taft, there was a lot of discussion during the convention as to whether or not including these direct democracy provisions would prevent Arizona from becoming a state.

Ted Simons:
You mentioned the constitutional convention. Who were the delegates? Who were the people we're looking at right now.

Ruth McGregor:
First they were all men. Women were not part of the constitutional convention. There were 52 of the delegates. They came from a number of different areas of life. About a quarter of them were lawyers. A couple were doctors, some business people. Objective two of them had been born in Arizona. Had lived here all their lives. The rest from some place else and six were actually immigrants who had been born in other countries and come to Arizona. It was heavily democratic. 41 of the 52 delegates were democrat and 11 Republicans.

Ted Simons:
So we have this group, I'm guessing -- well, maybe wrong but was there a lot of fussing and fighting at the constitutional convention over what the constitution -- obviously had been drafted first, but was there fussing and fighting going on?

Ruth McGregor:
There was a lot of fussing going on and when the constitution was finally adopted, all the democratic delegates but one signed it and none of -- except one. It centered in a number of areas. One was on the direct democracy provisions, another on the rights of people, of employees and people to recover for damages. That was very much a part of the progressive agenda that was important across the country but especially in state -- coming into the union about this time. And there was a lot of concern, not only about government power but about the power of big business, the mines and railroads in Arizona and how to ensure that employees were treated fairly within the statement. That was an area of a lot of contention.

Ted Simons:
Sounds like labor issues were very much at the forefront here.

Ruth McGregor:
They were very important. One of the things that the man who came Arizona's governor several times over, governor hunt, was -- chaired the convention, I think they called him the president of the convention and he managed to broker a deal. The labor party was fairly big at the time. Bring the labor party in with the Democrats and voted together as I democratic party. But the rights of the workers were important and labor issues were very big during the convention.

Ted Simons:
Was this seen at the time as a relatively progressive constitution?

Ruth McGregor:
Very much so. It was part of the progressive movement amp reflects very much the distrust of the government. Hence, the election of a lot of officers in Arizona not elected offices elsewhere. The election of county attorneys and clerks of the superior court and mine inspector. All of that reflects the real distrust. The government.

Ted Simons:
Did that reflect in itself, the west, a territory becoming a state and not going through the decades that some of the eastern states went through if was that more of you're out there on your own, take care of yourself business?

Ruth McGregor:
It was very much a western business. Looking at the direct democracy, South Dakota was the first state, then to adopt them. Oklahoma and Oklahoma and Washington. The western states with were the ones that initially had an opportunity for people to speak directly as to what the law should be, rather than only through their elected representatives.
Ted Simons:
You mentioned recall of judges being a major factor here.

Ruth McGregor:
Right.

Ted Simons:
In order to get the thing signed, apparently the constitution went one way and as soon as we became a state, we went the other way.

Ruth McGregor:
The story of Arizona, they knew during the constitution convention that president Taft was very opposed to allowing the recall of judges. And there's a lot of debate during the constitutional convention and people say -- one -- one delegate went through this whole long thing, of course, I have a rabbit to make a rabbit pie, let's not worried if I have the onions and potatoes. Using that to leave out the recall of judges knowing that president Taft would not approve. And they put it in. And President Taft did not approve it. He sent it back. They adopted another constitution, removing the recall of judges. President Taft approved it and Arizona became a state on February 14th, 1912 and the next election, the voters put back in the constitution, the provision allowing recall of judges.

Ted Simons:
Even back then we were Arizonans.

Ruth McGregor:
We were.
Ted Simons:
How has the constitution since then -- and I guess starting with the first movement -- over time, how has it changed and evolved with Arizona?

Ruth McGregor:
Well, the basic constitution remains very much in effect. Arizona has as you know, amended the constitution many times and we've had, I think 120 ballot propositions that were either initiative or referendum where the voters directly decided what the law would be. But the basic structure of our constitution really has not changed.

Ted Simons:
And we're looking at it now, and it looks like it's just a piece of type-written paper. Not the grand document you see under glass, is it?

Ruth McGregor:
There were no caligraphers apparently. But it's as valid.

Ted Simons:
When you look at our history and you want people to become more aware of where we were and where we're going, what do you want them to take from this? It's been 100 years, this is what it was. What do you want people to learn, know?

Ruth McGregor:
One of the things that's been important is a that Arizona has used the direct democracy provisions often.

Ruth McGregor:
Our voters have done things where they felt the legislature was not acting as they would want. Within my own area, it was through citizen initiative that we adopted, merit selection of judges, went away from election of judges. The voters spoke in other areas. Medical marijuana, first things first. Some of the things that Arizona's best known for actually came through the popular -- the direct democracy provisions. We've been fairly quick to amend our constitution. It's easier to amend than the federal constitution is. But the voters I think have shown a real interest in the basic constitution. It's very protective of the rights of Arizonans and attempts to cut back on the protections have always met with failure at the ballot box. The voters -- the general notion seems to be much like it was back in 1912.

Ted Simons:
Isn't that something?

Ruth McGregor:
Yeah.

Ted Simons:
Justice, thank you so much for joining us.

Ruth McGregor:
Glad to be here.

Arizona's Philanthropy

  |   Video
  • A new ASU report details how philanthropic Arizona residents are. Carlton Yoshioka, of the ASU Lodestar Center, discusses the report.
Guests:
  • Carlton Yoshioka - ASU Lodestar Center
Category: Business/Economy

View Transcript

Ted Simons:
This is the season of giving and a new report shows how philanthropic Arizona residents are. Nearly 700 households were surveyed for the Arizona 2010 giving and volunteering report. Released by ASU’s Lodestar philanthropy and nonprofit innovation. Here to talk about the report is a professor at ASU's school of resources, Carlton Yoshioka, part of the college of public programs.

Carlton Yoshioka:
Thanks for inviting me.

Ted Simons:
Why was household philanthropy looked at?

Carlton Yoshioka:
We do -- to give use inspired -- we did a giving and volunteering and this information, we think is effective if decision makers, non-profit professionals can use it to make good decisions and the giving, volunteering is usually a national perspective, but Indiana, a couple other states have done their own state to make sure the data is more specific to Arizona and we decided that this is our third attempt at looking at what happens in terms of giving and volunteering. We look at generosity, that's probably a better term, in terms of our -- our residents of Arizona.

Ted Simons:
Indeed. What was looked at specifically and what was found?

Carlton Yoshioka:
We looked at overall giving and asked many questions related to formal giving which is a perspective that is easier to measure but I'll say later it leaves out the informal giving, that some of the population probably would enhance their overall giving percentages. So we asked questions right after tax time, so to speak, to say what is your giving to charitable organization, formal giving and not so much individual giving related to personal and friends. And we found that generally Arizonans give a little bit less than national average and that might be due to the recession and other factors that are more recent. When we compare back to other studies, unfortunately, this particular study is more of a different methodology, done with a panel study and the previous two studies were done with ran deposit digit dialing or telephone surveys, that's more representative. So this one did have a different result in giving and volunteering so we can't exactly say what made the difference. But probably the recession.

Ted Simons:
Was it fewer people giving and volunteering or more people giving and volunteering but doing it less.

Carlton Yoshioka:
Good point. That's the point of probably more giving but giving smaller amounts. In that sense, it does reflect -- it could reflect the methodology, but we think it reflects the recession and it's impacting.

Ted Simons:
How were non-monetary giving quantified.

Carlton Yoshioka:
We asked them, money, values, but also in terms of goods and services that they donated, other means of giving that adds up in terms of value, and the easiest is money, and we would look at and have them quantify the value. Maybe donated a piece of property or something to a organization, that helps them out.

Ted Simons:
The report also focused on Hispanic population. Why was that done?


Carlton Yoshioka:
We knew in most studies whether we do them or nationally, when you just do a random sampling, you still under-represent the Hispanic population. We get 20% or less. And we know the Arizona Hispanic population is closer to 30%. So we over-sampled and, of course, found out informal giving, Hispanics give less than dominant white population. Because that's not surprising, it's found across the country. But again, I would say it's probably less because of the informal giving was not addressed, not asked. And we just know that Hispanics, extended families and helping friends and neighbors is considerable and we missed that part, we believe.

Ted Simons:
You mentioned previous reports in '03 and '08?

Carlton Yoshioka:
Yes.

Ted Simons:
What was done with those reports and what do you plan now to do with this report? What do you want people to take from all of this?

Carlton Yoshioka:
It's a baseline, all three, and hopefully, the last one, we'll do another, hopefully, indicators panel methodology with the Morrison institute so we can compare it with this particular study and get a better judge of what is happening based on recession, and other factors, but we think that Arizonans stack up nicely in terms of -- we get bad publicity from other situations in our state, but looking at Arizonans in particular, they do a nice job of generosity, helping others in the community. Throughout the state. So that's what we say. And that's a good message.

Ted Simons:
Yes. What surprised you most out of all of this?

Carlton Yoshioka:
I think the volunteering data. It was higher than the national average and then, again, we looked at just formal volunteering and I think the surprising part about it, and we've done additional research and looking, if you give, you tend to volunteer, so there's a connection between the two and that's part of this generosity, it's hard to separate those two and we do, because it's two different sets of the survey, but it does suggest there's a lot of -- a lot of commonality out there and also a lot of complexity that we still haven't got -- the challenges we do quantitative research and the next steps as you're asking would be slowing down and doing more qualitative measures, asking particular families what they do and so we can get at that richness. Right now we ask people give us figures and numbers. Some people don't answer the phone and the data is probably adequate for now, but looking at doing something different if the future.

Ted Simons:
Quickly, if there's a headline from this study, what would it be?

Carlton Yoshioka:
Arizonans still generous, still helping each other.

Ted Simons:
Very good. Thanks for joining us, good stuff. Thank you.

Prop 112 Recount: Arizona Signature Filing

  |   Video
  • Arizona’s Proposition 112 lost by only 128 votes. That narrow margin triggered an automatic recount that’s happening now. Secretary of State Ken Bennett talks about the process and what happens if the recount changes the outcome of the election.
Guests:
  • Ken Bennett - Arizona Secretary of State
Category: Vote 2010

View Transcript
Ted Simons:
Tonight on "Horizon," the election was more than a month ago, but the votes are still being counted for one proposition. Arizona's constitution was on display today 100 years after it was signed. And that's coming up next on "Horizon."
"Horizon" is made possible by contributions from the Friends of Eight, members of your Arizona PBS station. Thank you.
Good evening, welcome to "Horizon," I'm Ted Simons. November's election is not over yet, votes are still being counted for Proposition 112. That's the measure that would change the deadline for filing initiative petitions. It lost by only 128 votes. Triggering an automatic recount. Here to talk about the process is Arizona secretary of state, Ken Bennett. Good to see you again.
Ken Bennett:
Good to be here.

Ted Simons:
So what triggers the recount process?

Ken Bennett:
There's a state statute that says if the outcome is within 1/10 of 1% or 200, whichever is less and 1/10 of 1% would be in the 16,000-vote range, because of the 200 or less, we seldom if ever trigger a statewide recount on any race, but in this case we did because the 128 was less than the 200 threshold and so we're recounting.

Ted Simons:
How unusual is 128 votes?

Ken Bennett:
Well, this is the first proposition in the history of the state that triggered a recount. The only other statewide recount we can find was a recount of the 1916 governor's race between Hunt and Campbell, I think it was. But it doesn't happen very often. But here we have one this time.

Ted Simons:
Describe the recount process. What's going on here?

Ken Bennett:
Basically, there were about one and three quarter million Arizona votes. The one and three quarter million, there were about 1.6 million votes cast in favor or against Proposition 112. All of those ballots processed on election day went into boxes and were stored and normally that would go into big warehouses but as soon as we realized we were less than 200, we notifies the counties to keep those available and all of those had to be gotten out and run through the same machines, or similar machines they were run through on election day. They didn't have to do in individual precinct locations, usually collected at a central counting point in each county and run through machines to recount them in a similar way they were counted on Election Day.

Ted Simons:
You're basically talking in effect the same process that happened after the November 2nd vote.

Ken Bennett:
Absolutely. Except the machines can are be kind of programmed or adjusted in program so they're not counting every race and every ballot proposition again. You just kind of tell them, count this one again.

Ken Bennett:
Right, count Prop 112 again.

Ted Simons:
Same number of folks involved?

Ken Bennett:
Just about. Similar number. You don't have the people in each precinct polling locations but you have probably the same number of people in a central counting location where those 1.6 million have to be run back through the machines. I helped for four or five hours myself. It was bizarre and fascinating to watch that -- I mean, there were pallets and pallets here in Maricopa County and literally hand-feeding each one back through the machines.

Ted Simons:
After the recount process, by the way, what are you looking for? A time frame?

Ken Bennett:
We'll be done in -- the -- a judge had to order the recount, it should be done by the 20th of December. 11 of the counties have already finished their recount. Seven have reported their new result to us. We won't go back to the judge until all 15 counties have reported their results but when that's done in probably another week or so, we'll go back and show the results, they're turning out very, very close. Extremely close to the original results. But any time you would count one and three quarter million of everything, it's not going to be exactly, but it's looking pretty good.

Ted Simons:
Not only not exactly, let's say that after all is said and done and all is retabulated, the other side wins. What happens?

Ken Bennett:
That's a dilemma we've talked about behind closed doors, but I think this second recount is going to be more precise than the first one. Because we're going to great lengths and the county fishes are going to great lengths to make sure we've got the boxes and feeding them in right and on and on and on so, we hope the outcome doesn't change, but that possibility exists. State law basic provides whatever happens in the recount stands as the final result.

Ted Simons:
Ok.

Ken Bennett:
But it does make you wonder, you know, in my business, I used to add up checks for a deposit and things, if I had a stack and added them up once, I would never assume that one was right. I'd add them a second time and obviously, if they balance, good, that's the number you take to the bank, but if you added it up once and it was different the second time, you wouldn't presume this one was right, and this one. You add it up a third. We're not going to have that luxury.

Ted Simons:
No.

Ken Bennett:
We're going to great lengths to make sure we're precise in this recount and the recount numbs will stand.

Ted Simons:
What kind of cost?

Ken Bennett:
$150,000 to $200,000.

Ted Simons:
Can it be done more cheaply?

Ken Bennett:
No, we're doing it very cheaply and -- but that's about what it takes just to pay continues of people, instead of thousands on election day. Hundreds in the 15 counties it spend anywhere from probably some counties two or three days, others, nine or ten.

Ted Simons:
About as streamlined as you can get?

Ken Bennett:
We think.

Ted Simons:
What about the process itself. Are there areas of improvement in the recount process you can see?

Ken Bennett:
Well, because it's never a -- been done not state, we're having some fascinating discussions as election officials going through a process that not many of our colleagues have had the opportunity to go through. And so even as we've been doing it, we think we've found way to make sure and we've had regular calls with all the counties on a conference line, how are you doing over here? So a fascinating process and we have good election officials in our counties and trying to make sure that everything is going smoothly.
Ted Simons:
If we do get a different decision, when all is said and done –

Ken Bennett:
I'll be back.

Ted Simons:
We'll wlecome you back. Thanks, Ken.

Ken Bennett:
Thank you very much.

Content Partner: