2012 Ballot Propositions

Ballot Propositions can be confusing.  Does it say this?  Or that?  Does "yes" really mean "no?"

Here is where you get the info about the propositions that can help you understand these Propositions.

Members: 3
Latest Activity: Oct 12, 2012


Ballot propositions are always confusing.  This year, there are quite a few propositions and the name of the Propositions can be confusing because the propositions actually do the opposite of what the name says.  Take the Top Two proposition:  the official name is Save Our Vote but what it does is destroy our vote because of the unintended consequences.  Go to that tab above for full info on that important proposition and be sure to vote NO and to make sure your sphere of influence understands what that proposition actually does.

There are other propositions that need your understanding.  Below we have attached a file put together by members of AFA with short explanations of the proposition together with THEIR.... not AFA's.... recommendation.  We recommend that you do your own homework to be sure you are casting your vote for the conservative choice on each measure. Remember, it is YOUR vote.  Vote smart.


You will find a slate of Conservative Candidates for various offices in Federal, State and Maricopa County offices provided to AFA by Legislative District 18 Republican Committee, presented here for your consideration.  AFA does not endorse these or any other candidates but does support solid Conservative candidates as being the best candidates to get our government at all levels back on track.


Also as part of that attachment is a synopsis of the 2012 ballot Propositions for your review.  Although recommendations are made on the attachment, AFA does not necessarily agree with those recommendations but ask that you thoroughly investigate the Propositions for yourself. 

What we do know by the polling that has been done is that Prop 121, the Top Two Propositon and Prop 204, the Permanent 1% State Sales Tax, are highly unpopular with voters across the political spectrum and are unlikely to pass.  These two are the most emotionally charged propositions on the ballot and both are likely to fail.  Good for Arizona citizens on both counts!

~~~~Also, here is the data put out by Center for Arizona Policy Voter Guide.


Proposition 114: 

The Crime Victims Protection Act of 2012 amends the Constitution so that crime victims and their families could not be sued by, and have to pay damages to, someone who was harmed while attempting to victimize them; e.g., a burglar who slips and breaks his leg in your home while attempting to steal your TV. This proposition will protect crime victims from being sued by felons.

Proposition 115:

For more information, see:


PRO: Prop 115 would reduce the influence of the State Bar in judge appointments, increase the pool of candidates for each appointment, and – most critically – require publishing judges' orders so voters can make informed decisions on retention.


CON: Prop 115 increases the power of the Governor and could make appointments even more political than they are. The term increase is meaningless, as our current system virtually ensures that judges are appointed for life.


Proposition 116:

The Small Business Job Creation Act would increase the tax exemption of business property purchased each year, starting in 2013, from $68,000 to $2.4 million. This tremendous expansion in tax exemptions will incentivize small businesses to expand, invest in new equipment, and hire more workers. This is expected to spur economic growth across the state. [Editor: The question here is if you want the government to be involved in small business or not.]


Proposition 117:

This complicated proposal makes it look like property taxes would be capped at no more than 5% per year for assessment purposes; however, its main proponent, the Arizona Tax Research Association (ATRA), acknowledges that this will NOT reduce property taxes. This will end up shifting taxes to residential property from commercial property, according to your County Treasurer and the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.


Proposition 118

This proposition will allow the state to spend 2.5% of the principal of the state trust fund every year for the next 8 years, then return to the old formula. The state land trust produces revenue for various public institutions including schools, colleges, and prisons. According to State Treasurer Doug Ducey, the new formula would provide more stable revenues to all beneficiaries of the fund.

Proposition 119

This Proposition amends the Arizona Constitution to allow state trust land exchanges that would provide a buffer for military installations. Would also allow exchanges to convert the land to public use or if the swap would improve land management, to help sell or lease trust lands. The Arizona Supreme Court determined in 1990 that until the Constitution is amended, the state can no longer engage in land


Proposition 120

This is NOT a "secession" or "nullification" initiative as opponents pretend. It is a re-establishment of land rights. The U.S. government controls 42% of Arizona's land. The State Sovereignty Proposition amends the Arizona Constitution to declare that the state has complete control over its land, air, water, wildlife and natural resources. Tribal reservations and lands specifically ceded to the federal government within Arizona (e.g., national parks) are exempt.


Proposition 121

As demonstrated by outcomes in every state that has "Top Two Open Primaries," this initiative will do exactly the opposite of what its pushers promise. "Open primaries" depress voter turnout, make the playing field less level for all voters and candidates, and increase the influence of out-of-state money in elections. And the promise of abolishing taxpayer-funded partisan primaries? Taxpayers will still fund the elections.


Proposition 204

Remember the "temporary" sales tax that passed in a special election in 2010? This so-called "Quality Education and Jobs Act" just makes that tax permanent. Proposition 204 is not an education reform bill; it's a special interest lobbyist's dream come true, paid for out of your pocket. Even teachers don't like it! The initiative commits our state to spend a billion dollars a year on twelve different special interest areas (including health care and light rail!) with NO oversight, NO actual reform, and NO guaranteed dollars in the classroom. And because it amends the State Constitution, Proposition 204 makes it impossible for the legislature ever to reduce the tax or cut the billion-dollar boondoggle. Proposition 118 provides a better way to fund education and public safety without raiding your wallet. In contrast, Proposition 204 is just another job-killing tax hike – one of the most egregious ever, making retail business more expensive in the state with the second highest sales tax in America.




There is also information on how to judge the Judges on the attachment, but beware of that info as it seems to say that ALL judges did a great job since their last election.  We say, not even close! Many believe one should vote NO on all judges. We think there are a few worth keeping. Given the way the courts have ruled against the State Constitution in the past couple of years, it's clear many of these judges should not be on the bench. Remember, the pool for judge selection was put together by Gov. Napolitano!



The LD18 Committee has amended their original Proposition page so we are posting it here.  It's up to each of us to come to our own informed decision about these:


Discussion Forum

Prop 117: Here is what the experts say!

Started by Arizona Freedom Alliance. Last reply by Arizona Freedom Alliance Oct 12, 2012. 1 Reply

The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, an internationally recognized private institution, published a comprehensive study in 2008 of the problems associated with limiting property values. Their study…Continue

Tags: 117, Prop, Arizona

Prop 115: Transparency and Accountability

Started by Arizona Freedom Alliance Oct 9, 2012. 0 Replies

From Center for Arizona Policy:The courts have a profound impact on everything we stand for at Center for Arizona Policy. Many vital decisions on life, marriage and family, and religious liberty are…Continue

Tags: Vote-Yes, 115, Prop, Arizona

Comment Wall

Comment by jfreden on September 21, 2012 at 9:27pm!/NoProp204  EXCELLENT PICTURE BY LEG BUDGET OFFICE ON WHAT AZ. HAS SPENT FOR EDUCATION...Add to UR flyers.

Comment by Pat J on September 27, 2012 at 12:10pm

I have a headache with some of these propositions and the recommendations.  For instance, on prop 116, why would anyone vote Yes on that one?  Didn't we all just go nuts over having our government play favorites with big companies?  So why would we repeat that mistake with small companies?  Prop 115 sounds like out of the frying pan into the fire.  I'd vote NO in hopes of getting a more reasonable proposition in the next session.  This does not solve the real problem.

Comment by jfreden on September 27, 2012 at 12:52pm

In SE Arizona we're focused on Prop 204 - taxation w/o representation-spec interest groups retaining one cent sales tax and THEY decide how it is spent & THEY decide once appropriated it can NEVER be reduced.  Taxpayer through representative gov't (our legislature) has NO say - and there is zip in the prop. that guarantees any $$$ will go to the classroom.  Prop 121 needs no explanation - just NO - takes away your choice in the general election; and only 20%+ vote in the primary-so they will decide the candiates.  NOPE.

Comment by Arizona Freedom Alliance on September 27, 2012 at 1:25pm

Actually, we've heard of lots of conservatives who think Top Two is a great idea.  I guess they have visions of Conservatives finishing 1 & 2 in every race!  They need to be educated!  Also, Prop 117 is a hidden tax that no one will know about until it hits them.  So push Vote NO on that one, too!

Comment by jfreden on September 27, 2012 at 1:42pm

Will read 117 - so focused on the other two...and yes they are not using their heads on Prop 121 - getting sucked in.  Remind them that people like McCain support Prop 121 - and they R NOT conservative.  Big money, fame & fortune, 'incumbent protection act' are some of the comments I've heard.

Comment by Arizona Freedom Alliance on October 12, 2012 at 7:14pm

From Andrew Thomas:

"On Prop 115, I support it overall as a small step in the right direction.  It was a compromise measure that gives the governor 8 candidates to choose from in selecting new judges (instead of 3 as it is today), and it essentially removes the liberal State Bar from the commission that reviews the applications of potential judges.  This would make the judiciary a little bit more accountable to the people.  The measure is far from a perfect reform and is very modest at best (what we really need is to elect judges and impeach the bad ones).  But it is, on balance, an improvement over the current system in my judgment.  Prop 115 is supported by Gov. Brewer and Republican leaders; its opponents are almost all left-wing attorneys, judges and former bar presidents, which says a lot.  You're welcome to share this with others if you'd like.
I hope that's helpful.  Here's hoping for some big victories for the good guys come November! "


You need to be a member of 2012 Ballot Propositions to add comments!


Members (3)





NOTE:  Blog posts cannot be blasted to the membership.  Post in Opinions if you want your post to be blasted out.

Post on the correct tab that matches your topic.

Keep it brief and to the point.

Use the proper spelling and punctuation.

Please include the link to your source for the information you post.

Do not attack your fellow conservatives.

If you wouldn't say it to your mother, think twice before saying it here.

Follow these rules!


Suppose the earth and its inhabitants exist in order to identify just what causes mankind continually to suffer so many troublesome problems and afflictions.



© 2022   Created by Arizona Freedom Alliance.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service