The Arizona Legislature
48th LEGISLATURE
(2007–2008) Arizona Senate
President: Timothy S. Bee (R)
D
R
What the Legislature does—The Arizona Legislature’s primary responsibilities are
making state laws and controlling state spending. It accomplishes the latter by authorizing
all appropriations and approving the state budget. The Legislature also performs government
oversight functions: It conducts investigations, and has the power to expel its own members,
impeach officials in other branches, and review state agency performance through sunset
legislation. Other legislative functions include proposing state constitutional measures, approving gubernatorial appointments (senate only), and on rare occasions approving U.S.
Constitutional amendments.
Basic structure—The Arizona Legislature consists of a 30-member Senate and a 60-mem-
Republicans:
17 (57%)
Democrats:
13 (43%)
Standing
committees:
13
Female legislators:
12 (40%)
Incumbents:
21 (70%)
Arizona House of
Representatives
Speaker: James P. Weiers (R)
D
ber House of Representatives. All 90 legislators have two-year terms and are elected concurrently in November of even-numbered years. Term limits restrict legislators to four consecutive terms in the same office. (It is not uncommon for legislators to switch to the other
chamber when they reach their eight-year maximum.) Legislators are elected from 30 districts, with voters in each district selecting one senator and two representatives. The districts
are now redrawn by a citizen commission every decade after the federal census. Gerrymandering—the drawing of district boundaries to give an advantage to a party or group—has
plagued Arizona since statehood. Following the 2000 census, only four of the 30 districts
were competitive; the remaining districts all contained an overwhelming number of persons
of the same party. This district map allowed Republicans to gain more than their fair share
of seats in the legislature, although from 1912 to 1966, the Democrats were the major beneficiaries of gerrymandering. Gerrymandering reduces political competition overall so that
Arizona legislative candidates often run unopposed or face reduced or nominal opposition.
Legislative sessions—The Arizona Legislature meets for only one regular session each
R
Republicans:
33 (55%)
Democrats:
27 (45%)
Standing
committees:
18
Female legislators:
18 (30%)
Incumbents:
42 (70%)
LAST SESSION STATISTICS
(47th, 2nd Regular 2006)
Session length:
165 days
Bills introduced:
1,453
Bills passed:
438
Bills vetoed:
43
Line item veto:
1
Vetoes
overriden:
1
year, beginning in January and typically lasting roughly 100 days. (The 2006 session ran an
unusual 165 days.) An unlimited number of special sessions can be called by the governor
or (more rarely) initiated by the legislature itself. If the session is called by the governor the
legislature can only address the specific matters identified in the governor’s call. In recent
years, the legislature has met for an average of three special sessions each year. Such sessions can last only a few hours or up to several months. It is customary for the governor to
call a special session during a regular session when the state’s general appropriations bill is
ready for consideration. This compels the legislature to drop all other business and focus exclusively on the budget. Even when the legislature is not in formal session, legislators often
work on upcoming legislation, participate in meetings, and respond to constituent needs.
A “citizen legislature”—The formal qualifications for serving in the legislature are fairly
low: A legislator must only be at least 25 years old, an Arizona resident for three years, a
county resident for one year, a registered voter, and English proficient. Because legislative
service is only part-time and compensation is low (see below), most legislators have privatesector jobs on the side. This type of legislature is called a “citizen legislature” to distinguish
it from legislatures like the U.S. Congress, which are made up of full-time, professional
politicians. Citizen legislatures are fairly common on the state level. The typical Arizona
legislator is a small business owner or employed in a business-related field such as real estate, insurance, or banking. That is, the citizen legislator needs to have an occupation with
hours flexible enough to accommodate the demands of legislative service.
Legislative compensation—Legislative pay in Arizona has always been low to preserve
the citizen legislature concept. In the beginning, the state constitution capped the compensation at $420. Now, a citizen salary commission reviews salaries every two years and sends
its recommendation to the voters as a ballot proposition. Since the system was instituted in
1972, the voters have rejected the Commission’s recommendation 16 out of 18 times. The
Legislature currently receives an annual salary of $24,000 (approved in 1998). Frustrated
with the low compensation, the Legislature has voted itself a controversial supplement in the
form of a “per diem.” Legislators engaged in official business receive an extra $35 per day
(Maricopa County legislators) or $60 per day (legislators outside of Maricopa County).
Internal legislative organization—Leaders, parties, and standing committees play an
important role in the day-to-day operation of the legislature. Each chamber chooses its leader by majority vote. (This is just a formality; in actual practice, the leaders are chosen by the
majority party in a party caucus that precedes the opening session.) The Senate elects a President and the House elects a Speaker. The leaders preside over meetings of their respective
chambers. They appoint other members to committees, choose the committees’ chairpersons, and remove members or chairs who are disloyal to the party’s agenda. The leaders also
have significant powers over the passage of bills (discussed below) and they have various
administrative powers (e.g., they hire staff, control the facilities, and approve per diem and
other disbursements to members). Most legislative work is done in semi-permanent standing
committees that are devoted to certain areas (e.g., education, health, transportation, appropriations). This allows legislators to develop expertise and handle legislative business more
expeditiously. Members typically serve on two or more committees. Since the committees
work on the principle of majority rule, the leaders carefully appoint members to committees
to ensure that their party (i.e., the majority party) has a majority on every standing committee. This insures that the majority party can control all committee outcomes.
How the lawmaking process works—Only a legislator can sponsor a bill although the
impetus for most bills comes from other government officials, lobbyists for special interests,
and citizens. The Legislature typically considers more than 1,000 bills during each regular
session. Roughly two-thirds fail to make it through the process. Bills can begin in either
chamber. The speaker/president assigns the bill to select standing committees in a process
that can be manipulated to kill bills. The chair of the standing committee can also kill the
bill by simply failing to schedule it for a public hearing. If a hearing occurs, committee
members hear testimony on the bill and propose amendments. Only if a majority votes the
bill out of committee does it proceed to its next committee for study. All bills ultimately go
to the rules committee which determines whether the proposed law is in proper form and
constitutional. Bills that successfully make it through the committee process (most don’t!)
are debated in the Committee of the Whole (“COW”) where the bill’s language is finalized.
If approved by COW the bill is scheduled for an official vote of the chamber (see sidebar for
vote requirements). Bills that pass the first chamber go to the other for committee study in a
similar but shortened process. Only if both houses pass the bill in identical form does it proceed to the governor. (If the second chamber passes the bill in a different form a conference
committee, consisting of members of both chambers, may be created to craft a compromise.
The compromise must be approved by each chamber before it can proceed to the governor.)
If the governor vetoes the bill the Legislature can override the veto by a super majority (see
sidebar) vote. Bills with emergency clauses, bills that appropriate money to keep government running, and new tax measures take effect immediately. All others sit for 90 days after
the session ends to allow citizens to block the measure through the referendum process. If
no referendum is perfected, the bills take effect.
Prepared by Toni McClory
toni.mcclory@gcmail.maricopa.edu
Last updated: 12-10-06
IMPEACHMENT PRIMER
Who can be impeached: Any
state official other than a legislator. (Legislators are subject to
expulsion by a 2/3 vote of their
own chamber.)
Grounds for impeachment:
High crimes, misdemeanors, and
malfeasance in office.
Procedure:
1. House votes to impeach
(simple majority vote).
2. Senate conducts trial and
votes to convict (2/3 vote).
Penalty: Removal from office.
Under the Constitution’s “Dracula
Clause” an official can also be
barred from holding a public office
in the state again.
Who inherits the office: The
governor typically appoints a
replacement. If the governor is
being impeached, the qualified
constitutional successor (usually
the secretary of state) inherits the
office.
VOTES NEEDED TO PASS BILLS
Ordinary bills
simple
majority
Appropriation
bills
simple
majority
Tax bills
2/3
Emergency bills
2/3
Veto overrides
2/3 or 3/4
depending
upon the
initial vote
required to
pass
Constitutional
referenda
simple
majority
Statutory
referenda
simple
majority
Changes to
voter-approved
measures
3/4
ARIZONA LEGISLATURE:
www.azleg.state.az.us
Arizona’s Executive Branch
ARIZONA’S CURRENT
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Governor:
Janet Napolitano (D)
Secretary of State:
Jan Brewer (R)
Attorney General:
Terry Goddard (D)
Treasurer:
Dean Martin (R)
Superintendent. of Public
Instruction:
Tom Horne (R)
State Mine Inspector:
Joe Hart (R)
Corporation Commission:
Gary Pierce (R)
Kristin Mayes (R)
Jeff Hatch-Miller (R)*
William Mundell (R)*
Mike Gleason (R)*
* seat up for election in 2008
A plural executive branch—Like most state governments Arizona has a “plural” execu-
tive branch. Arizona elects eleven executive branch officials and has dozens of state agencies headed by independent multi-member boards. Under this arrangement no single official
is in charge. This contrasts with the national government which has a single elective head
(the president) and appointed subordinates. The elected members of the Arizona executive
branch (in succession order) are: the governor, secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer,
and superintendent of public instruction. In addition to the “big five,” Arizona elects a state
mine inspector and a five-person corporation commission. Notably, Arizona has no lieutenant governor. Except for the corporation commissioners (who have staggered terms), the
remaining officials are elected to four-year terms in off-presidential even-numbered years
(e.g., 2006, 2010, 2014). This means that Arizona’s top officials are typically elected in low
turnout elections. In the 2002 election, for example, only 30% of the voting age population
voted. Term limits now restrict executive branch officials (other than mine inspector) to two
consecutive terms. .
The pros and cons of a plural executive branch—The drafters of Ari-zona’s consti-
tution believed that having multiple elected officials would reduce corruption. (Territorial
officials had been notorious for abusing power.) With a plural executive branch no single
person has all the power, and multiple elected officials serve as watchdogs over each other.
In addition, the voters have control over who heads sensitive departments such as utility
regulation, mine safety, and the management of schools. To some degree this plural design
has worked. In the past twenty years Arizona has weathered two major gubernatorial crises.
Governor Evan Mecham was removed through the impeachment process in 1988 and Governor Fife Symington resigned following a criminal conviction in 1997. Having an independently-elected attorney general benefited the state in both instances. However, critics argue
that a plural executive deprives the state of strong leadership. Friction and conflict can result
when voters elect officials from different parties. Even officials from the same party do not
always work well together—they may be political rivals or simply have different views. A
plural branch also tends to reduce accountability because officials can blame each other for
inaction or failures. Finally, the voters do not always elect officials with expertise (e.g., treasurers with financial backgrounds; school chiefs with educational experience.)
The governor: first among equals—Arizonans expect their governor to be a forceful
George W. P. Hunt was Arizona’s
first governor. He was re-elected
to office a record seven times.
leader who can take charge of the bureaucracy and effectively manage the state’s needs.
Although the state constitution gives the governor varied powers, nearly all are limited in
significant ways. For example, the ability to hire and remove department heads is one way
that chief executives control the bureaucracy. However, in Arizona some major departments
are off limits because they are controlled by other elected officials (e.g., the department of
education). And the governor cannot fire board members who head many important state
agencies (e.g., the parole board and most occupational regulatory agencies). Similarly, the
governor lacks the power to hire or fire most of the state’s workers who are civil servants.
The governor plays a major role in the state’s budget process, but the legislature has the final
say. The governor is the commander-in-chief of the state’s militia (National Guard), but the
president can nationalize the Guard at any time. The governor can dictate the legislature’s
agenda by calling it into a special session, but the legislature is not obligated to enact the legislation sought by the governor and can immediately adjourn. The governor has a veto power
over legislation, including the more powerful line-item veto with respect to appropriation
bills. However, the legislature can override the governor’s veto with a supermajority vote
(although this is rarely done). The legislature can also bypass an anticipated veto by sending the measure to the people through the referendum process. (The governor has no veto
over any citizen-initiated measures.) The governor has the power to appoint all appellate
judges and most superior court judges. However, this is not comparable to the president’s
power to appoint federal judges: Arizona’s governor is forced to appoint from a short list of
candidates, state court judges do not serve for life, and state court judges must win periodic
retention elections to remain in office. Finally, the governor’s clemency powers are also
limited. Although the governor can grant reprieves (postponements in the carrying out of
criminal sentences), commutations (reductions in sentences) and pardons (full forgiveness)
the governor cannot act unless a state board approves clemency first. Additionally, the governor has no power over paroles (early release from prison) which are exclusively controlled
by a state board.
Historically, many Arizona governors have been overshadowed by powerful legislative
leaders or attorney generals. However, Governor Bruce Babbitt (1978–86) demonstrated
that strong political skills, an aggressive use of the veto power, and some luck, can make the
governor the dominant person in state government even when the legislature is controlled by
the opposing party. The advent of legislative term limits has also helped shift the balance of
power from the legislature to the governor. Finally, governors can draw upon various informal powers. For example, the governor is the ceremonial “head of state” and usually attracts
the most media coverage. The governor is usually the leader of his/her party. These informal
powers can be used to build political support for the governor’s agenda.
Other executive branch officials—The secretary of state is the chief elections official
and maintains the state’s records and laws. This official is next-in-line of succession if something happens to the governor. (Since 1977, three secretary of states have inherited the top
office through this means.) Wielding more real power is the attorney general, who serves as
the state’s top legal advisor. Because the line between legal and policy advice is not clearcut, attorney generals can significantly influence the operation of state government. The
attorney general represents the state in most non-criminal litigation and plays an important,
but not exclusive, role in criminal law enforcement. (In Arizona most crimes are initially
prosecuted by county attorneys, but the attorney general has supervisory powers and handles
criminal appeals.) The treasurer is the top financial officer and collects, safeguards, and
invests, and invests the state’s funds. The superintendent of public instruction manages the
department of education which oversees the state’s K–12 schools and certifies its teachers. However, the superintendent’s authority is undercut by other officials and bodies that
participate in school governance (e.g., the state board of education, locally elected school
boards, school superintendents, and county superintendents). Arizona elects a state mine
inspector because the constitution’s drafters feared that governors would appoint industryfriendly officials. The same rationale—mistrust of corporate influence—caused the framers
to create an elected Corporation Commission. This body, (which recently expanded from
three members to five), regulates public service corporations—the utility companies that
provide gas, electricity, water, telephone and similar services. Because most of these businesses are monopolies, the commission determines the maximum rates they can charge and
monitors the service that they provide. The corporation commission also licenses private
corporations and securities issued in Arizona.
Governor Janet Napolitano (D)
2003-present
Largest State Agencies:
Corrections (DOC)
Economic Security (DES)
Transportation (DOT)
Health Services (DHS)
AHCCCS
Juvenile Corrections
Revenue
Administration (DOA)
Attorney General
Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Major State Boards and
Commissions:
Accountancy
Barbers
Chiropractic Examiners
Cosmetology
Dental Examiners
Education
Executive Clemency
Funeral Directors and Embalmers
Industrial Commission
Medical Examiners
Nursing
Opticians
Parks
Pharmacy
School Facilities
Regents (universities)
Veterinary Medical Examiners
Governor’s homepage:
www.azgovernor.gov/
State of Arizona homepage:
http://az.gov/webapp/portal/
Prepared by Toni McClory
toni.mcclory@gcmail.maricopa.edu
Last updated: 12-22-06
Arizona Judiciary
ARIZONA’S APPELLATE
COURTS
Judicial Power: What Judges Do—The familiar role of judges as trial referees is only
part of the story. Most people don’t realize that judges also make law and shape public
policy. Appellate court judges do this when they interpret existing laws and constitutional
provisions. Their interpretations become as binding as the original text. Arizona courts have
shaped public policy in many important ways. In 1994 they declared the state’s method of
funding public school improvements to be unconstitutional and ordered a more equitable
system. In 1998 they struck down the citizen’s (first) Official English initiative, declaring
that it violated free speech rights. When judges strike down laws on constitutional grounds
they exercise a power known as judicial review.
The Arizona Court System: an overview—Arizona’s state courts fall into two main
Arizona Supreme Court
5 justices, 6-yr. terms
Handles appeals from lower courts;
special actions against state officials;
suits between counties.
Arizona Court of Appeals
22 judges, 6-yr. terms
[Div.1 (Phx) = 16 judges;
Div. 2 (Tuc) = 6 judges]
Handles appeals from superior
courts, the tax court, the Industrial
Commission, and unemployment
compensation cases.
MAJOR TRIAL COURTS
Superior Court
168 judges, 4-yr. terms
[Maricopa= 93 judges]
Handles serious criminal and civil
cases (e.g., all felonies, private claims
over $5,000, divorces, probate)
and appeals from JP and municipal
courts.
LIMITED JURISDICTION
COURTS
Justice courts (JP)
85 judges, 4-yr. terms
[Maricopa=23 precincts.]
Mostly handles traffic cases, minor
criminal cases (misdemeanors and
petty offenses), private claims under
$10,000; small claims division (cases
under $2500); and conducts preliminary hearings in felony cases.
Municipal (city) courts
129 judges, 4-yr. terms
Mostly handles traffic cases, minor
criminal cases (misdemeanors and
petty offenses occurring within city
limits) and violations of city ordinances.
categories: general jurisdiction and limited jurisdiction courts. The former handle more serious cases covering a wider range. Limited jurisdiction courts mostly deal with traffic cases.
Another way to classify courts is to distinguish between trial and appellate courts. Cases
start out in trial courts. Typically, a single judge presides, witnesses give testimony, and
physical evidence is presented. Either a jury or the judge decides the outcome. Appellate
courts receive the case after trial is over. Their job is to determine whether the lower court
proceedings were fair and proper. They do not hold trials or consider new evidence. Instead,
a panel of judges listens to short arguments presented by the lawyers for each side. The
court also reviews written briefs filed by the parties. After privately conferring, the appellate judges vote, with majority rule determining the outcome. The appellate court issues a
formal written opinion setting forth the judges’ reasoning. These opinions are published and
become part of the common law (judge-made law) of the state.
Arizona’s Appellate Courts—Arizona has two appellate courts: the Arizona Supreme
Court and the Arizona Court of Appeals. Most litigants have an automatic right to an appeal
in the Court of Appeals. (When a criminal defendant is acquitted double jeopardy bars an
appeal by the government.) Only death penalty cases have an automatic right to an appeal
before the Supreme Court. The state’s highest court has discretionary jurisdiction and accepts only a small number of appeals each year. Appellate court justices serve for six-year
terms and are chosen and retained by Merit Selection (see below).
Superior Court—The superior court is the state’s major trial court. Each county has a su-
perior court with multiple judges assigned to it. This court handles the most serious criminal
and civil cases. All felonies are tried in superior court along with civil cases where more
than $5,000 is at stake. Superior court also handles important family cases like dissolution
of marriage and adoption, as well as probate (wills), and disputes over real property. Superior Court judges have four-year terms. Those in Pima and Maricopa County are chosen
through Merit Selection. Superior Court judges in other counties are elected in non-partisan,
contested elections.
Limited Jurisdiction Courts—There a two limited jurisdiction courts: Justice (or “JP”)
courts and municipal (city) courts. Together they handle the greatest volume of cases. City
courts mostly deal with traffic cases, misdemeanors, and violations of city ordinances and
codes. Most judges in these courts are appointed by city governments. Justice courts are organized by precincts within counties. Justice courts have similar criminal jurisdiction as city
courts, but also handle private lawsuits where the amount in controversy is under $10,000.
If less than $2500 is at stake the case can go to the small claims division of Justice court,
where no lawyers are allowed. Litigating in small claims division is speedier and less costly.
Justice courts also handle the preliminary hearings that proceed felony trials in superior
court. Justices of the Peace are elected in contested elections and serve four-year terms.
A persistent controversy surrounds the qualifications for JPs: Unlike like other courts, the
judges do not have to be lawyers. Essentially, they need only be registered voters over the
age of eighteen.
Merit Selection—All Arizona general jurisdiction judges were originally elected in con-
tested elections. In 1974 the system was revamped as a result of mounting criticism of
judicial elections. Some reformers believed that ordinary citizens were not competent to
choose the most qualified judges. Others were disturbed by the mounting costs of judicial
campaigns. This meant that judges either had to be wealthy or successful fundraisers. Fundraising raised additional concerns because major contributors were typically big businesses
and other special interests frequently involved in litigation. This put judicial integrity in
issue, along with mudslinging campaigns that reduced respect for the entire judiciary. Accordingly, Arizona adopted Merit Selection (which in other parts of the country is known as
the “Missouri Plan”). Merit Selection works as follows: Whenever there is judicial vacancy
candidates apply to a judicial appointments commission. The commission screens applicants
and sends at least three names to the governor. The state constitution prohibits all nominees
from being from the same party and requires the commission to consider diversity as well as
merit. The governor then appoints the judge from this short list. If the judge wants to remain
on the bench, he/she must survive a retention election at the end of every term. In a retention
election the judge’s name appears on the ballot and the voters are simply asked to vote “yes”
or “no” as to whether the judge should be retained. If a majority vote no, a vacancy is created
and the process begins anew with another appointment by the governor. Supporters of merit
selection contend that it has increased the overall quality of judges, allowed younger, less affluent persons to serve, and has promoted judicial independence. Critics contend that Merit
Selection has simply transferred the open politics of the electoral process to the manipulations of a narrower, less visible group of insiders who lobby the appointments commission.
Retention elections—which require voters in Maricopa County to be knowledgeable about
the performance of more than forty judges—are also problematic. Merit Selection currently
applies to all appellate judges and to superior court judges in Maricopa and Pima counties.
Jury Power in Arizona—The drafters of Arizona’s constitution did not trust government
officials, including judges. Accordingly, they put several provisions in the constitution to
ensure that jurors would always have the final say in tort cases (private injury lawsuits).
For example, the Constitution prohibits the Legislature from passing any law that limits the
amount of money that can be recovered in injury cases. It also recites that the jurors must
decide whether defenses such as assumption of risk or contributory negligence should bar a
person from recovering money. (In other states they are grounds for dismissal of the case.)
These provisions have become controversial in modern times as some have argued for tort
reform and restrictions on high jury verdicts. The voters have been asked to repeal these
provisions on multiple occasions. To date, they have refused, reposing their trust in the common sense of the jury.
COURT FILINGS BY COURT
(2005)
AZ Supreme
Court
1,164
AZ Court of
Appeals
3,871
Tax Court
1,019
Superior Court
205,516
JP Courts
856,153
Municipal courts
1,469,243
TOTAL
2,536,966
JURY TRIALS IN ARIZONA
The Arizona Constitution gurantees the right to trial by jury, but
the number of jurors required and
the degree of agreement needed
to reach a verdict varies:
#
Agreement
needed
Superior Court
(felonies
punishable by
death or 30+
yrs)
12
unanimous
Superior Court
(other felonies)
8
unanimous
Superior Court
(civil cases)
8
6
JP & municipal
courts (criminal)
6
unanimous
JP (civil)
6
5
Prepared by Toni McClory
toni.mcclory@gcmail.maricopa.edu
Last updated: 12-22-06