ARIZONA ELECTIONS INFLUENCED BY NATIONAL GROUPS, OUTSIDE DONORS

Distant Donors a Big Factor in Ballot Props

Among the propositions on Arizona's ballot this year is a
constitutional amendment to give the Legislature exclusive authority
to enact laws regulating hunting and fishing. The oversight could
trump even voter initiatives.

Backing Proposition 109 is the Virginia-based National Rifle
Association, which has sent donations totaling nearly $190,000 to a
campaign to pass the hunting measure. Not to be outdone, the Humane
Society of the United States, based in Washington, D.C., has
contributed $250,000 to the campaign that opposes the measure.

Combined, the groups have kicked in nearly all of the large donations
in the pro and opposition campaigns. Large donations are those of at
least $10,000, and they must be reported to the state within 24 hours.

National groups and out-of-state donors are playing a major role this
year in trying to woo voters in the campaigns for or against four of
Arizona's 10 propositions on the Nov. 2 ballot, according to an
Arizona Republic analysis of state campaign-finance records. With
those propositions, anywhere from two-thirds to all of the large
donations come from advocacy groups based outside the state.

The heavy presence of national groups and outside donors trying to
influence state elections has become a regular, if little watched,
feature of the political landscape in Arizona and elsewhere in recent
decades.

In the case of the NRA, for instance, "they are a typical story of how
national groups sometimes look around the states and try to find a way
to make progress on their issue," said Mark Alexander, a law professor
and campaign-finance expert at Seton Hall University. "You get a
toehold in one place and try and build on that."

Political experts say the trend is growing, with both individuals and
companies increasingly doling out money to try to shift public policy.
Businesses, which have been able to contribute toward Arizona ballot
measures for decades, also now can donate directly to candidates in
the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's January ruling in Citizens United
vs. Federal Election Commission.

It is difficult to quantify the trend of out-of-state giving to ballot
measures because of differences in states' campaign-finance reports
and factors that affect donor interest, such as midterm vs.
presidential election years. It's also hard to determine if outside
money succeeds often in swinging an election.

Regardless, in Arizona this year, outsiders are anteing up large sums
on selected issues:

. Nearly all the major donations to efforts tied to Proposition 113,
which would tighten rules on union organizing in Arizona, have come
from a Nevada-based organization, Save Our Secret Ballot, according to
records with the secretary of state. S.O.S. Ballot, a type of
non-profit that engages in political campaigning, says its overall
purpose is to protect the right to a secret ballot in
government-required elections.

. Nearly two-thirds of the major cash paying for campaigns tied to a
medicinal marijuana measure in Arizona, Proposition 203, is from out
of state. The biggest outside donor is the Marijuana Policy Project, a
non-profit based in Washington, D.C.

. Outsiders account for all of the big donations on both sides of
Proposition 107, a state constitutional amendment that could ban
affirmative action in Arizona. The largest out-of-state donor was the
California-based American Civil Rights Coalition, co-founded by
activist Ward Connerly.

. All but $30,000 of the nearly $440,000 in major gifts to help pass
or defeat the fishing and hunting measure has come from outside groups.

Era of Outsiders

Anthony Corrado, a government professor and campaign-finance expert at
Colby College in Waterville, Maine, said that in the 1980s, national
groups began to see ballot measures as a less expensive way to bring
about influential changes.

Since then, outside groups have pushed for passage or defeat of
countless measures around the country, including bans on same-sex
marriage, allowing casino gambling and medicinal marijuana, and
limiting abortion rights. But they also include smaller issues
affecting business, regulation, taxation and other technical matters.
Historically, many of those issues had gone to legislators instead.

"These tend to be the type of issues that don't draw a lot of
attention, so a small amount of money can maybe make a difference,"
Corrado said.

With many measures, national groups are trying to immunize states from
possible changes made by courts, legislatures or even Congress. In
other cases, groups may try to undo changes already imposed.

The hunting and fishing proposition in Arizona may be a mix of
both.

Andrew Arulanandam, director of public affairs for the NRA, said
Arizona is one of four states this year where the group is urging
passage of measures establishing hunting and fishing rights. The
effort is aimed at preventing measures like the one passed in Michigan
in 2006 that kept mourning doves off-limits to hunters, he said.

"Rather than wait for a problem to develop," he said, "we started a
proactive measure a number of years ago. We are responding to a need"
to protect overall hunting rights.

Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States,
said his organization succeeded with four Arizona ballot measures
since 1994, including bans on cockfighting and steel-jaw trapping. He
believes if Proposition 109 passes, it will allow the Legislature to
overturn bans already approved by voters.

NRA leaders "see that the people of Arizona favor the humane treatment
of animals," Pacelle said. "They don't trust the voters to protect
some of the things the NRA cares about."

Both groups cite their national memberships, 4 million in the NRA and
11 million in the HSUS, as reasons to get involved on the ballot.

Good or Bad?

This year, businesses and outside organizations are investing in other
state elections, as well.

Animal-rights groups, including the HSUS, are major donors in a
Missouri ballot measure that would tighten restrictions on dog
breeding to require better care and limit puppy mills. People and
groups outside Missouri account for 91 percent of the $3 million
raised by a committee urging passage, records show.

In California, oil refiners in Texas, Kansas and Ohio are largely
responsible for funding support of Proposition 23, which would suspend
the state's efforts to reduce global warming during times of high
unemployment. Overall, nearly 70 percent of the money supporting the
proposition comes from outside California.

Two years ago, Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in California,
passed with considerable financial help from members of the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, many from Utah. The same year, a
unit of Colorado-based Focus on the Family led the financial fight to
ban gay marriage in Arizona, committing $215,000 to that campaign,
which passed easily.

As is often the case, Alexander and Corrado said it's hard to know how
decisive any help in a ballot measure is.

In 1996 and 1998, three wealthy men - including two outsiders - who
favored relaxing drug laws spent heavily to influence the votes on
Arizona propositions. University of Phoenix founder John Sperling, New
York investor George Soros and Cleveland insurance executive Peter
Lewis combined to spend more than $1 million each year in support of
voting to legalize medical marijuana and lighten drug penalties.

The results fell their way. After the 1996 vote, the Legislature
repealed the marijuana provision, and after the 1998 vote, federal
officials threatened to prosecute any doctor who prescribed the drug.

But even well-funded efforts can fail, sometimes because outside
interests are vilified and in other cases because the public simply
rejects the change.

In Arizona, local and national members of the payday-loan industry
spent $14 million in 2008 to preserve their businesses here. Despite
nearly 30 times more money than an opposition group, the measure
failed handily at the ballot box.

Still, "spending money does have an influence on the ability to get a
message out," Alexander said. "And if you get a message out, you have
a better chance of winning."