PHOENIX — Gov. Doug Ducey is doubling down on his claim that David Garcia tried to “rig” the election for an income tax for education — even though there is no evidence Garcia had any role in crafting the measure.
Ducey first made the claim in a pair of debates last week, arguing that the fact the Arizona Supreme Court blocked the Invest in Ed initiative from going on the November ballot is proof it was deliberately misleading. Ducey, campaigning for another four-year term, said the act was not only intentional but that Garcia, his Democratic challenger, was partly to blame.
The governor has now repeated the claim in a radio interview, even though his press aide, Daniel Scarpinato, acknowledged Ducey cannot cite any link between the crafting of the measure and Garcia.
But Scarpinato, defending the governor, argued that’s irrelevant. He said that Garcia, in promoting the Invest in Ed initiative, should have known the ballot language was legally flawed — even before a divided Arizona Supreme Court eventually reached that conclusion.
What is undisputed is that Garcia, who has said the state needs more money for K-12 education, was an early supporter of the proposal to increase state income taxes on Arizonans earning more than $250,000 a year. The measure was designed to raise about $690 million a year.
The initiative drive gathered more than 277,000 signatures to put the question to voters in November.
On Aug. 29, however, a majority of the Supreme Court took it off the ballot.
In a brief order, the justices said the 100-word description, which all initiatives must have, was flawed. They said it did not accurately describe the change in the tax rate for top earners, listing the increase at 3.46 percent and 4.46 percent, respectively, for higher tax brackets, when it should have said “percentage point” over the current 4.54 percent top tax rate.
The justices also said the description did not inform voters that the wording would repeal an automatic indexing of tax brackets.
Scarpinato said Ducey’s claim of “rigging” — which would be an intentional act — is backed by the Supreme Court ruling. “Take a look at what they put out thus far,” he said.
The court record, however, suggests the legal conclusion the language was flawed was far from clear-cut.
First, a trial judge, hearing a challenge by initiative foes, ruled that the wording was not inherently misleading.
The high court ruling knocking the measure off the ballot was not unanimous. And there was no mention of “rigging” the election in the court order.
All available evidence also disputes Ducey’s suggestion Garcia was involved in the wording.
“He was not involved at all in the drafting and inner workings for Invest in Ed,” said David Lujan, whose Arizona Center for Economic Progress put the ballot language together.
Garcia said he helped gather the signatures, “just like everybody else, just like all the teachers.” He said that occurred after Lujan filed the proposed language with the Secretary of State’s Office, a legal precursor to circulating petitions.
Garcia said he looked at the language after it had been filed and decided to put his personal support and the support of his campaign behind getting it on the ballot.
“But it has nothing to do with rigging an election,” he said.
Garcia said there is no reason to charge that he should have known there were drafting problems with the language.
“I didn’t see anything that stuck out to me at that time,” he said. “But I was not involved in its crafting, not involved with the wordsmithing. I got it at the same time probably you did or anybody else did out there in the public.”
Ducey has said the state does not need new revenues to support his promise of a 19 percent pay hike for teachers by 2020 and restoration of funding, which Ducey himself had cut in 2015, from an account that helps schools pay for books, computers and other capital needs. Instead, Ducey contends that an improving economy will bring in enough without any new levies.
Garcia, who had been counting on voter approval of the initiative, has since said that if he is elected he will work with the Legislature to come up with a source of new funds for education. But he has provided no details of what he wants.
