Legislative Districts Are On Solid Ground When They Choose To Prohibit The Use Of Proxies

2021 AZGOP annual statutory meeting

On July 20th, the Republican precinct committeemen (PC’s) of legislative district 15 (LD15) met to elect all five members of its executive board. This was an unprecedented event. The normal course of events is to elect a whole new board in November of even years to replace the outgoing board, as its two-year term expires. What precipitated this mid-July full board election was the sudden resignation, without notice, of all members of the of the previous board on June 1.

That was not the only unprecedented characteristic of this election. It was also noteworthy that the election was conducted disallowing the use of proxies for voting. This was done, for the first time as long as anyone can remember, to comply with state statutes.

It is not unusual for people to have different opinions on what statutes mean, especially in Arizona because most statutes do not have a clause clearly indicating what the intent of the statute was when enacted. However, as we shall see, the PC’s of LD15 were on very solid ground as they opted to prohibit the use of proxies to cast someone else’s vote.

A proxy is nothing more than a power of attorney, authorizing someone to act on someone else’s behalf. But the proper use of proxies is limited to those functions that are transferable. For example, it is perfectly proper to use proxies to vote at stockholder meetings because stocks are transferable. Conversely, proxies may not be used to cast someone else’s political vote because voting rights are not transferable.

Robert’s Rules of Order does not outright prohibit the use of proxies, but imposes some heavy limitations on their use. Here is how the 11th Edition addresses the issue, “Ordinarily it [proxy] should neither be allowed nor required, because proxy voting is incompatible with the essential characteristics of a deliberative assembly in which membership is individual, personal, and nontransferable.”

Proxy voting is not allowed at any level of government either to elect its members or to enact legislation and regulations. It is also not allowed in the election of political party officers, but that prohibition has been ignored consistently.

Proxies are being used and abused by a handful of people for the purpose of placing control of the political party in the hands of a few, thereby violating the common-sense rule of one person, one vote. This is routinely done by recruiting people to become PC’s for the sole purpose of providing enough proxies to enable a few people to unduly influence the outcome of the election.

Those who support the use of proxies for voting, justify it by pointing to one statute within the Arizona Revised Statutes. But actually, there are three statutes that address the issue of proxy voting. Let us take a look at all three.

ARS 16-828. Supporters of the use of proxies for voting justify their position by pointing to the following language, “A political party may choose, through its bylaws, to allow the use of proxies at its meetings, in which event the following shall be minimum regulations.” Those regulations have to do with who can carry proxies and what must be included in the proxy. ARS 16-828 is totally silent on how proxies may be used, and certainly does not address the issue of using proxies for voting. Therefore, we must find the answer elsewhere in Title 16. Before we do, it should be pointed out that the prohibition on the use of proxies applies only to casting votes. It is perfectly proper and allowed to use proxies for other purposes, such as helping establish quorum, signing documents, etc.

ARS 16-102. This is the exact text of the statute, “A power of attorney or other form of proxy is not valid for use by a person in any procedure or transaction concerning elections, including voter registration, petition circulation or signature, voter registration cancellation, early ballot requests or voting another person’s ballot.” The language could not be any clearer than that. But proponents of the use of proxies for voting like to claim that this statute applies only to general voting, as in voting for legislators, governor, president, etc. But they are wrong, because a clarification of that question is found in ARS 16-191.

ARS 16-191. Here is the full text of this statute:

A. Except as provided by subsection B and except where different election procedures or provisions are set forth by statute, the provisions of this title apply to all elections in this state.

B. The provisions of this title apply to all elections held pursuant to title 48, chapters 5, 6, 8, 10 and 13 through 16, notwithstanding any conflicting election procedures or provisions in such chapters.

In other words, everything in Title 16 applies to all elections in the state.

Even if ARS 16-828 were to address voting, which it does not, then it would be subject to the provisions of ARS 16-102 and 15-191.

When faced with the foregoing reality, proponents of voting by proxy tend to make the claim that Title 16 does not apply because political parties are private clubs. There are many reasons why this claim is patently false, but let’s concentrate on only two.

First, the major characteristic of private clubs is that they are, well, private. In other words, the assembly gets to decide who is accepted for membership and who is not. Not so when it comes to becoming a precinct committeeman. For example, if Barak Obama moved to Arizona, registered as a Republican, collected his signatures, got on the ballot and got elected PC, there not a thing that anyone can do to prevent him from doing so. So much for being a private club, but there is more.

Second, PC’s are elected by placing their names on an official government ballot. This is the same ballot used to elect the governor, legislators, congressmen, etc. Can private clubs like the Elks, Rotaries, Lions, etc. do this? Obviously not.

It should be obvious that legislative districts are on solid ground when they choose to prohibit the use of proxies for voting by adhering to the provisions of Arizona Revised Statutes.

Citations:

Arizona State Legislature, www.azleg.gov

Roberts Rules of order, RONR (11TH Ed.), pp 428-429