'AZ Clean Elections' Responds to Election Interference Allegations
The commission defends its application of the '1% rule' barring Green Party candidates from debates, leaving more questions than answers...
In a recently obtained letter between the ‘AZ Clean Elections’ commission and State Senator Jake Hoffman, the commission adamantly defends its application of a ‘1% rule’ and subsequent decision to bar Arizona Green Party candidates from upcoming scheduled debates that feature mainstream political party candidates.
This letter comes on the heels of Senator Hoffman’s own investigation and inquiry into the matter, public outcry, independent media inquiry, and Green Party condemnation of the commission’s decision.
In this letter the commission states:
“The Commission is empowered to sponsor debates among candidates and has been granted broad discretion to do so. Because this requires substantial time, expertise and effort, the Commission has contracted with a local advertising and marketing firm and the Arizona Media Association (“AMA”) to produce broadcast debates for select statewide and congressional offices.”
“In order to ensure that these debates are widely available and watched by the voting public, Commission staff agreed to delegate editorial decision making to its broadcasting partner, the AMA. This includes determination of a showing of a minimal amount of support for a candidate to appear on stage in broadcast debates. Media partners throughout the country often set minimum requirements for candidates to participate.”
“AMA’s minimal standards ensure voters get as much information as possible in a limited time. The Commission signed off on those requirements, recognizing debate sponsors often set minimum thresholds using metrics that include polling or fundraising. This editorial decision recognizes viewer and broadcaster interests, as well as important logistical and preparation considerations.”
“This editorial policy is not a rule under the Arizona Procedures Act. Nor is it contrary to Ariz. Admin. Code (section) R2-20-107. Indeed, Mr. Quintana (a Green Party candidate) is not, evidently, qualified as a “candidate” under the applicable law.”
The commission’s letter leaves more critical questions on the table than answers:
Why has the commission abdicated the responsibility to restrict “qualified candidates” to the Arizona Media Association (AMA), a registered non-profit corporation, which is now seemingly in control of which candidate voices are heard in the conduct of an Arizona election? This move seemingly places public electoral powers into the hands of a private corporate entity. Is this what Arizonans should expect from its government; private control of a public electoral process?
If the Secretary of State recognizes the Green Party candidates as being officially on the ballot (not a write-in candidate), how can the commission or the AMA fail to recognize those candidates as “qualified”? How is there a difference in the definition of qualification between the Secretary of State’s office (the state’s official elections agency) and ‘AZ Clean Elections’?
The commission openly admits that “(this) editorial decision recognizes viewer and broadcaster interests”. How is a private entity permitted to filter out voices of official balloted candidates and decide for themselves what the “viewer interest” is? It further seemingly sows distrust of mainstream media, highlighting broadcaster interests as pertinent to the conversation, despite the reality that corporations have no vote in elections, the people do. What ‘broadcaster interests’ are at risk by the Green Party participating?
The commission states that “debate sponsors often set minimum thresholds using metrics that include polling or fundraising”. According to official polling by ‘InteractivePolls’, Eduardo Quintana (G) is polling at 3%, three times greater than the ‘minimum’ required by this ‘1% rule’. How does he remain “unqualified”?
“(‘AZ Clean Elections’) is attacking the (democratic rights) of all Arizona voters, putting its thumb on the scale… (election interference) in (a) national (#DebateGate) scandal,” says Quintana on the X social media platform.
Quintana is running for U.S. Senate against mainstream candidates Kari Lake (R) and Ruben Gallego (D) and wants to debate them in the upcoming Oct. 9th debate.
‘AZ Clean Elections’ has not responded to my requests for comment on this matter.