<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Arizona Capitol Times &#187; Ballot Measures</title>
	<atom:link href="http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/category/election-2012/election-2012-news/ballot-measures-election-2012-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com</link>
	<description>Your Inside Track to Arizona Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 13:40:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Arizona court says ballot measure complied with rule</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2013/01/07/arizona-court-says-ballot-measure-complied-with-rule/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2013/01/07/arizona-court-says-ballot-measure-complied-with-rule/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:47:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Associated Press</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latest News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ballot measure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Primary election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top two]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voters]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=54625</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The state Supreme Court says parts of a proposal to transform Arizona's primary election system fit together as one proposal and didn't have to be kept off the November ballot.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2013/01/07/arizona-court-says-ballot-measure-complied-with-rule/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Finance reports hint at high profile ballot prop losses&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/07/finance-reports-hint-at-high-profile-ballot-prop-losses/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/07/finance-reports-hint-at-high-profile-ballot-prop-losses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2012 00:00:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Evan Wyloge</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[final finance reports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[No on Prop 204]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Government Committee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proposition 204]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Responsible Leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salt River Project]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=53971</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two well-funded ballot initiatives went down in defeat last month, but as their final finance reports showed, their campaign coffers had perhaps foreshadowed the elections’ outcome.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/07/finance-reports-hint-at-high-profile-ballot-prop-losses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court: Prop 204 clerical error didn’t confuse voters&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/05/arizona-prop-204-clerical-error-didnt-confuse-voters-court-says/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/05/arizona-prop-204-clerical-error-didnt-confuse-voters-court-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2012 20:30:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gary Grado</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chief Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ken Bennett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quality Education and Jobs Committee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rebecca White Berch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secretary of state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of the United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=53877</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The clerical error that led to two different versions of a ballot measure was an honest mistake that did not confuse voters, and thus didn’t warrant Secretary of State Ken Bennett’s decision to bar measure from going to voters, the Supreme Court said in an opinion published today. 
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/05/arizona-prop-204-clerical-error-didnt-confuse-voters-court-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prop. 116, business property tax measure, loses by double digits&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/09/prop-116-business-property-tax-measure-loses-by-double-digits/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/09/prop-116-business-property-tax-measure-loses-by-double-digits/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:44:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Duda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ballot measure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Initiative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop. 116]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proposition]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=53099</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite facing virtually no opposition, Proposition 116, an initiative to dramatically lower the property taxes that Arizona businesses pay on equipment, was rejected by voters.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/09/prop-116-business-property-tax-measure-loses-by-double-digits/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prop 118 down by a hair&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/08/az-prop-118-state-trust-land-income-reform-down-by-a-hair/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/08/az-prop-118-state-trust-land-income-reform-down-by-a-hair/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Hank Stephenson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doug ducey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics of CaliforniaPolitics of California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Property taxesProperty taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Treasurer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=53040</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Proposition 118 – a constitutional amendment which would change the way the state distributes state trust land income to public institutions, including schools, colleges and prisons – was still too close to call on Thursday, November 08.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/08/az-prop-118-state-trust-land-income-reform-down-by-a-hair/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Eighth try a charm for Proposition 119&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/07/eighth-try-a-charm-for-proposition-119/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/07/eighth-try-a-charm-for-proposition-119/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:21:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kharli Mandeville</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal lands]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Nelson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military bases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proposition 119]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state lands]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=52985</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After seven failed attempts during the past two decades, Arizonans voted heavily in favor of Proposition 119, a ballot measure that will allow the state to swap state land for federal trust land in order to protect military bases from encroachment, as well as preserve sensitive land areas, such as the San Pedro River, in the process.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/07/eighth-try-a-charm-for-proposition-119/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prop 114 overwhelmingly approved&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/prop-114-on-track-to-victory/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/prop-114-on-track-to-victory/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2012 05:50:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gary Grado</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona Citizens Defense League]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Heller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cochise County]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Former Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MoralityMorality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger barnett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russell Pearce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security guard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spokesman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trial Lawyers Association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=52946</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Voters overwhelmingly favored approving a constitutional amendment barring criminals from suing their victims.

The Crime Victims Protection Act has a lead of 80 percent to 20 percent with 90 percent of precincts counted.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/prop-114-on-track-to-victory/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>State sovereignty proposal loses&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/state-sovereignty-proposal-losing/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/state-sovereignty-proposal-losing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2012 05:39:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gary Grado</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[losing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proposition 120]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state sovereignty]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=52937</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Arizona voters aren’t interested in declaring sovereignty over its land and natural resources under control of the federal government.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/state-sovereignty-proposal-losing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Judicial selection overhaul proposition losing in early returns&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/az-prop-115-judicial-selection-overhaul-proposition-losing-in-early-returns/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/az-prop-115-judicial-selection-overhaul-proposition-losing-in-early-returns/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:55:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gary Grado</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=52920</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A proposition to change the way Arizona picks its judges lost resoundingly. 
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/az-prop-115-judicial-selection-overhaul-proposition-losing-in-early-returns/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prop.117 property tax gets voters’ nod&#160;</title>
		<link>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/prop-117-property-tax-measure-appears-headed-for-victory/</link>
		<comments>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/prop-117-property-tax-measure-appears-headed-for-victory/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2012 03:48:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Luige del Puerto</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ballot Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election 2012 News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Proposition 13 (1978)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property tax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party (United States)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State’s Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=52885</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Voters rallied behind a proposal that is meant to check wild swings in property tax bills, the initial count by the Secretary of State’s Office shows.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/11/06/prop-117-property-tax-measure-appears-headed-for-victory/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
