In light of a recent attorney general’s opinion that says the scope of Prop. 200 is limited to certain welfare-related benefits, the chairman of the group that promoted the voter initiative said he will ask the Legislature in January to require people to prove their eligibility for a much larger range of public services.

Attorney General Terry Goddard issued an opinion on Nov. 12 that stated Prop. 200 applies only to programs under Arizona statutory Title 46, the welfare title, because that’s where the language of the measure placed it in Arizona Revised Statutes.

And even there the scope is limited, Mr. Goddard stated, because many welfare programs, including emergency health care and certain short-term emergency disaster relief, are mandated under federal law.

Prop. 200 has two main provisions: to require that potential voters provide identification when registering to vote and when casting a ballot; and to require that people prove their eligibility — that is, that they are citizens or legal immigrants — when seeking state and local public benefits that are not required by federal law. The measure also makes it a misdemeanor for state employees to fail to verify eligibility and to not report illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

Anthony D. Rodgers, director of the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, a program to provide health care to medically indigent and medically needy people, requested the opinion. Mr. Rodgers asked which “state and local public benefits” are subject to Prop. 200.

Mr. Goddard said that while the initiative does not define “state and local public benefits,” it can have been intended to affect only those provisions of the state welfare code because it amends only Title 46.

It can’t apply to AHCCCS and other public health programs, Mr. Goddard wrote, because it doesn’t amend the public health code, which is Title 36.

Randy Pullen, who chaired the Yes on 200 campaign committee, said he disagrees with Mr. Goddard’s interpretation of the initiative. He said it was intended to apply to programs such as food stamps, through which “illegal immigrants are costing us millions of dollars a year.” But Mr. Pullen’s opinion has no legal weight, and he said he will ask lawmakers to impose Prop. 200-like requirements on applicants for food stamps, higher-education tuition assistance and a number of other benefits.

Amending a voter-approved initiative requires a three-quarters majority vote in each legislative house, but Mr. Pullen said he will not attempt to amend Prop. 200, but to pass a completely separate bill. That would require only the usual simple majority (although to override the certain veto by Governor Napolitano, who opposed Prop. 200, would require a two-thirds vote in each house).

Mr. Pullen said he is happy with the attorney general’s opinion in one respect. There was considerable talk that public safety officers would not respond to emergencies involving illegal immigrants, and he said the ruling “laid to rest all this nonsense about how it would require people to prove their citizenship before the fire department would put out a fire at their house.” —