Attorney General Mark Brnovich is charging a firm that circulated petitions for the successful Invest in Ed ballot measure with violating state laws in how it paid some of its circulators.

A new initiative proposal seeks to block state lawmakers from proposing and voting on measures that could benefit themselves and family members.

A far-right candidate for the U.S. Senate allegedly threatened to deport family members of the owner of a signature gathering firm who refused to work for his campaign.

That record number of Arizonans who turned out to vote this year has a dark side for direct democracy: It's going to be harder for voters to propose their own laws or get rid of ones they don't like.

A handful of incumbent Arizona legislators aren’t happy that the most prolific signature gathering firm in the state is treating them the way they treat citizens who propose or challenge laws via the ballot.

Activists are attempting to repeal a trio of laws approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor this year. But pulling off a referendum, known colloquially as a “citizens’ veto,” isn’t easy.

The formal response to accusations that Republican Corporation Commission candidates Rep. Tom Forese and Doug Little violated the rules of Arizona's public financing system attempted to explain how they paid for campaign signs and nominating signatures. But it raised more questions about their overall campaign spending and compliance with the law.

When lawmakers rolled several controversial elections changes into one jam-packed omnibus bill and approved it in the final moments of the legislative session, a coalition of disparate political groups coalesced around a single goal: to stop the bill from becoming law.

It’s common to see failed presidential candidates continue their fundraising pleas so they can pay down their campaign debt.

Unfortunately for signature gatherers, attorneys and vendors, ballot measure campaigns don’t generally do the same thing.

Maricopa County elections officials don’t want to see a repeat of 2012.

After Election Day, the county had a record number of provisional ballots. For two weeks afterward, they counted votes, including thousands of provisional ballots caused by people who had received early ballots in the mail but chose to vote in person on Election Day instead.