Proposition 204, also known as the "Quality Education and Jobs Act," is a sales-tax measure that would keep the tax at the same level as the temporary increase voters approved in 2010.
A common criticism is that the ballot language doesn't describe exactly where the expected $1 billion in revenue goes, but the right-wing lobbying organization Center for Arizona Policy thinks it has things figured out -- it creates a $100 million "slush fund" that probably could all be used to fund abortions.
This theory CAP has cooked up is more like a conspiracy theory, since abortion is mentioned precisely zero times in the measure's language.
Here's part of the explanation from CAP:
Center for Arizona Policy and Arizona Right to Life announced opposition to Proposition 204 today due to vague and ill-defined language contained in the proposition that could allow up to $100 million of taxpayer dollars to be given to abortion providers annually.
While the proposition has been billed as an education measure, it creates a $100 million slush fund that a governor could allocate for "family stability" and "basic needs" that "lead to family stability". These terms are not clearly defined in the proposition, leaving the door open for chief executives to use this section to funnel monies to abortion providers.
An estimated $100 million taken in by this tax would be allocated to a "family stability and self-sufficiency fund," which would be used to "provide services for the basic needs of children, families, and vulnerable adults whose household income is less than two hundred percent of the federal poverty level."
According to CAP, "basic needs" could be one giant abortion fund, but the ballot language makes no such statement.
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
To see an even less-specific complaint about the proposition, here's CAP president Cathi Herrod:
A sampling of pros and cons on Prop. 204 that have a foundation in reality can be found here.