PHOENIX (By Matthew Benson and Mary Jo Pitzl, Arizona Republic) March 9, 2008 — A series of behind-the-scenes negotiations between legislative and business leaders may result in the abandonment of two dueling voter initiatives aimed at the underground labor market in Arizona.

The mutual disarmament - one initiative is backed by the business community, the other by border activists - would hinge on the Legislature and Gov. Janet Napolitano approving changes to the existing law against illegal hiring, according to lobbyists, legislators and others familiar with the talks. Those changes, meant to both strengthen the law while improving protections for well-meaning employers, are being fast-tracked through the House and Senate and could reach the governor's desk in about two weeks.

"The goal is to have the initiatives go away," said Jay Kaprosy, who has been participating in the negotiations on behalf of Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform. "The mutual hope is to have a simultaneous pullback of the initiatives."

It's a fragile premise, built on talks between House Speaker Jim Weiers, R-Phoenix, Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, fast-food franchiser Jason LeVecke and others.

But it's one that supporters hope will defuse what could otherwise be a bitter and divisive ballot face-off that pits the business lobby against hard-core opponents of illegal immigration, Republican against Republican.

It's a fight that legislators would prefer to avoid in a year in which all 90 seats are at stake.

Procedurally, initiatives also are problematic since they're exceedingly difficult to amend once voters approve them. So revisions, such as those now being considered for the state's existing employer-sanctions law, would be next to impossible.

Pearce has endorsed those changes. They would both extend the law's reach - setting out penalties for employers caught paying under the table, for example - and offer more protections for employers. One such provision would ensure that a chain of businesses isn't penalized for the hiring violation of a single location.

Pearce authored both the bill and initiative, but makes his preference clear: "This bill is better than the initiative. I would like to see both initiatives go away."

Dueling proposals

One initiative, led by Pearce and former gubernatorial candidate Don Goldwater, would come down like a hammer on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers. A first violation would result in revocation of the employer's business license.

Largely in response, a second, business-backed initiative was announced in October. Headed by former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Pacheco, the measure has been pitched as a tougher, fairer alternative - offering more buffers to businesses that come under prosecution but also targeting the pay-in-cash labor market and identity theft.

When asked about their willingness to jointly withdraw their proposals, both Goldwater and Pacheco were wary.

"We can't drop our guard," Goldwater said, preparing to bolster his initiative with a fundraising trip to Washington, D.C. Pacheco noted that he hasn't been asked to drop his initiative, and that he's skeptical of the negotiations.

That's to be expected. Distrust is the norm on the issue of illegal immigration. Animosity runs high.

It's perhaps the biggest obstacle to an agreement.

"There are all sorts of concerns on all sides," said Glenn Hamer, president and CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry. "It is fragile. It's hard to say what will happen."

Some of the distrust stems from last spring. A number of lawmakers had the impression that, if the employer-sanctions bill became law, Goldwater's even-stricter initiative would fold. That didn't happen.

'I don't trust a promise'

Convincing lawmakers to once more take the first step in approving changes to the employer-sanctions law may prove to be a tough sell.

"There are some people I can trust their word. There's some I can't," said Senate Minority Leader Marsha Arzberger, D-Willcox. "I don't trust a promise."

Suspicions run just as deep among border-security activists who point to the government's poor record when it comes to immigration. Some worry they'll be deceived by the governor, that the Pearce law won't be enforced, or that it'll be weakened by the Legislature at a later date.

A voter-approved and protected initiative would be a surer bet, they argue.

If Pearce's amendments to the existing law go through, look for him to play peacemaker with the border-security crowd with which he holds enormous sway.

"They're very emotional, very emotionally tied to this (initiative)," Pearce said. "It's tender."

"Now, we have to convince them they have victory (with the existing law), and that that victory will stand."

In the meantime, both initiative campaigns plow ahead.

Goldwater's group had only received $13,310 in donations since last March, as of campaign-finance reports filed Jan. 31. But his effort is powered by volunteer support, and he says he has an army of several hundred collecting some of the 153,365 signatures he would need to make the ballot.

Pacheco is relying on paid signature-gatherers, and has heavy corporate backing that helped him raise more than $126,000 in just a few months.

Both groups are confident they can make the ballot and find success with voters. Legislative leaders hope that won't be necessary.

"I think it's critical," said Sen. Bob Burns, R-Peoria. "It sounds like we're very close (to an agreement to pull the initiatives). What I would call a vast majority of the parties involved seem to be OK with this."