The excuse she gave was lame :

“As a former Secretary of State (sic), I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to arbitrary or politically-motivated decisions,” Brewer wrote in her veto message to House Speaker Kirk Adams.

Did she even read the bill ? One main part of the bill is that the bill allows the decision of the Secretary of State to be challenged in court ( giving the average citizen standing to sue ). This is totally the opposite of what she gave as her reasoning for the veto – designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate. This puts the ultimate decision in the courts , thus NOT designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate. This means that any relevant records could be subpoenaed. If he produced the COLB ( which by the way he has never presented to any court for examination ) – which the watered down version of this bill would allow, a resident could sue challenging the authenticity of that COLB and possibly subpoena the actual long form certificate. There is a severability clause in the bill. Even if the bill went to court and they found that the requirements of producing the documents were found to be unconstitutional, the part giving citizens standing to sue would remain in effect.

This is why Brewer’s comments make no sense. The reason she gave for vetoing the bill is actually a reason to SIGN THE BILL. The bill would hold the Secretary of State accountable through the courts.

Also , she made this comment on Greta : “The vote was a distraction” ( Note: a line straight out of the Dem talking points ) A distraction from what ? Even if the vote was a distraction, how is signing the bill a distraction? I guess her solution then is to have no standards at all in determining the qualifications of candidates on the ballot. After,all, she was the SOS of AZ in the 2008 election and she didn’t impose any. Is she just covering her a$$ with this veto ?