Citizens in Charge

With a constitutional amendment that would make it far more difficult to enact future constitutional amendments – especially through Colorado’s citizen initiative process – already passed by the State Senate and now pending on the floor of the House of Representatives, Citizens in Charge Foundation, a national voter rights group (and a partner organization to Citizens in Charge), today issued a report entitled, “Five Facts about Amending Colorado’s Constitution.”

“The arguments legislators are using to attack the initiative rights of Coloradans simply don’t hold water,” said Citizens in Charge Foundation President Paul Jacob. “One legislator expressed embarrassment at the number of amendments to the state constitution. If that’s the case, the solution is simple: don’t pass yet one more.”

The “Five Facts” report found that since 1912, when Colorado adopted the citizen initiative process, two-thirds of the amendments to the constitution have come from state legislators and only one-third by way of an initiative petition from citizens.

“Not only is it offensive for legislators to be attempting to undermine the ability of voters to check government power through the state’s cherished initiative process, but the truth is that legislators have put a lot more amendments into the constitution than have come through the petition process,” Jacob added.

Still, Senate Concurrent Resolution 1 (SCR-1) is quickly moving through the legislature. Senators passed the amendment in a 25-9 vote earlier this week and it could pass the full House as early as tomorrow (Friday, Feb. 25).

“Why the mad rush to pass this amendment?” asked Jacob. “Legislators seem intent on rewarding their big business and big labor cronies by blocking the use of the voter initiative process and they want to do it before pesky voters catch wind of their scheme.”

SCR-1 would require a supermajority vote of 60 percent for passage of a new constitutional amendment, mandate that citizen initiatives qualify in all seven congressional districts in Colorado and make it a little more difficult for the legislature to change statutory initiatives in the first three years after being passed by voters. It is similar to Referendum O, which legislators placed on the 2008 ballot and Colorado voters defeated.

“SCR-1 is a handout to special interests,” Jacob charges. “They may not be able to convince a majority of voters to defeat reforms proposed by citizens, but can use their huge money advantage to hammer such measures down below the new 60 percent requirement.”