Littwin: In the end, statesmanship eludes Owens

By Mike Littwin, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published June 29, 2006 at midnight

Text size

More News Columns & Blogs

Bill Owens had the chance to be remembered as, well, something almost like a statesman.

That's a big word, maybe too big a word for our times - and, especially, too big for a skinny-legged, softball-playing governor who poses in shorts with a skinny-legged, softball-playing mayor. And especially when one looks - as colleague Lynn Bartels kidded - like Beavis and the other like Butt-Head. You can decide which one is which.

But Owens, remember, did the right thing by bucking his party on Ref C. And he had the chance, at minimum, to not do the wrong thing on this unnecessary, unwarranted, unspecial special session.

It would have been his last important act as governor. But he passed on the chance and, instead, called a session that has nothing to do with policy or grand ideas. It's not even, really, about illegal immigration.

It has turned, instead, into a weirdly bipartisan nod to the harsh reality of politics - and to nothing more. There's a legacy for you.

The funny thing is, Owens was given a last-minute reprieve - a word, as it were, to the governor when a surprise compromise between Defend Colorado Now and Keep Colorado Safe gave him a way out.

But he didn't want a reprieve. He wanted a wedge issue that he hoped could be used against Democrats in November by forcing the issue in the swelter of July.

Or maybe I'm being unfair. Maybe Owens called the special session because he couldn't find it in himself to stand up to his own party once more, even though those in the Dave "Doc" Schultheis wing of the party are already blasting him for this compromise.

You can fault Democrats and Republicans alike on this issue. You can even fault me. I wrote recently that Democrats should call their own special session. The idea was that Owens would then be unable to make his call for a session into an up-or-down vote on the proposed, do-nothing, yet mean-spirited Amendment 55.

As you remember, the Colorado Supreme Court kicked Amendment 55 - which would have denied those many services to illegal immigrants that were already, by law, denied them - off the ballot.

Owens claimed the will of the people had been thwarted by activist judges. And so he had no choice but to call a special session. The Democrats, then, tried to beat him to it, in a race to call a session because what better way is there to enjoy global warming than to sit in the un-air-conditioned Capitol?

And just when you thought it couldn't get any stranger, Defend Colorado Now and Keep Colorado Safe came to their agreement. Yeah, it's hard to remember which group actually stands for which side of the immigration issue. But all you have to remember is that the compromise, forged between Dick Lamm and Federico Peña, would throw out the absurd amendment language and ask the legislature to replace it with a set of laws similar to those adopted in Georgia, which aren't absurd - just unnecessarily punitive.

Where did this leave Owens?

If he was calling a special session as a corrective to the court, how could he still call for one - when the group circulating the issue had abandoned it? That's a rhetorical question. You don't need urgency. Or logic. You just need an issue that, almost everyone agrees, can be resolved only at the federal level.

And yet, here we are. Owens did not issue a narrow call. In fact, he issued a call so broad that even Bill Ritter could embrace it. (See: The Democratic candidate, who opposed Amendment 55, gets to be for getting tough on illegal immigration, after all. Is this really working out the way Owens hoped?)

And Owens, doing his part, told the legislature, meanwhile, if I can paraphrase: I don't want symbolic legislation. And if I get a law that is symbolic, whatever that means, and I'm not going to tell you, I'm going to veto it.

Ah, one last Owens veto. It gives you chills.

It didn't matter, apparently, that Owens has virtually ignored illegal immigration until now. It doesn't matter he has no idea how much money - if any - the state is paying in unmandated services to illegal immigrants. He didn't know how much in January when the issue came up. He won't know when the special session is over either. Urgency?

Which brings us to the coming session, and to the Democrats, who will run it.

Their idea is to go after employers. In theory, it's a great idea. They're the real guilty parties, after all.

In theory, the Georgia law would go after employers. It includes a complicated tax law that doesn't allow companies to deduct from their state taxes for illegal-immigrant workers.

I asked how, in Colorado, we might enforce such a law. I'm still waiting for a good answer. No, I'm still waiting for any answer.

The Georgia law also denies services to illegal immigrants that they already don't get. Try this partial list of services they don't get: food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, SSI, public housing, foster care, driver's licenses, and on and on.

And here's the truth: If the problem is as big as many people suggest, then it would cost a fortune for the state to put in the necessary enforcement infrastructure to address it - and, even if it did, the enforcement still probably wouldn't work. And whatever the Democrats say, they already know that.

Here's another truth: Owens said the legislature would need three to five days to clear this issue up.

He said - and I guess we can all relax now - that would be plenty of time.

littwinm@rockymountainnews.com

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News