Blake: An iffy referendum title

Published July 5, 2006 at midnight

Text size

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

What the legislature needs is its own title board to make sure it's not misleading the public with its referendums.

Because it looks as though Referendum F, which would remove most deadlines for protesting recall petitions from the state constitution, has an inaccurate title.

The existing title board is required by law to review only proposed initiatives brought by the people. It's charge is to make sure the title accurately reflects the subject matter, and that the subject matter contains only one subject. Its decisions are reviewable by the Colorado Supreme Court before the measure goes on the ballot.

But lawmakers, who have the help of professional drafters, are presumed to be able to write accurate titles. Their proposals are also supposed to stick to a single subject, but their standard is a lot looser than the one imposed on people with initiatives. Their titles and content are not reviewable by the high court prior to the election.

Referendum F is one of five proposals lawmakers have put on the Nov. 7 ballot. The title says it concerns "elections to recall state elected officials." It goes on to say that the deadlines regarding recall petitions and hearings would be removed from the constitution and be set in statute.

But in fact passage of the referendum would have a much greater effect on local elected officials - who are not mentioned in the title.

The fact is, no legislator or statewide official such as governor, attorney general, secretary of state or treasurer has ever been recalled in Colorado. That's largely because the signature requirements are so high. For state and county offices, the required number is 25 percent of the total votes cast for that office in the last election. What's more, the signatures must be collected within a short 60 days after the petition form has been approved.

Apparently the only state official ever recalled in Colorado was Colleen Truden of Glenwood Springs, who was ousted as district attorney by the voters in the 9th Judicial District last December and replaced by Martin Beeson.

Local officials are much more likely to be targeted by voters. Perhaps the best-known official recalled in recent years was Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorder Tracy Baker. He of the red-hot e-mails was ousted by voters in February 2004 and replaced by Nancy Doty.

The legislature isn't waiting for passage of Referendum F to establish new, more liberal deadlines. Earlier this year it passed House Bill 1051, which establishes them in statute effective July 1, 2007. It would take effect only upon passage of the referendum.

The justification for changing the deadlines was that the current constitutional ones are too tight for election officials to respond to protests. They allegedly would have as few as five days to check the 358,200 signatures needed to recall the current governor, for instance.

But statewide recalls don't happen. This is aimed primarily to protect legislators - who haven't been recalled but could be - and local elected officials.

Tentative blue-book arguments against the referendum point out that if you remove the deadlines from the constitution and put them in statute, there's nothing to stop future lawmakers from further amending deadlines that regulate the recall of their own offices.

It's too bad the Colorado Supreme Court isn't authorized to review this referendum's title. It might find the omission of local elected officials from the title as a fatal flaw.

Or it might even find the recall of local officials a second subject and invalidate the whole proposal.

Give 'til it hurts, even during the session: Lobbyists can't contribute to the campaigns of lawmakers while they're in session, right?

Well, not quite. The law is very specific: No lobbyist or client can make or promise a contribution to a lawmaker or any statewide elected official "when the General Assembly is in regular session."

The session that begins tomorrow is, of course, a special session, not a regular one.

So, as one observer put it, "The game is on!"

Now this doesn't mean that all lawmakers will be taking gifts, or lobbyists proffering them, while the special session lasts.

Rep. David Balmer, R-Centennial, who's promoting a big-ticket fundraiser for GOP candidates July 25 at Invesco Stadium at Mile High, has issued a release pleading with lobbyists not to discuss contributions with him during the session.

But contributions are up to the consciences of the lobbyist and the lawmaker. There's nothing in the law to stop them.

blakep@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5119.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News