Right-to-work foes sue to block ballot issue
By David Milstead, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Originally published 01:42 p.m., May 29, 2008
Updated 03:08 p.m., May 29, 2008
A group challenging the right-to-work ballot initiative has filed a lawsuit against its backers, as well as the secretary of state, alleging a “pattern of massive fraud” that should keep the issue from going to voters.
The group, called Protect Colorado’s Future, says thousands of signatures collected for the initiative were duplicates, came from unregistered voters or had false addresses. In sum, the group argues, the invalid signatures put the initiative below the threshold for the ballot.
“The goal here is to challenge the secretary of state’s process and highlight the pervasive fraud at every step of the (signature-gathering) process,” said Jess Knox, director of Protect Colorado’s Future.
The right-to-work measure, to be known as Amendment 47, would change the state Constitution by doing away with the current process that allows employees to vote on whether they want to set up an all-union shop. Such arrangements require all workers covered by collective-bargaining contracts to contribute financially in return for being represented by a union.
The secretary of state’s office certified the measure in late April by using the process specified by law, sampling 5 percent of the signatures. The secretary of state’s office determined that 69 percent of the signatures in the sample were valid. The secretary of state’s office applied that percentage to the 136,608 signatures in the petitions and then presumed that 94,546 were valid. That put the measure 18,499 above the minimum necessary.
Labor-backed Protect Colorado’s Future argues that the sampling procedures should be trumped by what they found by examining all the signatures on all the petitions.
The group also alleges two violations of ballot-initiative law. It claims that some of the people who certified the petitions as notaries public were not actually notaries and that the petitions were not numbered before the signatures were collected. While these issues may sound minor, Knox said, the requirements are essential to the initiative process.
“If any of the claims are true, what the lawsuit purports to show is clearly not up to par with the high standards of this campaign,” A Better Colorado spokesman Kelley Harp said in a prepared statement. “The proper people will look into this and an appropriate judgment will be made.
“But the facts are this. More than 136,000 people signed the petition, well more than the 76,047 required. The secretary of state’s Office has already qualified Amendment 47, and we remain very confident Amendment 47 will be on the ballot in November.”
Rich Coolidge, a spokesman for the secretary of state’s office, declined to comment specifically on the lawsuit, saying the office’s attorney had not seen it.
The statistical sampling procedures are part of state law, he said. “It’s a process we follow, and the courts handle the protest,” he said.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
May 29, 2008
2:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
fmikey writes:
Of course the union folks are afraid that if the initiative does reach the ballot it will pass, workers will not be held hostage to self-serving unions any more, and the union officials themselves will no longer have the gravy train they currently enjoy for essentially impeding worker productivity and competitiveness in the marketplace.
And we don't want to hear the usual lies about all employers taking advantage of workers. Abuses occur on both sides....and there are many workers, mostly union related, who have the mentality that its ok to take a day's wages from an employer in return for basically doing nothing....
May 29, 2008
2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
We already know the governor is in the union's pocket after the campaign contributions that precipitated his election. Why not fudge a few signatures or, maybe, not so random a sampling in order to get 47 on the ballot?
If anyone out there thinks that any possible good can come from recipients of campaign contributions from labor unions I would like to hear what that can be?
May 29, 2008
9:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Vote YES on Amendment 47, shouldn't all Coloradans have the right to choose.
It's time to give the Unions what they got from Unionist Guv Ritter's order that handed 35,000+ state employees to the Unions - that my friends is Right-to-Work.
Right-to-work laws protect worker choice in twenty-two U.S. States, mostly in the southern or western U.S. RTW operates under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act. RTW prohibits agreements between unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or "fees" a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.
Colorado is a union shop state, with passage of Amendment 47 all Colorado workers will have the Right-to-Work.
May 30, 2008
9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
KCharles writes:
Whether you agree with unions or not, I think the amendment process has to be strictly enforced. When you consider that this ballot initiative is seeking to amend the State constitution, there shouldnt be any room for fraud, or minor oversights. Our ballot process has gotten a little out of hand. Then you begin to throw in out-of-state petitioners and notaries that arent really notaries.
If it is the will of the people of Colorado, then it should be done by the proper process. They should disqualify amendment 47 from the ballot. Coors and the others will live to fight another day. Next time, by the rules.