Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

REALITY CHECK: Amendments 49, 54 don't address multinational firms

Raj Chohan, CBS4 News

Published October 1, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Updated October 1, 2008 at 2:33 a.m.

Text size  

More Delegates and Volunteers

More stories »

A new political commercial suggests that a trio of Colorado ballot measures would give special breaks to multinational corporations such as Halliburton. The 30-second spot comes from a union- backed group called Protect Colorado's Future.

Ad: This is a voter alert. Colorado ballot amendments have built-in loopholes. Amendments 49 and 54 would not apply to multinational corporations.

The claim is misleading. Neither of the amendments addresses multinational corporations. Amendment 49 would bar the state and local governments from automatically deducting money from employee paychecks and directing it to private organizations. If 49 passes, it would change the way unions and other private groups collect their dues.

However, the amendment would not apply to employee health insurance and retirement plans. To the extent that big corporations such as insurance providers and financial management companies provide such services, they would be exempt from the restrictions of 49. That is, government employers would still be allowed to use the state payroll system to make health care and pension plan deductions, but not deductions for union dues.

What about Amendment 54? The ad implies there's a loophole for big corporations. That implication is false. Amendment 54 would ban the recipients of no-bid, single-source government contracts from giving money to political campaigns or lobbying efforts. As a practical matter, it would have a major impact on unions and investment houses that do government bond work. But there's nothing in the language of the amendment that would exempt multinational corporations from the restrictions of 54.

Ad: Oil companies, drug companies and defense contractors would not be covered by these amendments.

Here's the spin. The union interests behind this ad are trying to point out that these amendments will hinder their ability to collect money and lobby the government. In contrast, the amendments have no impact on lobbying by private companies engaged in competitive bidding.

That's a fair point, but Amendment 54 would still apply to private companies as well as unions in cases of single-source no-bid government contracts.

Ad: Multinational corporations are pushing Amendments 47, 49 and 54.

It is true that Amendment 47, the right-to-work measure, has received funding from CoorsTek, a multinational corporation, as well as national business groups. The backers of Amendment 47 have raised nearly $1.2 million. However, Amendment 49 is operating on a shoestring budget of a little more than $100,000, most of it coming from the Independence Institute, a Colorado- based free-market think tank. Backers of Amendment 54 would not confirm whether multinational corporations contributed to the campaign. The group supporting 54 did acknowledge that local business people have contributed. In contrast, the union coalition battling the three amendments has raised $6.7 million to fight the three amendments and promote two other ballot measures.

Bottom line: The unions have correctly identified 47,49 and 54 as amendments hostile to their interests. Having said that, 47 and 54 have no loopholes for multinational corporations. Amendment 49 does contain a narrow loophole for health care and pension deductions. None of these measures contain exemptions that would include Halliburton.

Contact Raj Chohan at rchohan@CBScom.

Comments

  • October 1, 2008

    8:59 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Ben_Arvada writes:

    Protect Colorado's Future "must be going after the world record for most deceptive campaign."

    http://bendegrow.com/2008/protect-col...

  • October 1, 2008

    12:50 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    Protect Colorado's Corruption Racket = Union Bosses, Politicians, Denver Chamber and Well-Heeled Businessmen.

    Large Corporate Businesses colluding with Union Bosses, sounds almost Hoffa-like.

    YES on 47, 49, and 54 to stop their inside sole source dealings.

  • October 1, 2008

    12:50 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    johne123 writes:

    BTW, Ben here works for the "think tank" backing 47, 49, and 54. They were against Refs C&D and Fastracks. As for deceptive, he and his bosses have a long history of using deception when it comes to all the ballot measures:
    http://colorado.mediamatters.org/issu...

    In full disclosure I'm doing some work for Coloradans for Middle Class Relief, but you'll never hear Ben or his cohorts ever disclose anything like that.

  • October 1, 2008

    2:21 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    AnarchoCapitalist writes:

    Johne123 aptly points out that the Independence Institute was against FasTracks, Ref C, and Ref D. What a terrible track record... FasTracks and Ref C are how many times over budget now? And still climbing.

    Boy, I wish I were as "wrong" as the Independence Institute on these issues.

  • October 1, 2008

    4:19 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    johne123 writes:

    Ref C doesn't have a budget, genius. Besides both measures were voted for by a majority of the people. Sounds like you still have sour grapes.

  • October 8, 2008

    1:51 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    YES on 54 and 47 - stop corruption in government and the workplace.

    47, and 54 makes Corporate Bosses, Political Bosses and Union Bosses accountable to the people.

  • October 9, 2008

    9:07 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    GVG17 writes:

    I worked at a Union job for almost 3 years. The benefits were great, the work was tough. Two reasons for leaving were the physical pain I was in at age 23, and that I knew my hard earned money that went to union dues was going to political campaigns and organizations that I did not and do not support. For all the "fairness" that unions claim to provide, not having a choice in where my money is allocated is extrememly unfair.

    Help make Colorado Right-to-Work!