Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

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

Ballot deal wasn't a bribe

Lawmakers are overreacting

Rocky Mountain News

Published October 5, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

Let's hope Thursday's deal between labor and business groups sets no precedent for future initiative campaigns in Colorado.

There's something disturbing about people putting draconian measures on the ballot - as labor groups did - in a brazen attempt to pressure other citizens into abandoning their own measures and then cutting a deal of the sort announced last week. And if organizations started placing truly insidious measures on the ballot with the expectation that some deep-pocketed opponent would pay them to remove it, that would be an ugly abuse of the initiative process.

But that's not exactly what happened Thursday, as we'll explain. And there's no evidence that scenarios involving outright bribery have occurred or are likely to occur in the future.

Enter state Rep. Amy Stephens, R-Monument, and Sen. Mike Kopp, R-Littleton. While the lawmakers haven't drafted their proposal, Stephens told us she wants to make it a felony for sponsors of ballot measures to remove their initiatives if it could be proved they did so after receiving money from their opponents.

Sponsors could be tried for extortion, perhaps facing charges for accepting (or soliciting) bribes.

What an overreaction. Critics of Colorado's initiative process say it's too easy to get measures on the ballot, but it's not so easy that people would be likely to put one on in the hope that someone would pay them to pull it off. And sponsoring a measure is certainly not cheap.

Placing a citizen-sponsored measure on the ballot can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, even if sponsors collect a good portion of signatures with volunteers. And once a measure reaches the ballot, there's no guarantee it will pass, even if sponsors spend millions more promoting it. More often than not, voters reject genuinely awful ideas.

Besides, the proposed legislation would not address what happened Thursday, when business groups agreed to finance a campaign against three amendments unions oppose if labor groups removed four measures they sponsored.

The unions actually assumed the risk. Amendments 47, 49 and 54 are still on the ballot. One or all three could pass.

Until we see more evidence that actual bribery or extortion has or is likely to occur, we believe such legislation is unnecessary. Before the legislature convenes in January, we hope Stephens and Kopp will reconsider.

Comments

  • October 5, 2008

    6:56 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    vudumom writes:

    So you think the parties involved are going to tell you when and if money has exchanged hands? That's your proof that money didn't exchange hands? Good reporting!

  • October 5, 2008

    9:22 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    wstrnlady writes:

    Your defense of what happened Thursday between business groups and labor is a poor example for what legislators are proposing.

    Remember, 'labor' collected signatures from members and filed the petitions for the 4 poisen 'pill amendments' with the explicit intent of forcing sponsors who were not connected to remove unfriendly amendments from the ballot .

    The negotiations between the union leaders and attorneys involved in the business community came to agreement only after they promised to add $3 million dollars to the already existing $11 million unions already have bankrolled. That's extortion.

    Without the promise of support there would be no agreement. That's extortion.

    The reports in your paper from the the business and labor organizations praising their efforts is self-serving. If you asked their members, you would not get the same message. These two 'bargaining' groups took Colorado voters' constitutional right to vote away from them.

    Politics in Colorado has taken a new path, and it isn't pretty.

  • October 5, 2008

    9:25 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jbowen43 writes:

    Republicans are known for their dirty tricks on election day. Be sure your voter registration is correct by visiting
    http://www.VoteForChange.com

  • October 5, 2008

    10:41 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    FreeEnterpriseWorks writes:

    Folks are correct – the deal that requires business to buy bullets for their own execution is neither extortion nor exaction by definition. It is BLACK MAIL.

    Extortion, outwresting, or exaction is a criminal offense, which occurs, when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion.
    Refraining from doing harm is sometimes euphemistically called protection.

    Extortion is commonly practiced by organized crime groups. The actual obtainment of money or property is not required to commit the offense.

    Exaction by it formal definition means the infliction of something such as pain and suffering or to make somebody endure something unpleasant.

    Extortion is distinguished from blackmail. In blackmail, the blackmailer threatens to do something which would be legal or normally allowed.

    Therefore, since the recent actions of organized labor are not illegal we should correctly call it blackmail!

    Unless there is a law passed that specifically makes these types of deals illegal, unethical and despicable actions such as this will still occur but still remain perfectly legal.

    It is a shame that some business leaders are now out pressuring businesses to purchase bullets for organized labor to kill business with. Protections for employees shouldn’t be bargained away between a few business “leaders” and organized in smoky backrooms. Citizens need to rise up and say they are tired of this corrupt system of back room deals.

    Stop this type of blackmail and backroom deals - Vote YES on Amendments 47, 49, and 54!

  • October 5, 2008

    11:40 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    a_watcher writes:

    This is an irresponsible editorial.

  • October 5, 2008

    1:48 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    spyder writes:

    Al Capone would be proud of this "co-operation" between unions and business in Colorado. He would be walking arm in arm with a big smile...right between ritter and looper.

  • October 6, 2008

    9:15 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    goodguy writes:

    The bigger issue is a complete lack of leadership that allowed it to reach this point. These ballot initiatves were in the works for months and the consequences were known, yet where was the Governor? Where was the Speaker? Where were our state leaders who are supposed to be doing what is best for Colorado? The vacuum in leadership at the top is having a direct impact on average citizens.

  • October 6, 2008

    1:26 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    YES on 47 and 54 to stop corrupt Union Bosses, Political Bosses and Corporate Bosses.

    Ritter gave state workers the Right-to-Work when he unionized them, the unethical basta_d now opposes it for the rest of Colorado?

    Next year I am signed an Amendment 53 like petition if it targets all these inside dealing sole source loving Bosses.