Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

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

One less initiative on hefty Colorado ballot

By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published September 3, 2008 at 3:55 p.m.
Updated September 3, 2008 at 11:59 p.m.

Text size  

More Elections

More stories »

An initiative that would have preserved affirmative action programs in Colorado fell short of the required number of signatures to make November's crowded ballot, the secretary of state's office said Wednesday.

Initiative 82 was nearly 8,000 signatures short following a line-by- line verification of the petitions, according to Secretary of State Mike Coffman.

There are 18 statewide issues on the Nov. 4 ballot, in addition to local ballot questions and races, state legislative contests, and U.S. House, Senate and presidential races.

"Don't throw away your blue book when you get it," said Rich Coolidge, Coffman's spokesman, of the official state voter guide mailed to voters.

Initiative 82 was put forward by Coloradans for Equal Opportunity as a countermeasure to Amendment 46, which already is on the ballot.

Amendment 46, called the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative, would prohibit the state from granting preferential treatment to anyone on the basis of race, sex or ethnicity in hiring, education and contracts. Jessica Corry, heading up the Amendment 46 effort, said she is "elated" that the countermeasure won't be on the ballot.

"Voters will now have the chance for an honest conversation about race and gender in public hiring, contracting and education," she said.

Melissa Hart, a University of Colorado law professor who headed the Initiative 82 drive, said she was disappointed but won't appeal the decision, preferring instead to focus political resources on trying to defeat Amendment 46.

"It's frustrating because our opposition tied us up in litigation and used every tactic they could to hamper the process," Hart said. "It won't stop us from working as hard as we can to convince voters that Colorado needs to reject (an) . . . intentionally confusing initiative."

flynnk@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5247

Colorado's crowded ballot

State voters face the longest list of measures to make the statewide ballot - 18 - in almost a century. The record for any single ballot was 32, in 1912.

* AMENDMENT 46

Colorado Civil Rights Initiative

Would prohibit the state from granting preferential treatment to anyone on the basis of race, sex or ethnicity in hiring, education and contracts.

* AMENDMENT 47

Right to work

Would outlaw agreements requiring workers covered by union contracts to pay fees for representation.

* AMENDMENT 48

Definition of person

Would ban abortion by defining personhood as beginning at fertilization.

* AMENDMENT 49

Public payroll standards

Would ban governments from taking deductions directly from employee paychecks for any nongovernmental special interest group.

* AMENDMENT 50

Gaming

Would allow casino towns to vote on whether to increase bet limits to $100 from $5, expand hours of operation and add games.

* AMENDMENT 51

Sales tax for disabled services

Would increase the state sales tax (by 2 cents on every $10) to fund services for those with developmental disabilities.

* AMENDMENT 52

Severance tax - transportation

Would allocate more severance tax money to transportation.

* AMENDMENT 53

Corporate fraud

Would impose tougher sanctions for fraud committed by businesses, executives.

* AMENDMENT 54

Campaign finance curbs

Would bar sole-source government contractors and unions with exclusive bargaining powers from making contributions to political candidates.

* AMENDMENT 55

Just cause

Would require an employer to provide a reason for firing a worker.

* AMENDMENT 56

Health coverage for employees

Would require employers with 20 or more workers to provide health care coverage for workers.

* AMENDMENT 57

Safe workplaces

Would allow an employee to sue for damages in addition to any settlements from the workers compensation system.

* AMENDMENT 58

Severance tax

Would reduce energy company tax breaks and use revenue to pay for college scholarships and other programs.

* AMENDMENT 59

K-12 schools funding

Would lift constitutional limits on state spending and direct additional revenue into an education fund.

Referendums

* REFERENDUM L:

Would lower the age of a candidate for the Colorado House and Senate from 25 to 21.

* REFERENDUM M

Would eliminate obsolete provisions in the state constitution about land value increases.

* REFERENDUM N:

Would eliminate obsolete provisions in the constitution about intoxicating liquor.

* REFERENDUM O:

Would increase the number of signatures required on petitions for constitutional amendments to at least 6 percent of votes cast in the previous election for governor.

Rejected, insufficient valid signatures

* INITIATIVE 82

Discrimination/ preferential treatment by Colorado governments

A countermeasure to Amendment 46 that outlaws quotas and systems in which job or college applicants earn points based on their race or sex but allows other affirmative-action programs to continue.

Comments

  • September 3, 2008

    4:08 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Willy writes:

    And had both measures passed we would have spent millions in court battles to sort out conflicting ammendments to our constitution. Millions that could pay for .......... (fill in the blank) or reduced our tax burden.

  • September 3, 2008

    4:36 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    bobarino writes:

    Let's see, Ms. Hart, a U of C law school prof, finds this language too tough to understand?

    "The state shall not discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to any group or individual on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public contracting, or public education."

    Maybe Ms. Hart can ask ex-prof. Churchill for some reading comprehension help.

    Geez. Talk about spinning BS. Too tough to understand......?

  • September 3, 2008

    5:37 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    gary writes:

    "It's frustrating because our opposition tied us up in litigation"

    A law professor could not figure out how to counter a legal litigation? Must be a friend of Campos!

    Nuff Said!

  • September 3, 2008

    9:27 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    mmannino writes:

    Initiative 82 was deliberately designed to confuse voters. It was removed by the election commission but then reinstated by the partisan state supreme court, the same partisan supreme court that stopped the will of the voters on the illegal alien initiative. It is refreshing that the voters of Colorado will get the opportunity to decide if racial preferences and quotas will be illegal in Colorado.

  • September 4, 2008

    12:32 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    p_myers661 writes:

    Anyone else notice that the unions and their cronies are running an ad attacking RTW and other measures by complaining that the company hired to collect signatures didn't do background checks on employees? Not a word about the initiatives themselves. Guess just letting people know about some things isn't their style.

    More ignorance means more people believing union lies.