Bell Center

offers insight



By REBECCA

VAN DYKE

ALAMOSA — Armed with blue books and ballots, community members listened intently as ballot measures were laid out in understandable terms.

“We’re trying to give a balanced overview of what’s on the ballot this year,” said Bell Policy Center President Wade Buchanan.

The Bell Policy Center stopped at Adams State College Tuesday morning in the midst of a whirlwind tour around Colorado to help Coloradoans understand ballot measures.

“This is the largest and most consequential ballot in many years,” Buchanan said. In fact, it’s the second largest in state history, ballot issues outnumbered only once in 1912 with 32 ballot initiatives. The current ballot contains 10 initiatives and 4 referenda, not to mention choosing amongst a long list of men and women for several elected positions and innumerable city and county issues varying across state ballots.

Bell focused on Colorado’s state initiatives, giving pros and cons for each item and the Bell’s position on each item.

The Bell Policy Center is based out of Denver and focuses solely on issues that pertain to Coloradoans and building a better life for the residents of the state. “The nonprofit Bell Policy Center is committed to identifying and promoting policies that help individuals and families access opportunity and move towards self-sufficiency,” according to www.thebell.org.

The Bell claims to be a non-partisan policy center focused on conducting research and advocating public policy that “reflect[s] progressive values.”

Bell partnered with the ACLU Foundation of Colorado to put together a ballot guide for voters with cropped explanations, arguments in opposition and proposition, as well as the positions taken by Bell and the ACLU.

Amendment 46, one of the ballot’s social issues, is a constitutional item that would prohibit Colorado government, agencies and institutions from considering race, gender, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education or contracting. This includes exceptions for court orders, federal requirements and gender specific hiring, according to the Ballot Measure Voter Guide given to community members at the meeting.

Arguments in favor say that preference is unfair and programs that offer preferential treatment are no longer needed. “Have we achieved the color blind society we’ve been working toward, or is there still work to be done,” Buchanan asked the audience to consider.

In opposition, the amendment would take away programs that give specific groups of people “an equal opportunity to compete.”

Amendment 47 would prohibit mandatory labor union membership and dues if passed.

Proponents of the amendment said “No one should be required to make payments to a union as a condition of employment.” The amendment could be interpreted as unions taking away an employee’s choice.

However, in opposition, contracts negotiated by unions for union members affect all employees regardless of membership, so those in opposition feel it is unfair for non-members to reap the benefits without paying dues like the members have chosen to do.

Arguable the most heated and controversial ballot issue is Amendment 48, the definition of a person. The amendment would grant full constitutional rights from the moment of fertilization.

Proponents of the amendment said, “The amendment will ensure all human life is afforded equal treatment. Currently these rights are not given until birth.”

Opponents said there would be government interference in the doctor-patient relationship. “It could subject medical professionals to legal action for providing medical care if that affected a fertilized egg.”

Amendment 49 redefines allowable government paycheck deductions. The amendment specifically disallows deductions for union dues or political advocacy groups.

Arguments for the amendment say, “Employees object to having deducted funds transferred to politically active groups such as labor unions.”

Arguments against say, “[Amendment 49] prevents government employees from deciding what organizations to support with payroll deductions. Public employees already have the option to cancel automatic deductions.”

This amendment works closely with 47. With union dues being mandatory with employment currently, there is no ability to drop the automatic withdraw without losing membership, therefore going back on terms of employment by having to be part of the union.

Amendment 50 will allow Central City, Black Hawk and Cripple Creek to extend their hours of operation, increase betting minimums, and include more games.

Currently, casinos must close by 2 a.m., have a $5 maximum bet, and cannot include Craps or Roulette.

Arguments for the amendment include estimated $50 to $60 million in existing revenue through existing taxes on the casinos to support community colleges in Colorado.

Opponents say gambling has “negative economic and social impacts.” They say it is not a stable source of revenue and will hurt the demographics that participate in gambling behaviors.

Amendment 51 will increase state taxes by two-tenths of one percent over the next two years to help developmentally disabled people receive state services and get them off of waiting lists to receive service.

Advocates said, “The need for services is so great that it cannot be met without a new source of funding. Spending money now may reduce future costs of government services.”

Those in opposition said our weakened economy couldn’t handle it. It may, in fact, make it harder. “Decisions about how to spend state tax dollars are best made through a deliberative legislative process, rather than dedicating revenues to a specific purpose.”

Amendment 52 would allow the allocation of severance tax dollars to be spent on highway projects.

Arguments for the amendment include an estimated $225 million for highways over the next four years without a tax increase.

Arguments against the amendment are the amendment would take away necessary funding from water projects, renewable energy projects, and low income energy assistance programs.

Amendment 54 would prohibit sole source government contractors from contributing to elected officials within 2 years of the contract’s expiration and disallows contributions from immediate family members as well. Affected contracts would be those worth $100,000 per year or more. Labor unions are defined as sole source contractors.

In proposition of the amendment, it would ensure taxpayers that their money is being spent in the most efficient way when the government chooses a contractor.

In opposition, the amendment has “built in loopholes so the amendment would not apply to large corporations.”

Amendment 58 changes state severance taxes on the oil and natural gas industry. The amendment would remove property tax credits as well as change the tax to a flat rate of 5 percent for producers with income over $300,000.

The amendment would reallocate money to be split between existing severance tax funds and wildlife habitats, college scholarships for middle and low-income students, alternative energy programs, transportation, and water grants.

Arguments for the amendment include new money for state and community programs and doubling available assistance to middle and low-income college students.

Opponents said the money may be unstable because of current energy trends.

Amendment 59 would create a savings account to support education during economically difficult times.

Arguments for the amendment are that the amendment does not raise taxes, will improve schools and the economy, and requiring the government to save money in economically good times will ensure funding during hard times.

Opponents said the amendment would eliminate TABOR rebates and eliminates guaranteed funding increases for education.

Referendum L would change the age requirements for those seeking to serve in the state legislature from 25 to 21.

In favor of the referendum, this would allow younger people to serve their demographic, increase political awareness in the age group, and add a new perspective to public policy issues.

Against the referendum, opponents said, “Young people may not have the maturity needed for making critical public policy decisions as legislators.”

Referendum M would remove “an obsolete constitutional provision that allows the legislature to exempt, for tax purposes, land value increases from the addition of trees on private land.”

Those in support say the provision is obsolete and is no longer taken into consideration when evaluating property taxes.

Opposition said it could remove the legislature’s ability to offer a tax incentive for planting trees on private land.

Referendum N would remove obsolete language in provisions related to alcoholic beverages. It would remove the ban on saloons, defined as establishments that serve only alcoholic beverages without offering food.

Arguments for the referendum are that alcohol is and will continue to be regulated. Passing the referendum would not affect anything.

Those in opposition say the provisions have historical significance.

Referendum O would change the requirements for ballot measures to favor citizen-initiated state laws.

It would increase the number of signatures required for constitutional amendments and disallow changes to statutory amendments within 5 years with the exception of a two-thirds vote.

Arguments for the referendum include it would “preserve citizens’ rights to initiate laws while protecting legislative flexibility to react if problems develop.”

Arguments against say “the measure limits the ability of citizens to amend the Constitution, which is the best way for them to set fundamental policies that govern the legislature, executive branch and courts.”

During the session, Buchanan shared with attendees the recommendations the Bell Policy Center has made in the voting session.