Lawsuit Filed Against TABOR

One week ago a bipartisan group of 34 plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in US District Court claiming that TABOR is unconstitutional. Plaintiffs note that TABOR, by requiring citizen approval of tax increases, takes away some of the power granted to legislators in Article IV, Section 4 of the US Constitution which states, “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a Republican form of government. . .”

Attorney General John Suthers has a 60-day period to respond to the lawsuit but may ask for an extension. Opponents of the lawsuit warn that the entire citizen-initiative process will be in jeopardy if this lawsuit is successful.

Other citizen-initiated amendments have been overturned by courts in the past, in particular, Amendment 2 (to repeal anti-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation) and Amendment 54 (prohibiting campaign contributions from the extended family of government contractors).


Background on TABOR
A version of TABOR (Taxpayer Bill of Rights) was on the ballot in 1988 and 1990 before being passed by Colorado voters in 1992. It added Article X, Section 20 to the constitution.

TABOR requires voters to approve any tax rate increases. TABOR also restricts spending, requiring taxpayer refunds of excess revenues unless voters approved a revenue change, called “de-Brucing” after Douglas Bruce, the author of TABOR. Colorado is unique among the states in having such revenue and spending restrictions.

Many Colorado communities have locally de-Bruced. In 2005 Colorado voters approved Referendum C providing for a 5-year timeout from some TABOR provisions.

In 1994 Colorado voters passed a single-subject amendment to the constitution. In 1995 the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in the Amend Tabor case that TABOR “contains multiple subjects.” The result is that undoing TABOR via a voter-approved, constitutional amendment would require passing multiple ballot measures, a tricky feat to accomplish in any election year.

The single-subject provision for amendments to the constitution was originally Senate Concurrent Resolution 93-004. It was referred to and passed by Colorado voters in the 1994 election. The single-subject language can be seen in Article V, Section 1 (5.5) and Article XIX, Section 2 (3) of the Colorado Constitution and in Title 1, Article 40, Section 106.5 of the Colorado Revised Statutes.

Colorado General Assembly website
http://www.leg.state.co.us/
The menu on the left contains links to the Colorado Constitution and the Colorado Revised Statutes.

State Ballot Issues – A Look Ahead

The Colorado Legislative Council Ballot and Blue Book webpage has a link to the initiatives currently being considered for the 2011 and 2012 ballots or you can go directly to the list via the link below.
http://www.leg.state.co.us/LCS/Initiative%20Referendum/1112InitRefr.nsf/dac421ef79ad243487256def0067c1de


Senate Concurrent Resolution 001 would have placed a referred measure proposing changes to the initiative process on the November ballot. A disagreement between the House and the Senate on the supermajority percentage required for the legislature to change or repeal a statutory change precluded its passage.

If SCR 11-001 had made it to the ballot and been approved by the voters, it would have
1) increased the percentage of citizen votes required to pass new constitutional amendments
2) allowed constitutional amendments passed prior to 2013 to be repealed with a majority of citizen votes
3) required a minimum percent of signatures on citizen initiatives from each congressional district
4) required a supermajority vote of the legislature to change or repeal a citizen-initiated statutory change for 3 years after it becomes effective

SCR 11-001 could yet reappear as a citizen initiative. In 2008 Referendum O had some similar goals but failed at the ballot box. Some supporters of Referendum O blame its defeat on the lengthy ballot; it was hard to get the voters to pay attention to it, and it competed with other ballot issues for campaign funds.

Click below to see the full text of SCR 11-001.
http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2011A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/65B390DB5A87F561872578080080066D?Open&file=SCR001_rer.pdf

2010 Ballot Issues – Results

Voters were not enamored of the 2010 state ballot issues. They rejected all the ballot issues except for Amendment Q to relocate the state government in the event of a declared disaster emergency.

Voters in Boulder City, County and Valley felt much more favorable toward those ballot issues, passing every single one.