From Our Readers
| Publication year | 1994 |
| Pages | 2513 |
| Citation | Vol. 23 No. 11 Pg. 2513 |
1994, November, Pg. 2513. From Our Readers
There were so many inaccurate statements about Amendment 12, Election Reform, in your two September articles [see Koncilja, "So What's Wrong with Amendment 12?" at page 2079 and Nichol, "Why Lawyers (and Everyone Else) Should Oppose Amendment 12" at page 2083] that I must focus my reply on their factual errors, not a discussion of the merits.
Readers who want more information may call (303) 869-6306 or write to Amendment 12, Box 1900, Arvada, CO 80001.
1. Frances Koncilja criticizes Amendment 12 four times in the first three paragraphs for reforms it "pretends" to enact. If it is just "make believe," why is she so upset? She says it "returns us to the excesses of a (campaign finance) system Colorado rejected years ago." But Colorado has no limits to repeal! So when was this public "rejection?" #12 DOES limit gifts to $50 a year from listed special interest groups. They now give up to $50,000; there are your excesses!
2. She says #12 "prohibits those most interested and most knowledgeable in a particular issue from participating in the debate." Translation: officials can no longer spend our tax money to create campaign material promoting their view on ballot issues. Anyone can still say what he wishes, and spend his own money, but massive theft of public money for politics must stop. Election notices based on citizen input on both sides will still be mailed. (Why DO we have those pesky elections, anyway, when government officials know it all?)
3. #12 will "allow any organized numerical minority to stop legislative action on a topic." Translation: Our right to petition in Article V, § 1 (3) is dusted off and the 20,000 non-stop emergencies legislators have declared since 1932 to stop citizen petitions for voter review of new laws will slow to six a year. #12 does not create this right; it just thins the blizzard of lies that have prevented its use.
4. "It rolls back compensation for elected officials to 1988 levels..." FALSE. The first four words of that text state, "Compensation changed after 1994..." If there is no change, it stays the same. Really hard. The Legislative Council's Blue Book agrees there is no rollback.
5. "It bars pensions of elected officials unless voters approve the pension, including any increase." FALSE. The Blue Book says they will have pensions---Social Security for future terms. Our state pension contribution will be 6.2 percent of salary, not 11.6 percent, saving us $100,000 a year. There will be no more conflict of interest (raising all pensions to benefit themselves). Total compensation, including pensions, will be tied to inflation OR voter approval. Legislators will no longer get secret lifetime pensions for 20 months' work.
6. "The legislature will no longer be making most decisions." They consider about 650 bills a year. Does anyone really believe there will be 644, or 144, petition drives?
7. "Even after the referendum, (#12) then prohibits the legislature from re-examining that issue." If voters reject a new law, why should politicians cram it down...
To continue reading
Request your trial