Every two years, a group of people who have been elected to the Colorado House and Senate gather at the State Capitol, raise their right hands, and take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Colorado. That Oath of Office is an important step because it marks the point at which candidates become legislators.
People who run for a state legislative seat are generally familiar with the United States Constitution. It is a fairly concise document that has been amended a relatively few times since it was ratified in 1789. For reference, including an index and editor’s notes, the US Constitution occupies approximately 19 pages in the printed Colorado Revised Statutes.
But, how many of those people have actually read the large and evolving book that is the Colorado Constitution? For reference, including indexes, editor’s notes, and annotations, the Colorado Constitution occupies over 860 pages in the printed Colorado Revised Statutes.
Beyond that curious question about legislators-elect, if you participate in advocacy at the Colorado Capitol, then you might want to consider whether you have read the Colorado Constitution. When it comes to how the Colorado General Assembly operates, are you familiar with Article V, which delegates authority to the Legislative Branch and places certain requirements and restrictions on it?
Whether you have or have not read the Colorado Constitution, keep in mind that it is available here free of charge, with no username or password required for access, 24/7/365:
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/
Between the late 1980’s and early 2000’s, Colorado voters approved a series of amendments to their state constitution, which had significant and lasting impact on how the Colorado General Assembly operates. The cumulative result of those changes is a legislative process that is unique among the states. If you didn’t live in Colorado when those changes were made, weren’t old enough to vote, or hadn’t been born yet, then, short of reading the state constitution, how would you know about them?
Please note that the following is not a comprehensive list of all constitutional amendments that have been approved by Colorado voters. The following is intended to provide a brief, layperson summary, of certain constitutional amendments made by the people of Colorado that changed how their state legislature operates. If you have questions of a legal nature, then please consult with an attorney.
November 1988
- Colorado voters approve an amendment to the state constitution providing regular sessions of the General Assembly not exceed 120 days. The measure passed with 52% of the vote. See Article V, Section 7 of the Colorado Constitution.
- Colorado voters approve the GAVEL Amendment to the state constitution requiring that any bill introduced receive a public hearing before a committee of reference, that any measure reported out of a committee of reference appear on the chamber calendar in the order reported, and to prohibit members of the General Assembly from committing themselves or other members in a party caucus to vote in favor of or against any matter pending or to be introduced in the General Assembly. The measure passed with 72% of the vote. See Article V, Section 20 for insight about how bills must be referred to committee and Sections 22(a) and 22(b) for insight about the prohibition on caucus positions.
In order to guarantee those constitutional requirements, opportunities for one legislator to “pocket veto” a bill had to be eliminated from the Colorado legislative process. For example, in Colorado, a committee chair cannot “kill” a bill by not scheduling it for a hearing. Chamber leadership cannot “kill” a bill by excluding it from the chamber calendar. A bill sponsor cannot “pull” a bill prior to its public hearing because that would prevent the voice of the people from being heard at that committee hearing.
GAVEL also restricted the practice of “whipping” votes by prohibiting “caucus positions.” In doing so, GAVEL sought to make each legislator accountable to the people, not to other legislators.
November 1990
- Colorado voters approve an amendment to the state constitution requiring term limits for Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, and members of the General Assembly. The measure passed with 71% of the vote. As it applies to members of the General Assembly, see Article V, Section 3(a) of the Colorado Constitution.
November 1992
- Colorado voters approve the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (“TABOR”), an amendment to the state constitution requiring voter approval for certain state and local government tax revenue increases and debt; to restrict property, income, and other taxes; to limit the rate of increase in state and local government spending; to allow additional initiative and referendum elections; and to provide for the mailing of information to registered voters. The measure passed with 54% of the vote. See Article X, Section 20 and Article V, Section 1 (2) – (10) of the Colorado Constitution.
November 2002
- Colorado voters approve an amendment to the state constitution that places strict campaign finance limitations on candidates by limiting contribution amounts, prohibiting certain contributions, and requiring public disclosure, and other provisions. The measure passed with 66% of the vote. See XXVIII – Campaign and Political Finance, of the Colorado Constitution.
November 2006
- Colorado voters approve an amendment to the state constitution that defined ethics in government, prohibited members of the General Assembly from accepting anything of value from a lobbyist, created a limit for gifts received from non-lobbyists, prohibits members of the General Assembly from lobbying at the state level of Colorado government for a period of two years after leaving office, created an Independent Ethics Commission (“IEC”), and provided authority to the IEC to receive and hear complaints, assess penalties, and to issue advisory opinions on ethics issues. The measure passed with 63% of the vote. See Article XXIX – Ethics in Government, of the Colorado Constitution.
It is fairly common for people in our society to be more familiar with events in Washington, DC than at their state capitol. The volume of national news coverage tends to draw more attention to the White House and Congress than local news might to a governor’s office or state legislature.
In order to be more effective in your advocacy efforts at the Colorado Capitol, it can be helpful to understand the differences between how the federal government operates under the US Constitution and how state government operates under both the US Constitution and the unique Colorado Constitution.
For example, if you support term limits for members of Congress, then have you considered whether term limits have addressed your concerns at the state level since the people of Colorado adopted them in 1990? If you support a balanced budget requirement at the federal level, then have you considered whether TABOR has addressed your concerns at the state level since the people of Colorado approved it in 1992?
It can also be helpful for advocates to understand how Colorado differs from other states. Remember: states are different. Differences between how state governments operate generally start with the unique state constitution of each state. An advocacy effort that succeeded in some other state might not work in Colorado.
For example, if you support or oppose the use of a certain textbook in public schools, then consider that Article IX, Section 16 of the Colorado Constitution makes clear that the Colorado General Assembly does not have “…power to prescribe textbooks to be used in public schools.” If you are inspired by a state legislative advocacy effort on that topic that occurred in some other state, then keep in mind that the Colorado legislature may not have the power to do whatever that other state legislature did. In Colorado, it might be necessary to direct advocacy on that topic to one, some or all of the 178 locally elected school boards. Article IX, Section 15 of the Colorado Constitution states that each local school board has “…control of instruction in the public schools of their respective districts.”
Finally, when advocating for or against a bill that is before the Colorado General Assembly, it can be more effective to understand what the Colorado Constitution requires for each bill and, as a result, to understand what is not permitted to occur. For example, urging legislators to “shut down the process” by denying quorum cannot work in Colorado because the state constitution doesn’t allow for that to happen.
The bottom line is that the legislative process works in those unique ways here in Colorado because that’s how the people of Colorado wanted it to work when they adopted their original state constitution in 1876 and when they later approved amendments to their state constitution. Reading the Colorado Constitution and studying the posts provided at Civics Corner might help you to be more effective in your advocacy efforts at the Colorado Capitol.