Date: 05/02/2012

Final
HCR12-1003

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STATE, VETERANS, & MILITARY AFFAIRS

Votes: View--> Action Taken:
Moved prepared amendment L.004. The motion passed
Moved to postpone indefinitely House Concurrent Re		PASS
PASS



03:44 PM -- HCR 12-1003

Representatives Court and Coram, prime sponsors, presented House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003, concerning the process for amending the state constitution, and, in connection therewith, increasing the number of votes needed to pass a constitutional amendment from a majority to at least 60 percent of the votes cast; allowing a constitutional amendment passed prior to 2013 to be repealed by a majority of the votes cast; and adding a requirement that a minimum number of petition signatures for a citizen-initiated constitutional amendment be gathered from voters who reside in each Colorado congressional district. Representative Court provided background on the ability of the voters in Colorado and other states to change their respective constitutions and state laws at the ballot box, and discussed the threshold for changing the constitution in Colorado under the resolution. Representative Coram discussed the provision in the resolution requiring a geographic distribution of signature-gathering to put a citizen initiative on the ballot. Discussion ensued regarding ways to change provisions already in the state constitution if House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003 were to pass. Representative Court explained the grandfather provision in the resolution.


03:52 PM

The following persons testified regarding House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003:

03:53 PM -- Mr. Thad Tecza, representing himself, testified in opposition to the resolution. Mr. Tecza discussed the difference in nature between the types of powers exercised by federal and state governments, and explained how the initiative process acts as a check on broad state powers. Mr. Tecza explained why state constitutions are inherently longer than the U.S. constitution, and explained why he feels the resolution is "a solution in search of a problem." Mr. Tecza explained how the provision in the resolution requiring geographical distribution of signatures for putting an initiative on the ballot, and opposition to the citizen initiative process in general, favors those with greater financial resources.

04:00 PM -- Ms. Anne Campbell, representing herself, testified in opposition to House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003. Ms. Campbell opposed the resolution since it burdens ordinary citizens and grassroots organizations, particularly due to the provision requiring a geographical distribution of petition signatures. Ms. Campbell discussed the voices of minority interests. Ms. Campbell responded to questions regarding how grassroots organizations are disfavored when it becomes harder to put an initiative on the ballot. Ms. Campbell responded to further questions regarding the voices of rural communities.

04:07 PM -- Ms. Elena Nunez, representing Common Cause, testified in opposition to the resolution. Ms. Nunez discussed the importance of the initiative process, particularly as a tool when the legislature fails to act. She discussed the inherent incentives for citizens to amend the constitution rather than statute to effect public policy, and expressed opposition to a provision in the resolution that requires a supermajority vote to amend the constitution. Ms. Nunez also discussed the fact that a supermajority vote would not be required to pass House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003 if it were to reach the ballot. Ms. Nunez explained why the resolution will not prevent wealthy interests from putting measures on the ballot, and discussed public opinion about the right to petition through the initiative process.

04:13 PM -- Ms. Marty Neilson, representing the Colorado Union of Taxpayers, testified in opposition to House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003. She viewed it as a "backdoor" attack on Article XX, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution, and supported the initiative process.

04:14 PM -- Mr. Mark Radtke, representing the Colorado Municipal League, testified in support of the resolution. Mr. Radtke discussed the need to raise the threshold for changing the state constitution.

04:16 PM -- Mr. Nicholas Colglazier, representing the Colorado Farm Bureau, testified in support of the resolution. Mr. Colglazier expressed support for raising the threshold for amending the state constitution.

04:19 PM -- Ms. Christine Watson, representing the League of Women Voters, testified about the resolution from a neutral position. Ms. Watson expressed support for the right of the citizens to petition their government, while also expressing a desire to protect the state constitution from excess amendment. Ms. Watson discussed the geographic signature distribution provision in House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003, and expressed support for providing protections to citizen-initiated statutes from amendment.


04:24 PM

Representative Becker explained the effect of prepared amendment L.004 (Attachment B). Discussion ensued regarding the fairness of increasing the threshold for removing a pre-existing constitutional amendment. Representative Becker clarified the effect of the amendment. Discussion returned to the fairness of the threshold created by the amendment.

HseState0502AttachB.pdf
BILL:HCR 12-1003
TIME: 04:26:25 PM
MOVED:Becker
MOTION:Moved prepared amendment L.004. The motion passed on a vote of 5-4.
SECONDED:Kerr J.
VOTE
Baumgardner
Yes
Becker
Yes
Casso
No
Court
No
Duran
No
Joshi
Yes
Todd
No
Coram
Yes
Kerr J.
Yes
YES: 5 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


04:32 PM
BILL:HCR 12-1003
TIME: 04:32:25 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Moved to postpone indefinitely House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003. The motion passed on a vote of 8-1.
SECONDED:Coram
VOTE
Baumgardner
Yes
Becker
No
Casso
Yes
Court
Yes
Duran
Yes
Joshi
Yes
Todd
Yes
Coram
Yes
Kerr J.
Yes
Final YES: 8 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS



04:34 PM

The committee adjourned.