The ethics law overwhelmingly approved by Colorado voters last fall obviously needs some clarification, and cautious lawmakers are acting appropriately by seeking guidance from the state Supreme Court.
Legislators have been bleating for weeks over whether they have the authority to write implementing language for Amendment 41, which is now part of the state’s constitution. We think they not only do they have the authority – it’s written into the amendment and there is precedent for it – but they also have the moral obligation to do so.
Far too many innocent people are about to be hurt by the legislature’s inaction. Major philanthropic groups, such as the Daniels Fund and the Boettcher Foundation, are threatening to withhold scholarships from the children of government employees, theorizing that they’re covered under the ethics law. The Boettcher group filed a lawsuit Monday hoping a judge would clarify the issue. Thousands of non-elected government employees have been left in some type of limbo by the law, unsure if, or why, it pertains to them.
Before these political games get further out of hand, the legislature should produce a bill and let the Supreme Court offer advice.
“So far, there have been legal opinions bandied about regarding a bill that no one has seen,” said Denver lawyer Mark Grueskin, hired by the amendment’s backers to help resolve lingering questions. “This will allow the bill to surface and give the court an opportunity to address just how much authority the legislature has to resolve the absurd consequences that flow from the strict interpretation of this.”
Under the amendment, lobbyists are prevented from giving gifts or meals worth more than $50 to state and local officials and employees or members of their immediate families. It also slows the statehouse “revolving door,” prohibiting just-retired lawmakers from lobbying former colleagues for two years. Some 27 states already have similar provisions.
The ballot initiative was plagued by vague wording, as citizen initiatives often are, and that has prompted the theatrical concerns. The intent of the law was never to prohibit the children of government employees from accepting a well-deserved scholarship. Punishment, according to Amendment 41, is to be meted out only for a “breach of the public trust for private gain.” A scholarship is hardly a breach.
Lawmakers, and the courts, should act swiftly, so the reach of the new law can be clarified without creating innocent victims.
