It may be tempting to look at last week’s victories by the Democratic Party, nationally and in Colorado, and pontificate that there is clearly a new acceptance of an activist, vigorous, even frisky sort of government in the land.
Democrats are associated with this kind of government, the kind that moves in eagerly and tries to solve problems rather than the kind that stands back and lets free-market forces sort things out. It’s a let-us-help rather than a laissez-faire approach to public policy.
Colorado certainly showed signs of joining in the national give-government-a-chance mood by awarding so many seats to so many Democrats.
But those are candidates. Candidates, at least in this term-limited state, have a comparatively short shelf life. No more than eight years in the same office, then it’s time to move on.
But ballot issues — including term limits themselves — seem to live forever. And it’s in that crowded arena that Coloradans showed their continuing skepticism of government.
Colorado voters put government in its place by defeating two ballot issues: Amendment 59, which would have resolved an incompatibility problem created by earlier ballot issues, and Referendum O, which would have made it harder to create future constitutional contradictions.
Those defeats make it highly unlikely that those issues will be raised again anytime soon. It would be too risky politically.
They mean that the Colorado legislature will continue to have less power and less flexibility than any legislature in the country. They also mean that Colorado will continue to be the easiest state for citizens to clutter the constitution with details and pet peeves.
Colorado’s is the only legislature that can’t simply pass a bill to raise tax rates. Tax increases — including revenue increases that exceed cost-of-living increases — must be approved by voters.
Amendment 59 would have continued a moratorium on the state having to return revenues that exceed the cost of living, and it would have removed another provision requiring the legislature to increase spending on public schools by more than the cost of living.
Those are both constitutional amendments, passed in 1992 and 2000, and they are clearly incompatible.
For now, there’s a moratorium on revenue refunds because a remarkable, bipartisan, business-labor-government coalition in 2005 spent a lot of money and effort to win voter approval of the change. Even so, it passed with just 52 percent approval, and only 40 percent of the state’s electorate went to the polls that off-year.
Through 2010, thanks to Referendum C, the state is excused from having to make those revenue refunds. It can actually spend the money it collects from existing taxes. But that’s barely two years away.
Referendum C, and its failed companion, Referendum D, probably benefited from a small turnout and a small ballot. Tuesday’s turnout was huge, and the length of the ballot was daunting. There was no focus, and limited financing, for a pro-59 campaign.
Because of what happened Tuesday, it’s possible we’ll see even longer ballots in the future. The legislature has little power, and limited revenue, so advocacy groups continue to try to get their slice of the pie carved into constitutional stone. Public schools. Cigarette taxes for health care. Casino revenue for community colleges.
That last item was one of the few successful ballot initiatives last week. Colorado had 14 statewide ballot issues, more than any other state, and therein may lie the answer to preventing future weight gain by an already obese document.
Keep those ballot issues rolling in. The more there are, apparently, the harder it is for any of them to pass.
Fred Brown (punditfwb@aol.com), retired Capitol Bureau chief for The Denver Post, is also a political analyst for 9News. His column appears twice a month.
