Big and bold ideas are needed to fix Colorado’s conflicting budgetary constraints.
However, the massive process of staging a constitutional convention to rework the budget process isn’t one of the answers.
It is refreshing to see two Republicans legislators, Sen. Al White and Rep. Don Marostica, consider various ways to free the state budget from the stranglehold exerted on it by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights and Amendment 23. But opening up the Pandora’s box of a constitutional convention isn’t worth the time or money — or the risk.
White and Marostica rightly view the arbitrary caps on revenue growth and various budget strictures as outdated and unworkable. The caps are made worse by the requirements of Amendment 23, which continually increase funding for K-12 education — regardless of the economy.
But forming a constitutional convention is difficult. Since Colorado held its first one back in 1876, it’s never seen another.
The General Assembly must reach agreement in each chamber by a two-thirds vote to ask statewide voters whether to call a convention.
If voters support the plan, the General Assembly has to figure our how to pay for a convention.
Voters must then elect 70 delegates — two from each state Senate district. Can you imagine the money spent on those races?
Those delegates then would be responsible for drafting a new constitution. Once they did so, the new version goes back to a statewide vote.
And that costs money.
Also, no one knows for certain whether just budget issues could be addressed at the constitutional convention. Once the delegates were at work, who knows whether they could resist sticking to unraveling TABOR when venturing into other subjects would be so tempting.
The process, even if successful, could take years.
We suggest lawmakers tackle TABOR and other budget strictures in more immediate ways.
