Given the increasing number of proposed amendments to the state constitution that citizens put before voters, it is important to ensure that they get there in an above-board manner.
The potential petition fraud being investigated by prosecutors is a troubling development in Denver deputies’ push to get arrest powers. We trust District Attorney Mitch Morrissey will do a thorough job in investigating suspicions that thousands of signatures were forged.
But the allegations are a reminder of why the signature verification process, though often maligned, is so critical. And this case underscores why it was important for the legislature to pass a law last session setting stricter rules for petition gathering.
In this case, seven people were hired to gather enough signatures to ask voters whether Denver sheriff’s deputies should be given arrest powers. But they used “questionable” practices in their work, according to Denver Clerk and Recorder Stephanie O’Malley.
Some signatures did not appear to match those on file for the registered voters, and numerous others appeared to be done in the same handwriting.
The signature gatherers worked for a Washington-based company hired by deputies.
House Speaker Terrance Carroll, who last session pushed the measure strengthening protections in the petition process, said the bill not only gives prosecutors additional tools, it explicitly gives judges the authority to look at fraud when petitions are evaluated for sufficiency in court.
“I think it provides a pretty big hammer,” he said.
House Bill 1326 closely ties signature gatherers to the integrity of the petitions they submit. It also prohibits signature-gathering firms from paying by the signature and imposes training requirements on those signature gathers.
The reforms were a reaction to the 2008 election cycle in which the tactics of petition gatherers working to get an anti-affirmative action measure on the ballot were called into question. They were accused of deceit in how they approached voters.
Despite the criticism, the measure ultimately made it to the ballot, where it was narrowly defeated.
The experience prompted calls for change in the petition process, and HB 1326 was the vehicle for those sentiments.
Regardless of what you think of the measures that make it onto the ballot, it’s vital to maintain the integrity of the petition process, which is frequently used in Colorado.
Regrettably, voters shot down Referendum O in 2008, which would have raised the bar for getting constitutional amendments on the ballot, and lowered requirements for putting proposed statutory changes on the ballot.
Without those safeguards, we’re glad O’Malley’s staff has been so diligent in scrutinizing signatures submitted for verification.
Such efforts are critical to maintaining the integrity of the electoral process.
