The governor of Colorado has gained a new responsibility over the past two decades: “Chief Stopper” of potentially damaging constitutional amendments that have been put on the election ballot by initiative petition.
John Hickenlooper recently starred in the role of Chief Stopper when he got four initiated constitutional amendments on local control of oil and gas drilling off the ballot and back under the control of the governor and the state legislature.
The proposed amendments, now withdrawn, would have required such things as drilling rigs being set back 2,000 feet from homes, state oil and gas revenues being withheld from communities that ban drilling, delegating greater decision making authority over oil and gas drilling to local governments, and related matters.
As promised, Gov. Hickenlooper has appointed a commission to study oil and gas drilling issues in Colorado and make recommendations for reform to the legislature. The commission will try to fashion a compromise for the legislature and the governor to consider next February.
All four of the withdrawn amendments were well-intentioned and had passionate supporters. Political insiders said all four were probably headed for defeat, but not until after huge amounts of money had been spent on negative rather than educational advertising.
By negotiating these four initiatives off the ballot, Hickenlooper replaced direct democracy (a vote of the people) with representative democracy (the state legislature and the governor), which is the republican form of government strongly preferred by the nation’s founders, such as George Washington and James Madison.
We wish more governors of Colorado — past, present, and future — stepped into the ballot issue fray and used the “bully pulpit” of their office to keep divisive and dubious initiated amendments off the ballot, or worked to defeat them when such proposals get on the ballot.
In 1992, when the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights — an initiated constitutional amendment limiting state revenues — was on the general election ballot, Gov. Roy Romer issued a statement opposing it. Given the questionable side effects that TABOR has had on state and local finances in Colorado over the past 22 years, Romer should have, as he himself later acknowledged, raised money, formed a campaign committee, and barnstormed throughout the state to defeat it.
The governor should not just take the responsibility of stopping potentially harmful constitutional amendments initiated onto the ballot. He or she should also, on occasion, play an active role in initiating constitutional amendments — put on the ballot by the state legislature or the popular initiative — that, in the governor’s view, make positive improvements to state government.
That role was ably played by former Gov. Bill Owens, who in 2005 led a drive to reduce the most damaging effects of TABOR on state and local finances. The result was Referendum C, a measure put on the ballot by the state legislature which, after a vigorous statewide campaign of support by Owens, was narrowly adopted by the voters.
Thomas E. Cronin and Robert D. Loevy are political scientists at Colorado College.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
