2008 Colorado Statewide Ballot Initiatives
YES on Amendment 46, Nondiscrimination by the State. It’s time to end the mistake of affirmative action.
YES on Amendment 47, Colorado Right to Work Amendment. Unions should not be able to monopolize labor available to employers.
YES on Amendment 48, Life Begins at Fertilization. Obviously it does, and our laws should reflect this fact.
NO on Amendment 49, Limits on Payroll Deductions for Public Employees. This is an unnecessary limit on public employees contract rights.
YES on Amendment 50, Increased Gambling Limits in Central City, Black Hawk and Cripple Creek. If you’re going to allow gambling at all, the degree to which a person chooses to engage in it should be a matter of personal choice, and not kept artificially low.
NO on Amendment 51, Increase Sales Tax to fund state services for developmentally disabled people. This looks like a bad law that contains many escape clauses for funding to be directed away from the intended beneficiaries of the law.
NO on Amendment 52, Reallocate Fuel and Mineral tax revenues to I-70 highway construction. In effect, this law appears to create new subsidies for the highway construction and ski industries.
NO on Amendment 53, Change Business Executive Liability rules. This law creates a loophole to excuse an executive from liability if the executive discloses an offense to the attorney general prior to the onset of criminal charges.
YES on Amendment 54, Political Campaign contribution limits by government contractors. After observing how special interests bought themselves a sales tax in Elbert County last year, this measure seems like a very good idea.
NO on Amendment 55, Cause for Employee discharge. Colorado should remain an “at-will” employment state.
NO on Amendment 56, Employers Required to provide health insurance. With the volatility in the insurance and health care markets, these benefits should be freely negotiable between employers and employees, and not mandatory.
NO on Amendment 57, Additional workman’s compensation requirements. Existing workman’s comp rules are sufficient.
NO on Amendment 58, Increase state oil and gas severance taxes. No new taxes. Tax revenues will continue to rise without the addition of new taxes.
NO on Amendment 59, Give Tabor refunds to an education fund. Colorado should keep Tabor in effect.
NO on Referendum L, Lower the age for serving in the Co. legislature to 21. The current age requirement is 25 and that is already too young.
NO on Referendum M, Land improvements no longer exempt from property tax. Tax exemptions should be increased.
YES on Referendum N, Liquor purity laws in Colorado constitution. No point in keeping this law in the constitution.
NO on Referendum O, Revise Citizen Initiative process. Citizen Initiatives should not be further encumbered.
I would like to comment on Amendment 51, which I support. As a parent of an adult child with a disability, I actively participated in developing the wording of this initiative. There was a great deal of time spent making sure that, contrary to your statement, the funding would be channeled directly to services for our children through the state mandated Community Centered Boards, which are the conduits for distributing the funding for the services needed. There are 12,000 people on waiting lists who are qualified by the state to receive the services. Colorado is 46th in the nation for fiscal services for people with developmental disabilities. The tax increase would be 2 cents on $10, a small price to pay to meet the needs of people, who through no fault of their own, are waiting. This is a win-win situation for Colorado. I urge you to look more closely at your statement on Amendment 51. Check out endcoloradowaitlist.org. There is no organized opposition to this amendment, it is strictly a grassroots initiative, and we ask you to Vote YES on 51.
The goal of the tax is laudable, however, a close reading of the text of the bill reveals only a general directive for spending, and escape clauses that allow for spending to be redirected. You wouldn’t trust a private sector party with your money on those terms. It amazes me that people throw money at the government with those kinds of caveats and expect a positive outcome.