Colorado needs a new Constitution

6 Comments

by: hursa

Colorado is the Centennial state. In 1876, 100 years after America declared independence from Great Britain, our small state of 100,000 miners, farmers, trappers and railroad pioneers wrote a state constitution that created the very same framework of government that we operate under today. The 1876 state constitution has been amended 163 times, several of those amendments conflict with one another. Politicians often blame TABOR, which has serious flaws, but forget that the Gallagher Amendment, Amendment 23 and federal mandates have substantially changed the state budget situation.

Instead of another round of ballot measures intended to nick and tuck the overwhelmingly long and aging state constitution, I hope that state legislators will make a bold move that would fix the problem: to call for a state constitutional convention.

Once the legislature calls for a constitutional convention an election is held for delegates. each state Senate district will elect two delegates, making 70 delegates to write a blueprint for our state for the 21st century and beyond.

Aside from the budget, what should delegates change about our current constitution? Plenty. Currently, only the Governor can order the Attorney General to open an independent investigation of a crime. Why do we elect an Attorney General if not to act as a neutral third party, especially when investigating local police or prosecutorial misconduct, if they cannot currently investigate malfeasance?

Our general assembly should have more members. 35 senators and 65 representatives for a state of five million people is disproportionate. The legislature, regardless of the size, should abolish the Joint Budget Committee and hand that authority to the entire general assembly. A new constitution would remove TABOR, Gallagher, Amendment 23 and allow the state to prioritize

Voters should demand that their legislators fix the Colorado Constitution.

6 thoughts on “Colorado needs a new Constitution”

kwtree says:

May 31, 2022 at 9:32 am

Most of the folks calling for a Constitutional Convention want to gut it.

At least two-thirds of states must pass a call to force a convention; so far, 15 states have passed the model legislation proposed by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a conservative group that backs free markets and states’ rights.

Bills have passed at least one legislative chamber in another nine states, and bills have been introduced in 17 more states. The 15 states that have passed measures so far all have Republican-controlled legislatures and Republican governors; another nine states totally controlled by the GOP have yet to finalize passage, according to Convention of States Action, a project of the conservative group Citizens for Self-Governance.

On the agenda of these ALEC-backed autocrats: strengthening corporate citizenship, clarifying the 2nd Amendment, limiting voting rights to an elite minority.
You know what they say about fixing stuff that ain’t broke…

Log in to Reply
notaskinnycook says:

May 31, 2022 at 9:42 am

Um, kwetree, You know this diary is about the STATE constitution, right? It is, indeed, a tangled mess and could use an overhaul.

Log in to Reply
1. kwtree says:
  
  May 31, 2022 at 12:58 pm
  
  Nevermind.
  
  Log in to Reply
JohnInDenver says:

May 31, 2022 at 10:31 am

Nice idea … however, even I, who trusts in the power of public debate and believes there can be good changes that I am not personally in favor of, don't think it likely to happen.

I'd want to know a good deal more about delegate selection, what sort of majority or supermajority would be required to approve individual clauses or the overall Constitution, whether there would be any ratifying role for current legislators, or if it would require a citizen vote (or two) to ratify.

Too many people do not understand the arcane contradictions of our existing Constitution. Among those who do, partisanship is so baked into the process that I doubt there would be agreement to change without knowing in advance that the Republican or Democratic preferences would be included.

Log in to Reply
Voyageur says:

May 31, 2022 at 10:45 am

I strongly disagree with abolishing the joint budget committee. Like any other committee, it can be overridden by the general assembly as a whole. But it is a full-time job and lobbyists would have a field day if you eliminated its staff.

Log in to Reply
Conserv. Head Banger says:

May 31, 2022 at 2:21 pm

Yes, definitely keep the JBC. Legislators already are too dependent on lobbyists for vital information on bills, due to lack of staff. And the size; 65 and 35; is just right for us small government types.

Log in to Reply