Colorado's initiative process remains a…
Colorado's initiative process remains a threat to agriculture, needs reform
Anti-livestock initiatives will continue to be proposed as long as it's easy to get them on the ballot
By Jeff Rice | ricej@journal-advocate.com | Sterling Journal-Advocate
PUBLISHED: March 3, 2022 at 5:08 p.m. | UPDATED: March 3, 2022 at 6:31 p.m.
Colorado's petition process for ballot issues needs to be reformed and soon.
Two agricultural representatives told an audience at the Colorado Agriculture Forum on Wednesday that there are no safeguards to prevent absurd ballot questions from going before the voters in Colorado. Terry Fankhauser, executive vice president of the Colorado Cattlemen's Association and Shawn Martini, vice president of advocacy for Colorado Farm Bureau, warned that animal welfare extremists will continue to come after Colorado's livestock industry because the state is what Martini called "a playground for extremists."
During a breakout session in the day-long forum, Fankhauser said petitioning for ballot issues is more prevalent in the West because, as the new territories were opened up, those creating state governments wanted more direct citizen input into government. Of all the western states, Fankhauser said, Nebraska seems to have the most secure process for getting initiatives on the ballot while Colorado joins Oregon and California with the least stringent.
Livestock growers dodged an electoral bullet when the Colorado Supreme Court rejected Initiative 16 last year, which would have gutted the state's livestock industry. Disguised as an "animal safety" measure, the initiative called for elimination of many accepted animal husbandry practices, including artificial insemination and pregnancy testing of cows. Fankhauser said the livestock industry and agricultural interests jumped on the issue with the only weapons they had.
"We engaged early to make sure the title (of the initiative) was accurate," he said. "The Title Board approved the title, but we challenged that and the Supreme Court found for us and rejected the initiative."
Fankhauser admitted the Court's reasoning was somewhat thin, but it was a unanimous decision and he believed the justices did the right thing. Still, proponents of the initiative learned from their mistakes, he said, and they will keep coming back.
Martini said these ballot issues are showing up in Colorado because it's easy to get on the ballot and because there is a virtual industry that makes big profits getting issues on the ballot.
"There's no roadblock to challenge the content of these things before they get on the ballot," Martini said. "All we can do is try to convince voters it's a bad idea, and that takes millions of dollars that (agricultural interests) just don't have."
Fankhauser said ag interests will be working to change the initiative process to something along the lines of the process for amending the state constitution. Coloradans approved Amendment 71, nicknamed "Raise the Bar," in 2016 to require that signatures be gathered from 2 percent of voters in each Colorado's 35 state Senate districts. It also requires constitutional measures to garner a supermajority of 55 percent of voter approval to pass rather than the simple majority previously required.
Had that process been in place in 2020, wolves would not be re-introduced in northwest Colorado, Fankhauser said.
Martini said Colorado's lack of safeguards in the initiative and referendum processes is costing the state jobs and investment because industry and financial institutions perceive that agriculture is under attack here. He said a meat packer decided to not build its new multi-million-dollar packing plant in southeastern Colorado because it sees Colorado's livestock industry as threatened. Fankhauser said one of the state's largest feedlots couldn't get a loan from an international bank to rehabilitate its pens because out-of-state banks will no longer lend money in Colorado.
Martini noted that it took seven years to get Amendment 71 passed, but he hopes it won't take that long to amend the initiative process.
"We're going to have to step up and find the dollars to finance this effort," he said.
Jeff Rice | Staff Writer
Jeff Rice is a reporter for the Journal-Advocate. He rejoined the paper in July 2016.
ricej@journal-advocate.com