The Colorado Regulation of Games of Chance, also known as Referendum P, was on the November 2, 2010 ballot in Colorado as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was defeated. The proposal would have transferred the licensing of games of chance from the Department of State to the Department of Revenue.
- See also: 2010 ballot measure election results
| Colorado Referendum P (2010)|
|Yes|| 611,664|| 37.67%|
Election results via:Colorado Secretary of State - official 2010 general election results
Text of measure
The language appeared on the ballot as:
|| Shall there be an amendment to section 2 of article XVIII of the constitution of the state of Colorado, concerning the regulation of games of chance by an authority specified by the general assembly?
- See also: Colorado Amendment P (2010), constitutional text changes
The measure would have amended Article XVIII, section 2, subsections (2), (3) and (6) of the Colorado Constitution. The proposed changes can be read here.
Media editorial positions
- Main article: Endorsements of Colorado ballot measures, 2010
- The Coloradoan supported the proposed measure. "In addition to the citizen-initiated measures, Colorado voters will also decide three constitutional amendments referred by the Legislature. All are noncontroversial and needed cleanups to the state Constitution. Amendment P moves the responsibility for licensing bingo and raffle games from the Department of State to the Department of Revenue...We recommend a "yes" vote on Amendments P, Q and R," said the editorial board.
- The Durango Herald supported Amendment P. "This is a minor organizational reshuffling that the affected offices are fine with, the Legislature thinks is worthwhile and that matters to almost no one else. It is a constitutional amendment because the assignment of bingo and raffles to the secretary of state is in the Constitution," said the editorial board.
- The Denver Post said, "We are convinced that in the end it will be more cost-efficient for the Revenue Department to take care of it since that department has the people and practices in place to handle such matters. We think voters ought to approve Amendment P."
- ColoradoBallot.net, a local blog, said, "This is placed on the ballot by a bipartisan majority of the state legislature. It makes the state a bit more efficient."
- TimesCall.com was opposed to Amendment P. In an editorial, the board said, "Amendment P, which would move regulation of all games of chance into the Department of Revenue, would ultimately have the effect of reducing cost — or should have that effect....However, there’s a $116,000 expected startup cost, which in another year might be fine, but this year is not. Vote against."
- The Steamboat Today was opposed to all constitutional amendments on the Colorado 2010 ballot. "Some of this fall’s ballot measures are more innocent, such as Amendment P and its attempt to transfer oversight of licenses bingo and raffle games to the Department of Revenue, and Amendment Q, which would establish a process for temporarily moving the seat of state government from Denver in the event of a disaster. But we hardly see the need for them. Why spend $116,000 to transfer gaming oversight to a different department when the current system seems to have worked just fine?" said the editorial board.
Path to the ballot
- See also: How the Colorado Constitution is amended
Two-thirds of each chamber of the Colorado General Assembly were required to vote affirmatively for the proposed amendment to qualify for the 2010 ballot.
- ↑ Full text Colorado State Legislature,"SB 141 full text," retrieved July 26, 2010
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Colorado State Legislative Council, "Ballot History," accessed February 26, 2014
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Colorado State Legislature,"House Concurrent Resolution 09-1003," retrieved August 25, 2010
- ↑ Coloradoan,"Voters, reject citizen-initiated amendments," October 27, 2010
- ↑ The Durango Herald,"Referendums," October 22, 2010
- ↑ The Denver Post,"Colorado voters should OK Amendments P, Q and R," October 22, 2010
- ↑ ColoradoBallot.net,"P: Regulating Games of Chance," retrieved October 27, 2010
- ↑ TimesCall.com,"Seven of nine ballot issues too costly for state," October 6, 2010
- ↑ Steamboat Today,"Our View: Vote 'no' on state amendments," October 20, 2010