Colorado Presidential Primary Election, Proposition 107 (2016)

Colorado Proposition 107
Election date November 8, 2016
Topic Elections and campaigns
Status a Approved
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

2016 measures
November 8
Amendment T d
Amendment U d
Amendment 69 d
Amendment 70 a
Amendment 71 a
Amendment 72 d
Proposition 106 a
Proposition 107 a
Proposition 108 a
Polls
Voter guides
Campaign finance
Signature costs

The Presidential Primary Election, also known as Proposition 107, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Colorado as an initiated state statute. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported this proposal to restore presidential primary elections held before the end of March and make them open in Colorado.

A "no" vote opposed this proposal, keeping the closed primary format.

Election results

Proposition 107
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		1,701,599	64.09%
No		953,246	35.91%

Election results from Colorado Secretary of State

Overview

Presidential primaries in Colorado

In March 2016, Democrats voted for their preferred presidential candidate in a caucus, with Sen. Bernie Sanders winning the most delegates. Republicans held district conventions, which Sen. Ted Cruz won. Republicans held caucuses in 2012 and 2008. To participate in Colorado caucuses, voters must be affiliated with the political party whose candidate they wish to vote for at least two months before the caucus. Colorado last convened presidential primaries in 2000, 1996, and 1992.

Initiative design

Proposition 107 established presidential primaries and allowed unaffiliated voters to vote in them. The primaries will be held at a date set by the Colorado Governor and held before the third Tuesday in March. They will be conducted as a mail-in ballot election.

State of the campaigns

See also: Campaign finance for Proposition 107

The group leading the campaign in support of Proposition 107, Let Colorado Vote, raised $5.3 million as of December 13, 2016, while the two groups opposing the proposition raised $71,481.

Gov. John Hickenlooper (D), and several former Colorado governors, endorsed the proposition. The active chairs of both major political parties of the state at the time of the election opposed Proposition 107. A poll conducted at the end of August 2016 indicated that around 54 percent of voters supported the proposition.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes recreating a presidential primary election to be held before the end of March in each presidential election year in which unaffiliated electors may vote without declaring an affiliation with a political party?

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary was as follows:

Background. Presidential nominees for major political parties are chosen by state delegates at each party's national convention. Delegates to the national convention are selected by each state based on the results of either a caucus or presidential primary election. Proposition 107 establishes a presidential primary election in Colorado that is open to voters affiliated with a major political party and to unaffiliated voters. Presidential primary elections were conducted in the state in 1992, 1996, and 2000. In other years, Colorado's political parties have selected delegates for nominating presidential candidates using a caucus system. Caucus participation is limited to voters who have affiliated with that political party at least two months prior to the caucus. Voters at a caucus typically debate the merits of each candidate and, in most years, a straw poll-style vote is then taken to determine the candidate preference of voters. Based on the caucus results, the parties allocate delegates to the national conventions. Process for presidential primaries. The presidential primary election established by Proposition 107 will be conducted as a mail ballot election on a date set by the Governor, no later than the third Tuesday in March. No other issue may be included on the ballot. Proposition 107 does not impact the existing primary election in Colorado, held in June, for other state, federal, and local offices. Participation of affiliated and unaffiliated voters. Under Proposition 107, voters are not required to affiliate with a political party in order to vote in the presidential primary election. Under Proposition 107, each major political party will have a separate presidential primary ballot for use by voters affiliated with the party. Unaffiliated voters will receive a combined ballot that shows all candidates for each political party. Unaffiliated voters may vote for a candidate of only one political party. If a voter selects candidates of more than one political party on the combined ballot, his or her ballot will not be counted. Funding for presidential primaries. Under Proposition 107, the cost of the presidential primary election will be paid by the state and counties. Counties will be responsible for administering the presidential primary election, and they will be reimbursed for a portion of these costs by the state. Currently, caucuses are paid for and conducted by the political parties. Pledging of delegates. Under Proposition 107, the winner of a party's presidential primary receives all delegates to the national convention, and the delegates are bound to support the winner at the convention. Impact on political party caucuses. Under Proposition 107, parties will still be allowed to hold caucuses to handle internal party business. However, parties will no longer use caucuses to determine the state party's choice for presidential nominee.

Full text

The full text of Proposition 107 can be read here.

Fiscal impact

The fiscal impact statement was as follows:

“

State spending. Proposition 107 increases state spending in the Secretary of State's Office by about $210,000 in budget year 2018-19 and by $2.7 million in budget year 2019-20 when the next presidential primary election will be conducted under the measure. After budget year 2019-20, state spending will increase every four years during presidential election years to conduct the presidential primary election. Local government spending. Under Proposition 107, counties will have costs of about $5.3 million in budget year 2019 to conduct a presidential primary election. Counties will be reimbursed about $2.6 million by the state to offset these costs. After budget year 2019-20, spending by counties will increase every four years to conduct the presidential primary election.

”

Support

Let Colorado Vote led the campaign in support of Proposition 107.

Supporters

Officials

• Gov. John Hickenlooper (D)
• Sen. Dominick Moreno

Former officials

• Gov. Bill Ritter (D)
• Gov. Bill Owens (R)
• Gov. Dick Lamm (D)
• U.S. Sen. Mark Udall (D)
• Rep. B.J. Nikkel (R)
• Rep. Christine Scanlan (D)
• Sen. Kiki Traylor
• Sen. Josh Penry (R)
• Sen. Lois Tochtrop (D)
• Sen. Cheri Gerou (R)

Organizations

• Metro Mayors Caucus
• Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce
• Grand Junction Chamber of Commerce
• Boulder Chamber of Commerce
• Club 20
• Colorado Concern
• Colorado Association of Realtors
• Colorado Contractors Association
• Vail Valley Partnership
• Rocky Mountain Farmers Union
• Boulder Chamber
• Progress 15

Individuals

• Howard Gelt, former Chair of Colorado Democratic Party
• Don Bain, former Chair of the Colorado Republican Party

Arguments

Kent Thiry, campaign chairman of Let Colorado Vote, argued:

“

Colorado voters value independence and want elections that encourage participation. Only 5 percent of voters participated in the March caucuses, which is not a sign of a healthy democracy. Our initiatives will fix that and allow more than 1 million unaffiliated voters to participate in elections that they currently pay for, but thus far have been excluded from.

”

Gov. John Hickenlooper (D), who endorsed the proposition, said:

“

That’s going to certainly encourage many, many more people to get involved in the electoral process. More and more people become unaffiliated voters through one frustration or another with the traditional party politics, doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t look for ways for them to be involved in who actually ends up on the ballot.

”

Curtis Hubbard, spokesperson for Let Colorado Vote, responding to proposition opponent Sen. Ted Harvey’s (R-30) point about voters being able to change their political affiliation to vote and then change back to unaffiliated, said:

“

Because you're asking them to be something that they're not. You're asking them to declare to be something that they're not and fundamentally, Senator, what this is about is this is a taxpayer financed election. And our view is if you're asking taxpayers to finance your private party function, then they should have a say in that process without being asked to join a party that they don’t believe that they're a part of but that they should have a say.

”

Official arguments

Official arguments in favor of Proposition 107 were as follows:

“

1) A presidential primary serves Colorado voters better than the caucus system. The current caucus system is confusing and inaccessible to many voters. Caucuses can be crowded, held at inconvenient times, and conducted by inexperienced volunteers. A presidential primary election eliminates the logistical difficulties of conducting caucuses. Under Proposition 107, a presidential primary will give voters several weeks to cast their ballots by mail or at a vote center, and the election will be conducted in the same manner as all other elections by experienced county election officials. 2) All registered voters in Colorado should be allowed to participate in the selection of presidential nominees, even if they are not affiliated with a political party. Unaffiliated voters make up more than one-third of all registered voters in the state. Proposition 107 gives these unaffiliated voters a role in selecting presidential nominees and may increase voter participation. 3) Proposition 107 protects voter confidentiality by allowing voters to select presidential primary candidates using a secret ballot. The current caucus system requires voters to publicly declare their candidate preference, which can discourage participation by many voters who do not wish to make their preference known.

”

Campaign advertisements

The following video advertisements were produced by Let Colorado Vote:

Let Colorado Vote's "Can We Play?"

Opposition

Citizens for Integrity Issue Committee and Save the Caucus filed in opposition to Proposition 107.

Opponents

• Sen. Kevin J. Grantham (R-2)
• Sen. Ted Harvey (R-30)
• Rick Palacio, Chair of the Colorado Democratic Party
• Steve House, Chair of the Colorado Republican Party

Arguments

Sen. Kevin J. Grantham (R-2) compared Proposition 107 and Proposition 108 to allowing the Oakland Raiders to select the Denver Broncos’ players. He added:

“

If you are registered as a Republican, you are a member of a private political organization; if you are a member of the Democratic party, you are a member of a private political organization, who currently has the right to select your own candidates without outside influence from outside parties, outside sources. Both 107 and 108 will put into place the ability of everybody from outside the party to make your decisions for you — again: Raiders/Broncos. … This is not a great system that they are trying to put into place. It's asking for confusion on an unprecedented scale.

”

Sen. Ted Harvey (R-30), in a debate with Let Colorado Voter spokesperson Curtis Hubbard, contended:

“

These are private entities, these political parties that are choosing their nominees, they're private entities and we are saying that people who are not a part of this private entity should be allowed to choose the leaders of these parties. It's like saying the Mormon Church will get to choose who is going to be the Pope… It's a violation of my identity that I'm a Republican choosing my leaders and I'm having people that aren't a part of my identity choosing who the leader would be. That's fundamental to the democratic process in the United States that people that are members of certain parties have the ability to choose their leadership.

”

Other arguments against the measure included:

• Rick Palacio, Chair of the Colorado Democratic Party, argued, "We want to make sure the caucuses remain intact for the purposes of party building for community building around party issues."

Official arguments

Official arguments in opposition to Proposition 107 were as follows:

“

1) Proposition 107 uses a combined ballot system for unaffiliated voters that will likely result in some unaffiliated voter ballots not being counted, could change the primary election winners, and would raise costs for taxpayers. On a combined ballot, unaffiliated voters must vote for only one party's candidate. People who vote for candidates in both parties will have their ballot disqualified, and their ballots will not be counted. This can change election results, and may result in contested elections and litigation. Producing and processing a separate combined ballot only for unaffiliated voters creates administrative and financial burdens for counties, especially smaller or rural counties. 2) Proposition 107 shifts costs to taxpayers, as the state and counties will be required to spend at least $5.0 million every four years to conduct a presidential primary election. Under a caucus system, taxpayers save money because caucuses are conducted and funded by the political parties. Taxpayers should not be required to pay the costs of nominating contests for political parties. The measure also places an administrative burden on counties to conduct an additional election every four years. 3) Under current law, unaffiliated voters who wish to participate at a caucus can declare their party affiliation ahead of time and attend.

”

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Colorado ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 31, 2016.

Let Colorado Vote registered to support the measure. The committee raised $5.29 million.

Citizens for Integrity and Save the Caucus, registered to oppose the measure. The committees raised $71,481.21.

Let Colorado Vote also supported Proposition 108 while Citizens for Integrity opposed it. It is impossible to distinguish between funds spent on each individual measure.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$5,295,090.00	$980.97	$5,296,070.97	$5,295,090.00	$5,296,070.97
Oppose	$398.00	$71,083.21	$71,481.21	$398.00	$71,481.21
Total	$5,295,488.00	$72,064.18	$5,367,552.18	$5,295,488.00	$5,367,552.18

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee(s) supporting the measure.

Committees in support of Proposition 107
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Let Colorado Vote	$5,295,090.00	$980.97	$5,296,070.97	$5,295,090.00	$5,296,070.97
Total	$5,295,090.00	$980.97	$5,296,070.97	$5,295,090.00	$5,296,070.97

Donors

The following were the top donors to the support committee(s).

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Kent Thiry	$3,158,000.00	$0.00	$3,158,000.00
Open Primaries	$250,000.00	$0.00	$250,000.00
Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce	$200,248.00	$0.00	$200,248.00
Anadarko Petroleum	$200,000.00	$0.00	$200,000.00
Noble Energy	$200,000.00	$0.00	$200,000.00

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee(s) in opposition to the initiative.

Committees in opposition to Proposition 107
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Citizens for Integrity Issue Committee	$0.00	$71,083.21	$71,083.21	$0.00	$71,083.21
Save the Caucus	$398.00	$0.00	$398.00	$398.00	$398.00
Total	$398.00	$71,083.21	$71,481.21	$398.00	$71,481.21

Donors

The top donors to the opposition committee(s) were as follows:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Media editorials

Support

• The Coloradoan said: “Across the state, an uncounted number of would-be voters abandoned their efforts, including a reported 200 at a single location in Boulder. Would-be voters left frustrated by the process, deciding it was not worth their time or effort to participate. Proposition 107 provides a solution.”
• Colorado Springs Independent said: "If it means more voters choosing to be unaffiliated, so be it. That would be the fault of the parties, not the individual voters for not feeling they can embrace one side or the other."
• Daily Camera said: "Props 107 and 108 will enfranchise more than 1 million unaffiliated Colorado voters in a crucial electoral step. The dramatic deterioration of our political system documented in the Harvard Business School report requires remedial measures to wrest that process from ideologues and special interests and return it to the people. Props 107 and 108 are a smart, constructive step toward that goal."
• The Denver Post said: "Thankfully, a pair of measures before voters this year would help. Propositions 107 and 108 would return a proper presidential primary to Colorado and open it and the rest of the primary races to greater voter participation by allowing unaffiliated voters to take part. We believe the changes would usher in more engagement, encourage broader and more thoughtful debate and ultimately provide better candidates to entrust with public office. We urge voters to say “yes” to Propositions 107 and 108."
• Grand Junction Daily Sentinel said: “The presidential primary would cost about $5 million every four years. That’s a reasonable cost to better engage voters.”
• The Gazette said: "Prop 107 would restore Colorado's presidential primary, making our state important during primary season. It would take an insider's game, in which small numbers of partisans choose electors to the national conventions, and allow all Republicans, Democrats and unaffiliated voters to participate in choosing presidential nominees."
• Steamboat Today said: "Colorado voters witnessed a confusing and tumultuous political process in spring 2016 that saw controversy spring up around both the Democratic and Republican state caucus procedures used to assign national convention delegates to presidential candidates. In the wake of that disputed process, we think it’s time for Colorado voters to get off the sidelines and approve Proposition 107, which would amend state statues to establish a presidential primary to be held in March of each presidential election year."
• The Tribune said: "We support both measures [Proposition 107 and Proposition 108]. In their own ways, they each would allow for greater participation by voters in the democratic process. Participation at presidential caucuses is low and often limited to party insiders and extremists. Creating a primary election would change that. Allowing unaffiliated voters to have a say in selecting a candidate at the primary level would also enhance the number of people who have a voice in our system."

Opposition

• Longmont Times-Call said: "To participate in the presidential selection process, he or she can choose a party in the weeks before the caucus and then revert afterward. For the costs associated, this solution is not worth it. A "no" vote is recommended."
• Loveland Reporter-Herald said: “For the costs associated, this solution is not worth it. A "no" vote is recommended.”

Polls

See also: 2016 ballot measure polls

• In late August 2016, Magellan Strategies surveyed 500 likely voters on Proposition 107. The firm found 54 percent of respondents supporting the initiative. Young voters, between 18 and 34 years of age, had the highest rate of support at 69 percent.

Colorado Presidential Primary Election, Proposition 107 (2016)
Poll	Support	Oppose	Undecided	Margin of error	Sample size
Magellan Strategies 8/29/16 - 8/31/16	54%	36%	10%	+/-4.38	500
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Colorado

• The proposed initiative was filed with the Colorado secretary of state's office on April 8, 2016, and the petition format was approved on May 20, 2016.
• Proposition 107 proponents needed to collect 98,492 signatures by August 8, 2016, to land Proposition 107 on the ballot.
• Supporters submitted signatures by the August 8, 2016, deadline.
• The secretary of state's office certified Proposition 107 on August 24, 2016.

Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired Kennedy Enterprises to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $544,401.43 was spent to collect the 98,492 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $5.53.

State profile

Demographic data for Colorado
	Colorado	U.S.
Total population:	5,448,819	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	103,642	3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:	84.2%	73.6%
Black/African American:	4%	12.6%
Asian:	2.9%	5.1%
Native American:	0.9%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0.1%	0.2%
Two or more:	3.5%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	21.1%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	90.7%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	38.1%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$60,629	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	13.5%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Colorado. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

Presidential voting pattern

See also: Presidential voting trends in Colorado

Colorado voted for the Democratic candidate in five out of the seven presidential elections between 2000 and 2024.

Pivot Counties (2016)

Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, four are located in Colorado, accounting for 1.94 percent of the total pivot counties.

Pivot Counties (2020)

In 2020, Ballotpedia re-examined the 206 Pivot Counties to view their voting patterns following that year's presidential election. Ballotpedia defined those won by Trump won as Retained Pivot Counties and those won by Joe Biden (D) as Boomerang Pivot Counties. Nationwide, there were 181 Retained Pivot Counties and 25 Boomerang Pivot Counties. Colorado had three Retained Pivot Counties and one Boomerang Pivot County, accounting for 1.66 and 4.00 percent of all Retained and Boomerang Pivot Counties, respectively.

More Colorado coverage on Ballotpedia

• Elections in Colorado
• United States congressional delegations from Colorado
• Public policy in Colorado
• Endorsers in Colorado
• Colorado fact checks
• More...

See also

Suggest a link

• 2016 ballot measures
• Colorado 2016 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Colorado

External links

Basic information

• Proposition 107
• Colorado 2016 Ballot Information Book

Support

• Let Colorado Vote
• Let Colorado Vote Facebook

Footnotes

Ballotpedia

About

Overview • What people are saying • Support Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

---

Executive: Leslie Graves, Founder and CEO • Gwen Beattie, Chief Operating Officer

Communications: Alison Graves, Director of Communications • Carley Allensworth • Abigail Campbell • Frank Festa • Sarah Groat • Nathaniel Harwood • Dillon Redmond • Erica Shumaker
External Relations: Geoff Pallay, Director of External Relations • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Ashley Fleming • Thomas Mardik • Hannah Nelson
Operations: Meghann Olshefski, Director of Operations • Amanda Herbert • Mandy Morris • Caroline Presnell • Kelly Rindfleisch
Tech: Matt Latourelle, Director of Technology Operations • Ryan Burch • Kirsten Corrao • Beth Dellea • Travis Eden • Tate Kamish • Margaret Kearney • Eric Lotto • Joseph Sanchez • Mary Susmitha

Contributors: Scott Rasmussen

---

Editorial Content

Josh Altic, Director of Content • Daniel Anderson, Associate Director of Elections & Data • Cory Eucalitto, Associate Director of Features • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor of Ballot Measures • Mandy McConnell, Managing Editor of News • Doug Kronaizl, Managing Editor of Local Expansion • Abbey Smith, Managing Editor of Elections • Janie Valentine, Managing Editor of Law • Joel Williams. Managing Editor of Events • Andrew Bahl • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Jon Dunn • Thomas Ellis • Nicole Fisher • Joseph Greaney • Thomas Grobben • Brianna Hosea • Molly Kehoe • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Nathan Maxwell • Jimmy McAllister • Brandon McCauley • Ellie Mikus • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Annelise Reinwald • Ethan Rice • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Emma Soukup • Alexis Thacker • Mina Vogel • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox