Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Colorado Amendment 62, Definition of Person Amendment (2010)
| Colorado Initiative 62 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 2, 2010 | |
| Topic Abortion | |
Status Defeated | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin Citizens |
Colorado Amendment 62 was on the ballot as an initiated constitutional amendment in Colorado on November 2, 2010. It was defeated.[1]
A "yes" vote supported amending the state constitution to include "every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being" in the definition of person. |
A "no" vote opposed amending the state constitution to include "every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being" in the definition of person. |
Election results
|
Colorado Amendment 62 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 509,062 | 29.47% | ||
|
|
1,218,490 | 70.53% | ||
Measure design
Initiative 62 would have included "every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being" in the definition of person used in Colorado constitutional provisions relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice, and due process of law.[2]
The measure was the second ballot measure in Colorado related to the definition of personhood. In 2008, Amendment 48 was defeated by a margin of 73% to 27%.[3][4]
Text of measure
- See also: Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title was as follows:[2]
| “ | Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution applying the term "person," as used in those provisions of the Colorado constitution relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice, and due process of law, to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being?[5] | ” |
Constitutional changes
- See also: Article II, Colorado Constitution
The ballot measure would have added a Section 32 to Article II of the Colorado Constitution. The following underlined text would have been added:
Support
Supporters
Candidates
Organizations
Arguments
Opposition
Protect Families Protect Choices led the campaign in opposition to the initiative.[6]
Opponents
Organizations
- Center for Reproductive Rights
- Coalition for Secular Government
- Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights
- National Advocates for Pregnant Women
- Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Action Fund
Arguments
Media editorial positions
- Main article: Endorsements of Colorado ballot measures, 2010
Ballotpedia lists the positions of media editorial boards that support or oppose ballot measures. This does not include opinion pieces from individuals or groups that do not represent the official position of a newspaper or media outlet. Ballotpedia includes editorials from newspapers and outlets based on circulation and readership, political coverage within a state, and length of publication. You can share media editorial board endorsements with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.
Opposition
- ColoradoBallot.net, a local blog, was opposed to Amendment 62. The blog stated, in part, "This is a question that does belong on the ballot (one of the few). But I think this is way more extreme than what the people of this state want. We should have a discussion of what point in the pregnancy we as a people want to say abortion is no longer allowed. And we should put it to a vote. But this proposal should be shot down."[7]
- TimesCall.com was opposed to Amendment 62. In an editorial, the board said, "Two years ago, 73 percent of Colorado voters rejected the personhood amendment. This is essentially the same amendment. While the amendment’s sponsors are sincere, voters have already spoken. Vote against."[8]
- The Denver Post was opposed to Amendment 62. In an editorial, the board said, "Obviously, the intent of the law is to defeat the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision, which defined a fetus as a person once it entered a pregnancy's third trimester. That definition prevents states from arguing that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution allows them to outlaw abortion. Again, reasonable people can disagree on the merits of abortion. But the "personhood" amendment's attempt to end the established practices under Roe vs. Wade would usher in far too many unintended consequences. Vote "no" on Amendment 62.[9]
- The Steamboat Today was opposed to all constitutional amendments on the Colorado 2010 ballot. "After careful consideration of the nine statewide ballot questions being put before voters this fall, we once again have reached the conclusion that proposed amendments to Colorado’s constitution too often are being used to effect changes in public policy that are better left to the legislative branch and the courts," said the editorial board.[10]
- The Coloradoan was opposed to the proposed measure. "As we said in 2008 when we recommended a vote against that year's proposal, regardless of how one feels about the issue of abortion, this proposal would carry broad and perhaps unintended consequences if approved by voters. Vote "no" on Amendment 62," said the editorial board.[11]
- The Durango Herald was opposed. "A badly written assault on women's reproductive freedom, the "personhood" amendment would end all abortions - even in cases of rape, incest or to save the mother's life. What else it might do would be decided by endless court cases," said the editorial board.[12]
Background
Colorado Amendment 48 (2008)
The 2008 version defined a person as "any human being from the moment of fertilization," whereas the 2010 version defined a person as "every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being."[13]
The 2010 proposed amendment did not include the word "fertilization" in it.[13]
According to Gualberto Garcia Jones, director of Colorado Personhood and proponent of the initiative, the change in language was made in order to be more "comprehensive in our definition of a person." For example, Jones noted that the new language accounted for human beings created through asexual reproduction in laboratories. "Fertilization would not have properly applied to asexually reproduced humans, but even asexually reproduced human beings have a definite biological beginning," said Jones.[13]
Path to the ballot
A ballot title for the measure was approved on August 5, 2009.[14] Supporters were required to submit 76,047 valid signatures to qualify the measure for the November 2010 ballot by February 12, 2010.
On March 26, 2010 the Colorado Secretary of State certified the proposed amendment after determining that supporters had collected a total of 95,884 valid signatures.[15][16]
Submitted signatures
Approximately 79,817 signatures were submitted in mid-February, 3,770 more than the required number of valid signatures to certify the measure for the ballot.[17][18][19] On March 3, the Colorado Secretary of State announced that filed petitions fell short of the required 76,047 signatures. Supporters had until March 18 to collect additional signatures.[20] A random sample of 5 percent of the submitted signatures revealed 960 invalid signatures. According to the secretary of state's office, only 60,357 were valid signatures.[21][22]
On March 18, 2010 supporters filed an additional 46,671 signatures with the secretary of state's office. A minimum of 15,690 were required to meet the number of valid signatures required to qualify the measure for the ballot.[23]
On March 26, 2010 the Colorado Secretary of State certified the proposed amendment after determining that supporters had collected a total of 95,884 valid signatures, surpassing the minimum requirement of 76,047 signatures.[24][25]
See also
External links
Support
Opposition
Footnotes
- ↑ The Durango Herald, "Colo. voters reject ballot initiatives," November 4, 2010
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Colorado State Legislative Council, "Ballot History," accessed February 27, 2014
- ↑ PersonhoodUSA press release announcing the campaign for the proposed amendment
- ↑ The Durango Herald, "Fetuses would be people under Amendment 62," October 7, 2010
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Protect Families Protect Choices, "Home," accessed May 18, 2010
- ↑ ColoradoBallot.net, "62: Outlaw Abortion," accessed September 7, 2010
- ↑ Think Outside the Cage, "Ballot measures costly," October 6, 2010
- ↑ The Denver Post, "Reject the return of "personhood,"" October 1, 2010
- ↑ Steamboat Today, "Our View: Vote 'no' on state amendments," October 20, 2010
- ↑ Coloradoan, "Voters, reject citizen-initiated amendments," October 27, 2010
- ↑ The Durango Herald, "Endorsements," October 24, 2010
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 The Colorado Independent, "Personhood initiative lining up friends and foes," October 27, 2009
- ↑ Denver Post, "Colorado "Personhood" proposal's 2010 ballot title approved," August 6, 2009
- ↑ 9News, "Voters to be asked a 2nd time about abortion," March 28, 2010
- ↑ KDVR Denver, "Taxes, personhood, possibly health care set for November ballot," March 29, 2010
- ↑ Ms. Magazine, "Signatures Submitted for New CO Personhood Initiative," February 17, 2010
- ↑ The Associated Press, "Group: Enough signatures gathered to put personhood on ballot," February 14, 2010
- ↑ Colorado Springs Independent, "Personhood on the edge," February 15, 2010
- ↑ The Daily Sentinel, "Ballot initiative defining a person short on signatures," March 3, 2010
- ↑ KUSA-TV, "'Definition of Person' ballot initiative short signatures," March 3, 2010
- ↑ Associated Press, "Abortion amendment faces new Colorado deadline," March 18, 2010
- ↑ Associated Press, "Colo. abortion foes say they cleared petition bar," March 18, 2010
- ↑ The Cypress Times, "Personhood Certified to be on Colorado Ballot," March 28, 2010
- ↑ HULIQ, "Colorado to vote on anti-abortion initiative in November," March 27, 2010
 |
State of Colorado Denver (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
