Colorado Amendment 1, Voter Approval for Tax and Debt Increases Initiative (1992)

Colorado Amendment 1
Election date November 3, 1992
Topic State and local government budgets, spending, and finance and Taxes
Status Approved
Type Initiated constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens

Colorado Amendment 1 was on the ballot as an initiated constitutional amendment in Colorado on November 3, 1992. It was approved.

A “yes” vote supported requiring government approval for tax increases and debt increases.

A “no” vote opposed requiring government approval for tax increases and debt increases.

Aftermath

Kerr v. Hickenlooper

See also: Kerr v. Hickenlooper

A lawsuit regarding Initiative 1 will likely have far reaching effects for other TABOR laws around the country and direct democracy, in general. A lawsuit was filed with U.S. District Court in Denver, with plaintiffs arguing that the amendment is unconstitutional. The lawsuit was filed during the week of May 27, 2011, by 34 bipartisan plaintiffs, according to reports.

According to Doug Bruce, author of the citizen initiative, if the lawsuit is successful in its efforts, it could allow lawmakers unlimited power, and could be extremely detrimental to citizen initiative efforts in the state of Colorado. Bruce stated: "This isn’t only attacking Colorado. The consequences of a ruling in their favor would invalidate the Constitution in all 50 states, and would also mean no limits on the federal government. We would have anarchy.”

However, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, David Skaggs, stated that the measure limits state legislators and conflicts with both the state and United States constitutions. Skaggs also argues that other initiatives have been overturned, but that it did not negatively affect the process. Skaggs commented: "Courts won’t reach beyond the narrow question presented. Yes, we got to this issue by initiative”, but the lawsuit targets TABOR and not citizens' initiatives.

The case's impact expanded significantly due to the consideration of a Guarantee Clause argument. In 2012, Colorado District Court Judge William J. Martínez ruled in favor of allowing the case to proceed. However, Martínez's ruling noted the history of seeing the Guarantee Clause as not justiciable or capable of judicial resolution, and said, "the Court determines that it cannot summarily conclude that Plaintiffs’ Guarantee Clause claim is per se non-justiciable"

The defense appealed the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. In March 2014, the court ruled that the case was justiciable. The court further denied a petition for rehearing en banc in July 2014. Some consider the case likely to reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

Election results

Colorado Amendment 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		812,308	53.68%
No		700,906	46.32%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Amendment 1 was as follows:

“

An amendment to the Colorado Constitution to require voter approval for certain state and local government tax revenue increases and debt; to restrict property, income, and other tares; to limit the rate of increase in state and local government spending; to allow additional initiative and referendum elections; and to provide for the mailing of information to registered voters.

”

Path to the ballot

See also: Signature requirements for ballot measures in Colorado

In Colorado, proponents needed to collect a number of signatures for an initiated constitutional amendment.

See also

1992 Measures

• 1992 Measures
• Taxes on the ballot
• State and local government budgets on the ballot
• spending on the ballot
• and finance on the ballot
• 1992 legislative sessions

Colorado

• Colorado ballot measures
• Colorado ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Colorado Blue Book (1992)