U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
November 09, 2018 09:43 AM UTC

Amendment 74: Now Its Backers Should Be Shunned

  • 7 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Amendment 74 supporters’ message to Colorado.

In a week packed with compelling political stories in Colorado, we wanted to circle back with a few parting words about the failed Amendment 74–a constitutional ballot measure that if passed would have radically altered takings laws in Colorado, forcing either the mass curtailment of zoning and other land use regulations or enormous payouts to business interests who felt the “value” of their property was diminished by such laws.

As the Denver Post’s John Aguilar reports, in the wake of Amendment 74’s defeat, the Colorado Farm Bureau–a storied organization founded in 1919 to represents the interests of agriculture and rural communities generally–is taking the public-relations fall:

Amendment 74, the measure that would have allowed property owners to file a takings claim against the government when a government action or regulation reduces their property’s value, was turned down by voters by a 54-percent to 46-percent margin with more than 1.9 million votes counted Wednesday morning…

Chad Vorthmann, executive vice president of Colorado Farm Bureau, conceded defeat and blamed “shadowy groups” out of the nation’s capital for Tuesday’s result.

“Coloradans clearly support private property rights protections, but ultimately Washington D.C. opposition groups were successful in creating enough doubt to prevent the amendment from passing,” he said in statement released late Tuesday night.

This statement from the CFB’s spokesperson, like the whole facade of the Farm Bureau’s public face for Amendment 74, simply has no basis in reality. This is an initiative that was opposed by virtually every local government in Colorado. The opposition to Amendment 74 was spearheaded by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper and Republican former AG and Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers, and condemned by every editorial board in the state–to include, belatedly, the idiots at the Colorado Springs Gazette. To suggest that the opposition to Amendment 74 was some kind of Washington, D.C.-based undertaking is demonstrably ridiculous.

The hypocrisy of this response to the defeat of Amendment 74 from the Colorado Farm Bureau is especially galling when you consider that, although their organization was the public face of the campaign, Amendment 74 was literally 99% funded by the oil and gas industry. This was a campaign whose true backers cynically hid themselves behind the much more sympathetic visage of farmers. In reality, the wide-ranging disruption that would have resulted from passage of Amendment 74 would have hurt agricultural interests too, along with (and this is not an exaggeration) everyone else in Colorado except the tiny fraction cashing in at taxpayer expense. As the true extent of this deception was unraveled, it became increasingly more difficult for Amendment 74 supporters to justify their position.

Once you understand just how destructive the seemingly simple language of Amendment 74 would have been in our state’s constitution, the next logical question must be about the irresponsibility of its proponents. Spending millions to enact this devastating end run around the most basic land use powers that local governments (and voters) have taken for granted their entire lives is not something that good-faith partners in civil society do. Any next time an oil and gas company goes before any local or state body to ask for permission to set up operations, Amendment 74 should hang over their heads like a cloud. You say you want to do right by the communities you frack?

That’s not what your money said in 2018.

As for the Colorado Farm Bureau? This disgraceful episode is not what that organization was ever founded to do. And before anyone takes them seriously in state or local politics again, heads should roll.

Comments

7 thoughts on “Amendment 74: Now Its Backers Should Be Shunned

  1. Absolutely.  They're going to try to bury this one but we should never forgive and forget.  $10 million spent on one of the most deceptive ballot measures we've ever seen.  And it's so ironic to see the Farm Bureau blame its defeat on "out of state" interests.

    1. We also need to remember that 74 was an equal but opposite reaction to Stalinist 122, which would have eventually cost as many as 150,000 jobs.

      Here's a deal: Keep your Stalinist hordes chained in the basement and we'll avoid such extreme defensive measures in the future.  Live and let live.

      1. Actually, the studies that came out during the campaign indicated 112 would not have been the hippie shutdown of the energy industry it was billed to be. But I also voted no.

        OTOH I think the oil and gas industry should be punished for Amendment 74. It was a draconian overkill response to the fractivists, especially since Prop 112 could have been changed by the legislature.

        1. By putting 85 percent of private land off limits, it would have gradually strangled the oil and gas industry in Colorado.   Read the posts of its honest advocates, like duke, and you'll see them admit that's what they wsnted.  Of course existing lease and public land, like the Roan Plateau, would hsve kept some jobs around for a long time.  But eventually we would have just imported from nonStalinist states.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

270 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!