By Laurie Forsyth
Have you received your ballot Blue Book?
The staff director of Legislative Council, the entity responsible for producing the Blue Book, says it’s “the people’s book.” But you won’t find any comments from the people in it.
Natalie Castle, director for Legislative Council staff, testified at a legislative hearing on September 4, 2024. She said that unlike smaller jurisdictions, her office is not required to place arguments or comments from the public in the analysis you see in the Blue Book.
She testified that the arguments for and against measures are “independent.” “We own those arguments,” said Castle. She admitted that the analysis of ballot issues in the Blue Book is required to be fair and impartial but that her office disregards some public comments.
The result is an unfair analysis of ballot issues according to Chris Forsyth, Executive Director of The Judicial Integrity Project. He points to two ballot issues to prove his point.
The first is this year’s Amendment H. As the analysis of the issue for the Blue Book was about to become final, he requested records from Legislative Council regarding the drafting of the analysis.
Internal documents from Legislative Council, which staff members wrote, reveal that the strongest arguments against Amendment H are that “the initiative does not go far enough.” That it “leaves the judiciary with substantial indirect control.” And that Amendment H “could actually make things worse, reduces transparency and accountability in the way the judiciary would exercise control.”
Yet you won’t read those arguments in the Blue Book. Those argument were left out in favor of an opposition argument that reads “The current system works. . . .”
“It’s an intentionally unfair analysis that encourages voters to vote for Amendment H,” says Forsyth. “The vast majority of people know the current judicial discipline system does not work. Saying the system works as the opposition argument will make people vote for H when the problem is that H changes very little and does not provide the reform Colorado needs. Indeed, we told that to Legislative Council.”
“Records show that Legislative Council knew the strongest argument against H and intentionally did not publish the argument,” Forsyth says. He is concerned the unfair analysis will result in the adoption of Amendment H and the ultimate result will be that necessary and more responsible reforms will be thwarted because legislators will allege they did the job with H. “The analysis is so bad we submitted our own which was more fair,” he adds.
The hearing held on September 4 was for the Legislative Council Committee, comprised of members of the General Assembly, to listen to public comments regarding the draft from Castle’s office before the Blue Book was finalized. At the outset of the hearing, however, the chair of the committee, Rep. Julie McCluskie (D), announced that amendments were due by 3 p.m. the prior day. The only exception would be if McCluskie granted an exception.
“The hearing was over before it began,” says Forsyth. McCluskie had no interest in ensuring a fair analysis in the Blue Book. And it’s not the first time this has happened regarding a judicial issue on the ballot.
In 2022, Amendment D was proposed and ultimately adopted. The Amendment regarded judges for the new 23rd Judicial District. The amendment allowed the governor to designate judges from the 18th Judicial District to serve the remainder of their terms in the new district.
The problem, according to Forsyth, is that the citizens in the new 23rd Judicial District had the constitutional right to select their own judges. The Blue Book did not advise voters that the citizens in the new district had the constitutional right to select their own judges and that Amendment D would take that right away to transfer some judges from the 18th Judicial District.
“It was the same scenario,” says Forsyth. “Legislative Council knew there was a strong argument against the amendment and refused to print the argument. That’s not fair or impartial.”
Forsyth contends that the Blue Book has simply become propaganda in favor of measures referred by the legislature to the voters. “Up to the last minute, council staff was changing the Blue Book analysis to make it more likely that people would vote for H,” Forsyth says.
He contends the process for Blue Book analysis needs to be revised. “People are voting to amend the state constitution without being adequately advised.”
Legislative Council has mailed 2,125,000 Blue Books to voters.
Contacts:
Natalie Castle
Director, CO Legislative Council Staff
Email: natalie.castle@coleg.gov
Direct: 303-866-4778
Mobile: 720-978-7172
Chris Forsyth
Executive Director
The Judicial Integrity Project