Colorado's Legislature can't seem to get past its contempt for the citizens initiative. That's the process in which voters exercise their right to do their lawmaking by petitioning proposals directly onto the ballot. And our elected lawmakers never stop trying to undermine that right.

The citizens initiative is voters' end run on the Legislature when it won't act in their interest. The Legislature resents it — especially when it comes to taxes. Rank-and-file voters like to cut taxes, of course, and plenty of lawmakers will do anything to stop them.

Hence, an outrageous if little noticed assault by majority-Democratic lawmakers on the citizens initiative back in 2021. They passed a bill — deceptively labeled "Voter Transparency in Ballot Measures" — mandating the use of ballot verbiage intended to kill any proposed tax cut.

Among its provisions, the law requires any citizens initiative proposing to cut taxes to include at the beginning of the ballot title the wording, "... thereby reducing state revenue, which will reduce funding for state expenditures that include but are not limited to ..." the three largest areas of state spending at the time of the proposal. Think, schools or transportation — i.e., spending cuts the authors of this devious law knew would give the public heartburn.

It was a cynical and smug attempt to force voters to make "tough choices." But it was a false choice — not to mention a potentially unconstitutional encroachment on citizens' First Amendment right to free speech by forcing them to use the state's approved ballot language.

Which is why some prominent Coloradans filed suit against the law this week in federal court. Led by the advocacy group Advance Colorado, plaintiffs in the action include former U.S. Sen. Hank Brown — who's also a former University of Colorado president — and assorted local elected officials. They are represented by former U.S. Attorney Troy Eid.

Their case seems pretty straightforward.

As Advance Colorado's Michael Fields said, "The requirement to include this language on citizen-initiated ballot measures represents a clear example of unconstitutional compelled speech, and even worse, it requires compelled false speech."

Fields, a lawyer, explained, "The language must be used even when there is no guarantee that a reduction in tax rates 'will reduce funding' for any particular state program. Even worse, it is required even when it is provably and mathematically false."

Indeed, a tax cut might or might not result in the named programs getting dinged. Tax revenue could surge once again in coming years due to economic growth and — depending on the size of the tax cut — result in no net reduction to state coffers.

As well, lawmakers could make some tough choices of their own — for a refreshing change — and exercise greater budget discipline if voters enacted a tax cut. Meaning, they might hold harmless some of the essential programs the tax cut's authors were forced to specify in their ballot title — and instead cut budget fluff to accommodate the tax cut. As they should.

This isn't the first time the Legislature gutted tax cuts before the public even had a chance to vote on them. In the same 2021 legislative session, ruling Democrats sabotaged a property-tax cut proposed for that fall's ballot.

Just before the spring session adjourned, lawmakers passed a bill scrambling the state's property-tax classifications in a way that nearly mooted the ballot proposal.

That the Legislature always wants more of your tax dollars is probably a given. What's noteworthy is that it would stoop so low in its relentless money grab.

REPRINTED FROM THE COLORADO SPRINGS GAZETTE

Photo credit: Mika Baumeister at Unsplash