Close
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
  1. #1
    Ammosexual GilpinGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Rural Gilpin County
    Posts
    7,221

    Default "Restoring Colorado" ballot initiative?

    This is an interesting idea. What do you guys think?

    Restoring Colorado

    From their website:

    Our mission is to restore fair representation for ALL Coloradans. Currently, both the House and the Senate in the Colorado legislature are based on population. This is in direct contrast to the way the U.S. Congress is determined, where one body, the Senate, is based on land area (two Senators per state, regardless of size) and the other body, the House, is based on population. The federal model provides a natural balance between large and small states and has been in place since the inception of our Republic.

    Our proposal is to restructure the Colorado State legislature with a model similar to the federal model. One chamber (the House) would be based on land area. Each county in the state would have its own representative, reducing the size of the House from 65 to 64 Representatives. The other chamber (the Senate) would remain based on population, with 35 State Senators.

    Our founding fathers understood that urban and rural interests would collide without a mechanism to compel cooperation. Simply put, larger urban interests have enough votes to pass legislation without the need for any votes from smaller rural communities. This leads to what is known as the tyranny of the majority. Larger urban areas can pass legislation unfavorable to smaller communities. It also means tax revenues collected from smaller rural communities can be spent on projects in urban areas. This happens in communities like those that produce energy and agricultural products as well as those that support tourism, like ski resorts and casinos.


  2. #2
    The "Godfather" of COAR Great-Kazoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Washboard Alley, AZ.
    Posts
    48,074

    Default

    I'd want to see the complete wording, before making a decision. Lots of outside money involved this Nov. Last thing we want is something that looks good the first 3 paragraphs. It's the unseen that causes trouble.
    The BG check at gunshows passed because people didn't read the entire bill. Folks thought it was for gunshows. Due to their laziness / failure to read past the first 3 pages ,we're stuck with it. Had they read the entire booklet,.it would have failed. very few people I spoke with didn't understand a gunshow was now 3 or more people in one place..
    Last edited by Great-Kazoo; 06-19-2014 at 09:51.
    The Great Kazoo's Feedback

    "when you're happy you enjoy the melody but, when you're broken you understand the lyrics".

  3. #3
    QUITTER Irving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    46,527
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    What is the expected outcome here? From the wording it looks like one less Representative on face value, but will those Reps change based on location?
    "There are no finger prints under water."

  4. #4
    Machine Gunner Hound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    1,764

    Default

    Like the idea. I would switch the rep part to mirror the Federal way to make it easier to understand and sell. This would mean the Senate would be based on each county representative and the House would be by population. Other than that and not seeing the fine print it is one of the better ideas for the long term. The cities are quickly becoming the ruling voting class and urban does not like guns. If it continues without something like this, we will become another CA or NY.
    My life working is only preparation for my life as a hermit.

    Feedback https://www.ar-15.co/threads/99005-Hound

  5. #5
    Ammosexual GilpinGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Rural Gilpin County
    Posts
    7,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hound View Post
    Like the idea. I would switch the rep part to mirror the Federal way to make it easier to understand and sell. This would mean the Senate would be based on each county representative and the House would be by population. Other than that and not seeing the fine print it is one of the better ideas for the long term. The cities are quickly becoming the ruling voting class and urban does not like guns. If it continues without something like this, we will become another CA or NY.
    The reason for changing the House instead of the Senate is that it would only change by 1 rep (65 to 64). Changing the Senate would be a much larger change and, presumably, not be as appealing.

  6. #6
    Ammosexual GilpinGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Rural Gilpin County
    Posts
    7,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Irving View Post
    What is the expected outcome here? From the wording it looks like one less Representative on face value, but will those Reps change based on location?
    Yes.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Current_State_House_539x392_.jpg 
Views:	42 
Size:	81.6 KB 
ID:	46199

    Obviously most reps are along the Front Range. Only 13 of 65 are not. One from each County would spread them out considerably.

  7. #7
    Machine Gunner Circuits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Colofornia Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,411

    Default

    Sounds like a system with disproportionately high representation for rural counties... which is appealing if you're of a more conservative bent, since cities breed liberalism, but not really a representative government any more.
    "The only real difference between the men and the boys, is the number and size, and cost of their toys."
    NRA Life, GOA Life, SAF Life, CSSA Life, NRA Certified Instructor Circuits' Feedback

  8. #8
    Ammosexual GilpinGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Rural Gilpin County
    Posts
    7,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Circuits View Post
    Sounds like a system with disproportionately high representation for rural counties... which is appealing if you're of a more conservative bent, since cities breed liberalism, but not really a representative government any more.
    That argument can be said for the US Senate as well. Wyoming has 2 Senators, just like California. Should WY have the same number as CA since they have such a smaller population?

  9. #9
    Machine Gunner Circuits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Colofornia Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GilpinGuy View Post
    That argument can be said for the US Senate as well. Wyoming has 2 Senators, just like California. Should WY have the same number as CA since they have such a smaller population?
    In the federal system, the more numerous house is the one which represents per population, the inverse of the proposed system.

    I'd be OK if every county got an equal number of senators, but the reps were properly proportioned by population - which is exactly how the federal system does it.

    To make the more numerous house based on geographic division rather than population distribution is going the wrong way, IMO.
    "The only real difference between the men and the boys, is the number and size, and cost of their toys."
    NRA Life, GOA Life, SAF Life, CSSA Life, NRA Certified Instructor Circuits' Feedback

  10. #10
    Possesses Antidote for "Cool" Gman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Puyallup, WA
    Posts
    17,848

    Default

    I guess it depends on which state house controls the purse strings. I understand the responsibilities of the Fed house & senate, but I'm not so familiar with this state's legislative break down.
    Liberals never met a slippery slope they didn't grease.
    -Me

    I wish technology solved people issues. It seems to just reveal them.
    -Also Me


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •