Is Colorado's Blue Book too 'blue'? New lawsuit argues guide's analysis of abortion-rights measure is biased

By Debbie Kelley debbie.kelley@gazette.com - Sep 20, 2024 Updated Sep 22, 2024

Is Colorado’s Blue Book too “blue” this year?

Some are arguing “yes.”

The 2024 nonpartisan voter guide produced by the Colorado Legislative Council is not fair and impartial as state law mandates, in its analysis of Amendment 79, according to a lawsuit filed Sept. 9 in federal district court in Denver.

At issue is the informational booklet’s analysis stating there will be “no fiscal impact” if voters approve the abortion-rights measure, which seeks to enshrine a fundamental right to abortion in the state constitution and also repeal the existing amendment that prohibits state taxpayer funding of abortion.

If the proposal passes in the Nov. 5 election, public funds would pay for abortions for women who qualify, which would be those covered by public-employee health insurance or Medicaid.

The language in the Blue Book is false, misleading and biased, alleges the legal complaint from Colorado Right to Life, a statewide organization that opposes abortion, and its executive director, Scott Shamblin.

“This clearly is going to have a fiscal impact — they are literally getting rid of the prohibition on taxpayer-funded abortion,” said attorney Gualberto Garcia–Jones of the Lloyd Law Group in Virginia, who’s representing the plaintiffs.

“This has played out in over half a dozen states, where the second this passes, lobbyists demand the state starts paying for taxpayer-funded abortion,” he said.

The Blue Book states that if enacted, Amendment 79 would have “no fiscal impact to state and local governments,” because the change would “place current state law and practices around abortion services into the Colorado Constitution.”

“At this time, no change in spending is estimated,” the analysis says. But if “additional abortion-related programs are created from allowing the use of public funds for abortion services, state or local government spending will increase.”

Jessica Grennan, campaign director for Coloradans for Protecting Reproductive Freedom, a coalition that is spearheading Amendment 76, called the legal complaint “baseless.”

“The Blue Book demonstrates that there is no fiscal impact when you vote yes on Amendment 79 and protect reproductive freedom in our state,” she said via email. “This is simply Colorado Right to Life’s attempt to distract from their fundamental goal of a total ban of abortion in Colorado.”

District Court Judge David Goldberg struck down the complaint’s emergency call to halt printing and distribution of the Blue Book until the language was reworded on Sept. 11, the day the book was scheduled to be printed.

While it’s too late to change the phraseology, the plaintiffs are considering appealing the decision, Garcia–Jones said.

The lawsuit argues that “the duty of the state is to give the people the right information to make up their own minds, and when the state categorically says there’s no fiscal impact, that’s clearly a lie,” the attorney said.

In dismissing the case, the judge ruled that because the Legislative Council — a joint committee of state representatives and senators — is under the auspices of the Colorado General Assembly, the court “does not have subject matter jurisdiction to review defendants’ actions in creating and preparing the Blue Book.”

Garcia-Jones said judges have intervened on other legal complaints tied to the legislature, including whether former President Donald Trump should have been removed from the ballot.

Defendants named in the Amendment 79 lawsuit included the state of Colorado, the Colorado General Assembly and Natalie Castle, director of the Colorado Legislative Council.

Requests for comments from Castle, as well as the Colorado Secretary of State's Office, which oversees the state's election system and works in conjunction with the Legislative Council, produced no responses Thursday.

The citizen-driven initiative that was petitioned through voter signatures, is one of 14 statewide measures on the Nov. 5 ballot.

The process to arrive at the Blue Book’s final copy is designed to take into account citizens’ comments in arriving at an impartial analysis of each initiated or referred constitutional amendment, law or question on the ballot.

Commenters included Coloradan Dick Brown, who wrote that he thought the third draft for Amendment 79 was "fair and balanced" and "an important objective source of information to voters."

Other commenters echoed the view of Carolyn Martin, director of government relations for the Christian Home Educators of Colorado, which is headquartered in Parker.

“It’s appropriate that they tell us how much it is going to cost the citizens if that measure should pass,” she said.

The booklet's directive is to present a summary of the measures, the major arguments for and against the measure, a fiscal assessment and other information designed to help voters understand the purpose and effect of a measure.

ORIGINAL POST: https://gazette.com/news/elections/is-colorados-blue-book-too-blue-new-lawsuit-argues-guides-analysis-of-abortion-rights-measure/article_bbbc5982-76da-11ef-ad9a-e77cab54f545.html