News, Analysis and Opinion for the Informed Boulder Resident
Friday September 21st 2018

Support the Blue Line

Subscribe to the Blue Line

That's what she said

city council transportation energy municipalization xcel housing urban planning april fools bicycles climate action election 2011 density affordable housing boulder county open space agriculture renewables CU local food climate change election 2013 development jefferson parkway youth election pedestrian election 2015 preservation election 2017 Rocky Flats BVSD immigration recreation mountain bikes GMOs decarbonization urban design transit farming plan boulder boards and commissions fires fracking wildlife colorado politics downtown architecture new era colorado smart regs plutonium journalism homeless transit village parking commuting radioactive waste ghgs height limits natural gas rental planning board coal energy efficiency walkability historic preservation april fools 2015 population growth land use historic district diversity Neighborhoods growth flood students arts North Boulder gardens education election 2010 solar bus zoning water supply University Hill taxes nutrition RTD library bike lane electric utility sprawl safety groundwater water quality election 2012 affairs of the heart april fools 2016 organic flood plain blue line mayor zero waste planning reserve wetlands hazardous waste politics county commissioners hogan-pancost obama transportation master plan renewable energy electric vehicle ballot right-sizing street design golden Mapleton solar panels PV recycling comprehensive plan longmont climate smart loan diagonal plaza bears colorado legislature flood mitigation campaign finance boulder junction conservation easement epa congestion pesticide food inequality drought community cycles election 2016 road diet flooding bus rapid transit children PUC automobile daily camera Newlands league of women voters ecocycle BVCP climate change deniers community sam weaver ken wilson wind power david miller contamination boulder creek city attorney crime bob bellemare bsec mlk john tayer boulder Orchard Grove civil rights green points al bartlett technology EV arizona west tsa public spaces marijuana Whittier

Ballot issue 302: Raising Barriers to Democracy


In this time of disaffection with government and the political process, populist ideas and candidates like Donald Trump are getting traction with promises of making broken things great again with illusory solutions.  Issue 302 fits that mold.

By The original uploader was Serjmooradian at English Wikipedia - Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons., Public Domain,

What exactly is the problem that 302 seeks to fix?  Issue 302 is like the barriers to voting set up in some states, ostensibly established to solve a nonexistent problem of voter fraud, but really intended to deny voters access to the essence of democracy—the right to vote.  Issue 302 would take away our right to vote for the candidates of our choosing while pretending to address purported problems with incumbency.

However, we are not suffering from incumbency stasis.  Election statistics reaching back almost 50 years, as illustrated in Richard Valenty’s June 24th Blue Line article indicate plenty of City Council membership turnover, and fairly high election success rates for first time candidates.

What will 302 accomplish?  Issue 302 is a lifetime and retroactive limit, an extreme and radical level of restriction far beyond Colorado’s own state law.  Like the aforementioned voting barriers, 302 will suppress ethnic and racial diversity on council.  Only rarely are minorities elected to our council.   When we are lucky enough to get a minority council member who is highly valued by voters for the perspective they bring to council and especially valued by our minority communities for the sensitivity they bring to governance, we should be able to keep them on the council as long as they’re willing to stay.  But under 302, that council member would be term limited forever.  That disenfranchises voters who are already politically marginalized.

Another “problem” cited by proponents is the experience incumbents bring gives them unfair advantages in elections.   But consider this: maybe Boulder is the desirable place it is today because of the experience and wisdom of previous City Councils.  Issue 302 will deny voters the right to choose that experience.

We already have term limits.  It’s called VOTING.  Just last year voters turned out an incumbent and replaced him with a first time candidate.  Open Boulder, the organization behind the ballot initiative, seeks to become the self-appointed gatekeeper to our democracy by limiting your candidate choices.

Be pro choice—vote NO on 302!

Rate this article: 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5 votes, average: 2.60 out of 5)

What do you think? Leave a comment!

You must be logged in to post a comment.