Democrat seeks measure to get rid of constitutional rule of "reading the bill at length" – coloradopolitics.com

The old saying "the majority has its way, the minority has its say" could come to a crashing halt should lawmakers approve a resolution from Rep. Mike Weissman, D-Aurora.

Weissman's House Concurrent Resolution 1002 would ask voters to end the constitutional requirement to read bills at length. Both parties have deployed the tactic of compelling such a reading chambers can dispense with the rule upon the unanimous consent of the legislators present totry and block or delay the passage of legislation.

But the measure's chances of even making it out of the House appear slim, with support lacking from even some ofWeissman's fellow Democrats.

Currently, bills are "read" three times: the first reading occurs when the bill is introduced and assigned to a committee. That reading, however, is not done at length, a change voters approved in 1950.

The second reading happens when the bill is debated and a voice vote is taken. The third reading, should the measure make it that far, is the recorded vote.

Lawmakers dispense with the full reading of bills most of the time.

But requesting that a bill be read at length on second or third reading is a critical tool that Republicans, who have been in the minority in both chambers since 2019, have employed to slow down the Democrats' agenda or to get the majority party to negotiate.

Weissman told Colorado Politics that people, regardless of party and beliefs, have the right to expect that, in a time-limited session of 120 days, their elected senators and representatives will use that time efficiently.

"It's vitally important," he said, that legislators read bills beforevoting onthem, "and you can do that on your phone, your tablet, your watch, your laptop."

In 1876, legislators didn't have the technological options for reading bills, Weissman pointed out.

Much has changed in Colorado since 1876, but this provision in the state Constitution has not.

"Unfortunately, it's used to delay doing the people's business, and the purpose of this referred measure is to ask the people of this state if they want that to continue to be the case," Weissman said.

However, the chances that HCR 1002 will gain the two-thirds vote in both chambers to get to the ballot are virtually nil, Republican lawmakers said.

It would take at least three Republican votes in favor in the House, in addition to the 41 Democrats, for the measure to pass, and at least four Republicans in the state Senate must also support it, along with the 20 Democrats.

The resolution is also raising eyebrows among House Democrats, several of whom indicated they cannot support it.

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have used the tactic over the years. For Democrats, the most notable example occurred in 2003, when Republicans, then in the majority in both chambers, rammed through a bill redrawing congressional maps, including a new 7th congressional district, in the last three days of the session.

Senate Democrats attempted a delay by asking that the 28-page bill, which contained mostly thousands upon thousands of numbers tied to each congressional district, be read at length. In political lore, it became known as the "midnight gerrymander."

The issue most recently became a flash point in March 2019, when Senate Republicans asked for a 2,023-page bill to be read at length in an attempt to get Democrats to the negotiating table. Democrats responded by breaking the bill down into multiple sections and setting up a bank of computer reading programs to read the bill aloud.

The reading was unintelligible, at around 600 words per minute.

Senate Republicans sued Senate Democrats in Denver District Court, winning an injunction against the speed readings. The lawsuit, on appeal, went to the Colorado Supreme Court, which agreed with the Republicans on a 4-3 vote a year ago.

The justices agreed with the district court's view that unintelligible computer sounds did not constitute reading.

The justices, however, took issue with Denver District Court Judge David Goldberg's directions on how to read a bill.The lower court told the legislature how to comply, and that was a mistake, the majorityjustices concluded.

That error, the Supreme Court said, stems from directing the reading to be "in anintelligible and comprehensive manner, and at an understandable speed."

That's problematic, the Supreme Court opinion stated, because "it imposes parameters around the form or manner by which the legislature" complies with the reading requirement.

Senate Republicans rarely use the tactic, and even less so since winning the court case.

Senate President Leroy Garcia, D-Pueblo, keeps a copy of HB 19-1172 on his desk as a reminder of what's important and when things don't work the way they're supposed to.

Garcia, who served as assistant minority leader before becoming minority leader in the 2018 session, has a strong memory of those days.

"I care about the institution. We have term limits, and if the [legislature] doesn't function the way it's supposed to, that's a travesty for Colorado," he said.

Senate President Leroy Garcia keeps a copy of HB 19-1172 on his desk as a reminder of what's important and when things go off the rails.

"I've always carried those values, that we work together," he said, adding that includes his belief that government works better when everyone is at the table and work together. He said that's what's wrong with Washington, D.C., and the 2019 session headed in a direction he described as "unbecoming" of the Senate.

Since then, the Senate has shown more collegiality among lawmakers from both parties.

"We have this collegiality that needs to exist, so it doesn't become so political," Garcia said.

It's a different matter in the House, where requests to read bills at length take place far more often and where collegiality isn't always obvious.

House Minority Leader Hugh McKean, R-Loveland, pointed to several examples where the bill reading isn't just a dilatory tactic.

In 2019, McKean offered an amendment to a sunset bill on the Public Utilities Commission to rename it the "Turducken Act of 2019."McKean's amendment lost by only two votes. During the last week of the 2019 session, then-Rep. Chris Hansen, D-Denver, successfully offered two amendments that inserted the language of two other bills into the PUC measure. Those two bills HB 19-1037 and HB 19-1313 both failed in the state Senate.

A more recent example took place on June 8, the last day of the 2021 session, and on the last bill voted on by the House.

House Bill 21-1266 was amended in the Senate to include language from another bill, SB 21-200, which died in the Senate the day before. That was in part because Gov. Jared Polis threatened a veto. Both bills dealt with greenhouse gas emissions.

HB 1266 showed up in the House on June 8 with several Senate amendments, including a 26-page amendment that included the language of SB 200, which had never been considered in the House.

McKean complained thatlawmakers had just 34 seconds to consider how the amendments fit into the bill.

"We had no idea" what was in the bill, he said.

During debate on June 8, McKean pointed out that HB 1266 was effectively a brand new bill.

Rep. Perry Will, R-New Castle, said the bill he heard in a House committee was 15 pages, but it came back with 55 pages.

"We heard the bill number, not the bill," he said.

Republicans could have asked for a recess, which was a gamble, McKean told Colorado Politics. The alternative was to ask for a reading of the bill, which he didn't do, instead focusing on language from SB 200 that found its way into HB 1286.

"It should have been read at length," he said, upon reflection.

McKean pointed out that reading a bill at length is also a tool for the public to learn how a bill has been changed.

HCR 1002 was assigned to the House State, Civic, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee. No date has been set for a hearing.

Correction: A previous version said the Constitutional change would require 55% voter approval, and while the bill includes language about Amendment 71's requirement for 55%, Rep. Mike Weissman pointed out that a repeal of language in the Constitution requires only a simple majority.

Read this article:

Democrat seeks measure to get rid of constitutional rule of "reading the bill at length" - coloradopolitics.com