[audience cheers and applause] [theme music] [Ryan] Hello!

Whoa!

Oh my god, you just deflected like a politician there.

[Gabriela] Oh, brother.

[Ryan] I'm Ryan Warner from "Colorado Matters."

[Gabriela] And I'm Gabriela Resto-Montero from Rocky Mountain PBS.

[cheering] [Ryan] And these are not real microphones.

[Gabriela] No.

Let us away to where they are real.

[Ryan] Okay.

Good.

[cheers and music] This is "purplish live".

At the Buell Public Media Center in Denver, Colorado.

I'm Ryan Warner from CPR news.

I'm one of your emcees tonight in a purplish tracksuit.

Although it might be aubergine.

Along with me, Gabriela Resto-Montero from Rocky Mountain PBS.

You can tell us apart because I'm the one in the purple sequins.

Welcome to "The Great Colorado, Ballot-O-Rama" [applause and cheers] We have an all star lineup from the Colorado Capitol News Alliance.

These reporters will compete in the ballot showdown as we demystify the measures you'll vote on this fall.

This year, you'll decide on competing tax questions and many other thorny issues.

Our in-house experts, celebrity judges and enthusiastic studio audience will help you make informed decisions come November.

[quiet clapping] [audience laughs] That's worthwhile.

Yes, Love it.

That's the kind of enthusiasm we want to see.

The reporter who makes their issue easiest to understand.

Wins and all expense paid trip to... [drum roll] The Colorado State Capitol.

Wow!

[sarcastic cheers] Yeah.

Gabriela, that sounds Golden.

[soft laughter] With us tonight, a woman who's always chatting with a source or breaking a story.

CPR public affairs reporter Bente Birkeland.

[applause] [music] I'm not sure why she gets hoedown music, but she does.

Also with us, the only person even remotely capable of scooping Bente, Colorado Sun political reporter and elections editor, Jesse Paul.

[applause] The two of you will ask questions of our reporter contestants sitting in the hot seat.

You'll know it because there are flames.

I didn't know it would be a heated rivalry here tonight, Ryan.

What are some of the things that you guys will be looking for from our contestants tonight, Jesse and Bente?

[Jesse] Brevity.

[laughter] [Bente] He wants the shortest possible "purplish" episode.

You know, so many competing measures.

And as you said, Ryan, so many thorny issues.

Who's behind it?

What's the impact?

And you know, pro and con.

What's the impact?

That is huge.

How is this going to affect our daily lives?

So important.

How about fun?

I want to see who comes with props.

[Gabriela] Oh, I like that.

I like that.

[Ryan] It's time to spin... [audience chants along] ...that wheel!

[music] [laughter] [Jesse] That was anticlimactic.

[Ryan] Let's meet the first contestant on purplish live.

Bente, who is it?

[Bente] It is CPR's Dan Boyce.

[Jesse] From Colorado Springs, Colorado.

[music and applause] [Ryan] Dan is sporting the classic Colorado combination of a suit and sandals.

[laughter] [Gabriela] So debonair.

[Bente] Welcome.

[Ryan] Just like a politician, he flip flops.

[laughter and groans] [Bente] Welcome to Denver, Dan.

Dan's our CPR reporter, based in Colorado Springs at KRCC.

Thanks for being here.

[Dan] Oh, it is such a pleasure, Bente.

Jesse.

Such big fans.

[Jesse] Thank you for being here.

This note card says "I'm your biggest fan", apparently.

So thanks for making the drive and being in the hot seat.

[Dan, humorously nervous] Hi Mom.

Sorry.

I'm nervous.

It's my first time on a gameshow.

[Bente] So Dan, your measures are all about giving Coloradan's rights.

Let's start with the first one.

A right to natural gas.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of natural gas.

Tell us about this Initiative 177 and why supporters think it's important.

[Dan] You basically already described the initiative, Bente.

Initiative 177 is to the point.

It is two sentences.

Basically, Coloradans have the right to purchase natural gas for cooking and heating.

Distributors and utilities have the right to sell it.

That is the initiative.

[Jesse] All right.

Well, now you're cooking, Dan.

So for these constitutional... This is a constitutional amendment.

What makes that different from some of the other issues we're going to hear about tonight?

[Dan] Well, once something is in the state constitution, it becomes a lot harder to change or to get around.

Right?

This is like God-Tier-Law for Colorado.

In addition, it also means that it's harder to pass.

So a constitutional amendment requires a 55% 'yes' vote in order to pass.

[Bente] And Dan, who's behind getting this on the ballot, and why?

[Dan] So this comes from a group that we're going to hear a lot from tonight, a conservative nonprofit called Advance Colorado.

And what Advance Colorado argues is that this is meant to protect consumers against rising energy costs.

The state's liberal political elite have been trying to clamp down on natural gas for a long time.

Let's get around 'em and put it in the Constitution.

Our climate goals are ambitious, and as they ratchet tighter, moving more toward renewables and using electric heat and cooking appliances, Advance Colorado worries that people like you and me, average Coloradans, we are going to be sucked into it.

[Jesse] So it's no surprise that environmentalist probably don't like this measure.

But talk to us about what they're saying in terms of natural gas used in cooking and home heating and how that impacts climate change.

So do we know how much it impacts climate change?

And who are some of those environmentalist are opposing this?

[Dan] Natural gas is a contributor to climate change.

I might throw in a devil's advocate first to say that it's actually natural gas that is the primary driver behind the United States reducing carbon emissions over the last two decades, as we've used more natural gas than dirtier sources of fuel like coal.

But it is still a major contributor.

So for the state of Colorado, say it's something like 15% of our emissions.

So opponents like the nonprofit Conservation Colorado, you know what they're saying?

They're saying, you know, who's really cooking with gas?

The atmosphere.

[Gabriela] Oh, no.

[audience groans and laughter] [Jesse] You're full of gas, Dan.

[Dan] The state wants to have zero net emissions by 2050.

So obviously continued widespread use of natural gas is a conflict to that.

[Bente] So, they also say that this has broad language that could include way more than using natural gas in your stove.

What do they think could happen?

[Dan] Right.

Like we already said, this initiative is two sentences.

Consumers can buy gas, distributors can sell gas.

So but what does that mean in practice?

Like there are no caveats in that language.

There are no public safety provisions in that language.

So opponents say this lack of clarity will produce all sorts of litigation.

And again, they say this is going to limit local efforts to reduce natural gas use in new housing developments and prevent the state for meeting its climate goals.

[Bente] Well Dan, let's move to the next initiative.

And this is the constitutional right to hunt and fish.

So hunting and fishing obviously dates back to long before Colorado became a state.

[Dan] This is a hot seat.

[laughter] [Bente] So why is this on the ballot now?

[Dan] There's an easy answer to that.

A couple of years ago, you may remember Colorado had on the ballot, a measure to ban the hunting and trapping of Colorado's big cats.

Think mountain lions, bobcats and lynx.

That proposition failed, and it actually failed pretty badly.

It lost by 11 percentage points.

So hunting advocates in the state, they say maybe this is our time.

Maybe now we can put a constitutional amendment to guarantee hunting and fishing into the future.

That would nullify future efforts like that cat hunting ban.

[Jesse] This is another interesting one, like the natural gas one that's a little vague out there.

So who's supporting this?

Who's against it?

Who's spending money on it?

[Dan] So primary supporter Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Alliance is a nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., involved in lots of public lands, hunting and fishing efforts.

They're behind the initiative.

So far, the Roosevelt Conservation Alliance has reported spending about $1.5 million supporting the measure.

And then in opposition is a group called Protect Colorado's Constitution, which I will say, as somebody who visited the website, it looks like it was completely made by AI.

But that group argues a constitutional amendment would hamper some of the actions of the Colorado Wildlife Commission, that it would invite costly lawsuits for some of the actions the state whole ready does, and then also did something like this.

Coloradans already enjoy hunting and fishing privileges.

This is an unnecessary amendment and not something that really belongs in the Constitution.

We said, The Roosevelt Conservation Alliance has so far spent $1.5 million.

Protect Colorado's Constitution The opposition group has so far spent about 1,300 bucks.

[quiet laughter] [Bente] So, I mean, Dan, other Western states already have this constitutional right to hunt and fish.

So Colorado certainly wouldn't be outlier if this does pass.

[Dan] We would not be an outlier.

So Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah and many other of our neighboring states already have constitutional amendments, at least similar to this proposal.

[Jesse] I kind of forced out of this earlier, but let's go a little deeper into the language of this proposed amendment.

What does it actually entail?

[Dan] It's more detailed than the natural gas one.

So it basically it guarantees Coloradans right to hunt and fish.

It says also that hunting and fishing will be the state's preferred method of managing wildlife populations.

While also saying and also, one thing that opponents dislike about the language is the bill says that hunting will be allowed to manage wildlife populations using, quote, traditional methods.

Some opponents worry that that could open the door to wider uses of trapping that these opponent groups find to be cruel.

But the law also does say that it is careful to say that while you do have the right to hunt and fish, you're not allowed to trespass on private property.

They're very clear about that.

[Jesse] So does that mean people who live in Colorado could hunt or fish anything... like humans?

Is that possible here?

[Dan] It specifically says... [Gabriela] I'm troubled that you would take it there, Jesse.

[Dan] Coloradans not legally allowed to hunt humans.

It says it's a line in there.

It's not.

[laughter] [Bente] Dan, I believed you for a second.

[Dan] It does not allow hunting for so-called non-game species.

That's something the state already has clear definitions for.

You could also not hunt, say, endangered species or anything else that's illegal to hunt under federal law.

And one caveat in the bill is that it also does say that the amendment does not limit the state's authority to limit hunting, or fishing, does not limit the state's ability to put any crackdowns on hunting or fishing.

If that limitation is needed for proper wildlife management and conservation.

[Jesse] All right.

Well, thank you so much.

[Bente] Thank you.

Dan.

[Dan] What a joy.

[applause and cheers] [Ryan] Give it up for dead anima and climate change everyone.

[applause] [Jesse] All right.

We know what time it is, folks.

It's time to... [together] Spin that wheel!

Oh wow!

[Bente] Wow, Hazel.

[Gabriela] Hazel wasn't playing around this time.

[Bente] Yeah, Hazel was not playing around.

[cheers and hoots] Oh, Oh!

[Jesse] John Daley.

[Bente] John.

John Daley.

[music and applause] [Jesse] John, it looks like you've got some bling on.

[Bente] Yeah, you've got some bling.

[John] Oh, I do have a little bling.

So before I was a health reporter, I covered some politics, including this here... Official press credentials, Richard Daley campaign.

In Chicago.

Back in the 90s, okay.

So it was just... I was in school.

and I've got ah... [Jesse] I don't think I was born yet.

[John] This one is from... [laughter] [John] I know.

[Gabriela] It's a game show, not a roast.

[John] Uh oh, I'm in trouble now.

[Bente] John Daly is CPR's reporter who covers health.

And you are in are in our hot seat.

[Jesse] John, so let's start out with Proposition NN.

What do we know need to know about this one?

[John] Okay.

Prop NN So this would raise the Tabor cap.

So we're talking about Tabor right.

This would provide money for K-12 schools.

Voters are being asked if they're down to allow the state for ten years, for a decade to keep some or all the revenue the taxpayers would otherwise get back to their Tabor refunds.

[Jesse] Tabor?

I barely know her.

[laugh] That's the Taxpayer's Bill Of Rights?

[John] Correct, sir.

[Jesse] Okay.

All right.

And how much would this change raise?

[John] So a lot of money, actually $4.6 billion.

And this would double current education spending.

Current economic projections are modest.

So the Tabor surplus would be modest in the amount of money, could be modest too.

At least at first.

[Bente] And Tabor is the constitutional amendment.

It limits how much state government can grow, and it requires voter approval for tax increases.

And historically, Tabor has been popular with voters from across the political spectrum.

John, tell us about the people behind this initiative.

[John] So, perhaps not surprisingly, the Colorado Education Association, the state's largest teachers union is one of the big proponents.

And, you know, they say that public schools have been underfunded for way too long, that teachers are underpaid, that when that happens, there's a lot of teacher turnover and they're just aren't enough resources, whether it's supplies for school supplies or mental health for kids, that kind of stuff.

Critics would include folks like the libertarian think tank, the Independence Institute, and they say this is a de facto tax increase, that Tabor is meant to protect taxpayers from government over spending.

[Jesse] What's interesting about ballot measures, it's the only one on the ballot this year that was actually sent there by the legislature.

It was a referred measure.

So Colorado voters, though, have rejected a long list of ballot measures increasing revenue in the past.

Some of them referred to the measure referred to the ballot by the legislature.

Why is that and what are the chances?

[John] So basically it goes back to the chronic underfunding issue.

They say that that's gone on for years.

They point to a pair of studies that were commissioned by state lawmakers, but conducted by a pair of independent groups, and the studies found that the total needed to properly resource K-12 schools adequately teach students was that $4.6 million, [Jesse] And that's the reason they put it on it on the ballot?

[John] Yeah, exactly.

Well, thanks, John.

[Bente] Well, thanks, John.

That's the first initiative.

And the second is Initiative 195, the graduated income tax.

Tell us what this would do.

And then the backers behind it.

[John] Sure, so graduated income tax.

It kind of goes up step by step.

The ultra-rich would get taxed more and the rest of us would get a tax cut.

[Jesse] This is confusing to me Because if everyone's getting a tax break and this still brings in billions of dollars, I think.

How would that exactly work?

[John] Yeah, on this one, we're talking about a measure that would raise $2 billion.

Essentially there's a $500,000 threshold.

So if you make above that amount then you would be taxed more.

If you make below that amount, you'd be taxed less.

So and then money would go to childcare, healthcare, education, things like that.

And of course, think about this in the perspective of we've got a big budget crisis.

So we've got these measures that are trying to raise money to help address that.

That's what this would do.

[Jesse] And it's not just individuals, right?

It would be corporations too?

[John] Yes, exactly, yup.

[Jesse] So explain exactly what this would mean for me, our audience, or businesses.

It would mean that I'm not paying like one flat tax rate.

Right?

My money would be taxed at different levels depending on the income I make.

Explain that.

It's very confusing.

[John] Yeah.

Again, higher the tax.

Sorry.

The higher your income, the more tax you'd pay.

The lower, the less you'd pay.

The group says that 97% of Coloradans make less than half $1 million, so they would get a tax cut that people above would get a tax increase.

So let's say you make $1 million a year, you'd be paying $16,000 more in taxes, according to the calculator on this group's website.

And if you make, let's say, a more modest income of like 65 grand, you pay $255 less in state taxes each year.

[Jesse] Okay, so I'm guessing Republicans aren't behind this one.

You are correct.

[John] You are correct, sir.

[laughter] They are not.

Behind this are a coalition of groups called Protect Colorado's Future.

It includes a lot of progressive advocacy groups like the Bell Policy Center, Colorado PTA, Colorado Cross Disability Coalition, and other groups.

Democratic lawmakers were also part of this.

They helped to help with the drive the correct to collect signatures.

You've got libertarian groups like the Independence Institute that opposes this.

So does a group called Advance Colorado that Dan referenced, and they're behind a kind of a competing measure that would cap the state flat tax, where it is now at 4.4%.

So we've got these two competing measures that are all happening on the same ballot.

And those groups argue that the current flat tax keeps taxes low.

And they criticize this as kind of making an end run around Tabor.

[Jesse] So we've got one last issue to quiz you about.

That's the sporting goods sales tax.

What does it do and how much money or are we talking about?

[John] Yeah.

So this is a little bit less money.

$175 million a year will be raised from this, according to the state analyst.

So this is whether to earmark the sales tax from sporting goods purchases.

The money would go to conservation efforts.

So we're talking things like wildfire mitigation and outdoor recreation projects.

It also it would be exempt from state spending caps.

Again Tabor thing here potentially lowering future tax refunds for Coloradans.

[Bente] And John, who's for and against this one?

[John] So we've got a collection of Colorado conservation groups like Conservation Colorado and the Nature Conservancy, also the state's largest water provider, Denver Water.

They're in favor of this.

Some of the folks that have criticized this.

Again, budget hawks, people like the Independence Institute, their president, John Caldara, you know, he said, he says is likely a reflection of voter frustration that, you know, state lawmakers haven't really been taking care of the basic needs of the state.

Things like water infrastructure public safety and roads.

[Bente] Well, thank you, John.

You had a tall task there.

[John] A lot of numbers.

I'm sure no one will remember every one of those.

[applause] [Jesse] Alright, you know what time it is.

It's time to... [together] Spin that wheel!

[Bente] Jesse in the hot seat.

[music and applause] [Ryan] Our own host is headed to the hot seat.

[Jesse] I want to apologize in advance to my wife.

Oh, do we have cards for me?

[Bente] No, you don't need those, do you?

[Jesse] Okay.

[Bente] No, yeah we do.

[Jesse] We can start.

We can start.

[Bente] You can bring those out to him.

So.

Yes, Jesse... [Gabriela] Jesse's got a very special prop.

[Jesse] Bente was not expecting this.

[Bente] I was like, oh, yeah, I was not aware of this, but.

Okay, Jesse, ah... [Galriela] Folks, we are live.

[Bente] Yeah, we are live.

[applause and cheer] [Ryan] Jesse has a guitar, folks [Bente] Yeah, Jesse has guitar?

[Gabriela] If this goes on too long, I will cut you off.

[strumming] [Jesse] Is it working?

It is.

Okay.

[Bente] I was waiting for your solo here.

Um, okay.

We're going to start with revenue constraints, Initiative 232.

And this would cap income tax rates.

So, tell us about these two measures.

And I think it's fair to say these put guardrails on state taxes and spending.

One initiative restricts how much the state can collect in taxes.

And then the other tells lawmakers how to prioritize state spending and how to budget.

So tell us about the measures.

And we'll start with the taxes.

So this is a Initiative 232.

[Jesse] Yeah, and this one is pretty stale, so I wrote a song.

[laughter] And remember this when we vote later, okay?

Can we hear it out there?

I'm sorry, to my wife.

♪ Initiative 232 ♪ ♪ Wasn't brought by people who are politically blue ♪ ♪ It was brought by Advance Colorado ♪ ♪ Conservative political nonprofit ♪ [strumming and laughter] ♪ It would cap Colorado's income tax rate at 4.4% ♪ ♪ All the libs say that wouldn't make much sense ♪ Except Jared Polis.

♪ Did I mention it would be a change in state statute♪ ♪ and not the state constitution?

♪ [Bente] Wow.

[laughter] [Bente] I'm mesmerized by, ah... [Jesse] That's it.

That's all.

[laughter and applause] [Gabriela] The best part of that was Bente's complete lack of impress.

[Bente] I am very impressed.

I didn't know you had the skills, so.

[Jesse] Me neither.

I'm ready for the rest.

That it... I'll be here all week.

[Bente] Jesse's available after the taping for some encores.

[Jesse] No.

[Bente] So tell us a little about... We've mentioned Advance Colorado a few times, but they had some success at the ballot and they are behind this initiative.

So tell us a little bit more about them.

[Jesse] Yeah, we've already heard about them a few times tonight.

We're here about them a few more times.

I would say that they've had mixed success.

Some wins.

Some losses.

They're behind a ton of stuff on the ballot this year, as we've already heard.

They don't reveal their donors, but they raise and spend millions of dollars each election cycle.

So they are very big players and they are a name you wanna know.

[Bente] So you've talked about this conservative proposal to cap the income tax.

John told us about the proposal for a graduated income tax.

In a very bizarre world that they both pass.

What happens?

[Jesse] You probably head where I was this morning, which was the courthouse.

I had jury duty.

I didn't get arrested or anything.

[laughing] Ultimately, this is probably something that a judge would decide.

So here are like three possible outcomes if they both pass.

Remember, 232 is a 4.4% measure.

Initiative 195 is the graduated income tax measure.

So let's say they both pass.

At a minimum the provision that's in the state constitution through Tabor, requiring all Colorado income taxes being imposed at the same rate, that would be gone.

So if Initiative 195 gets more votes than Initiative 232, Initiative 195 would be allowed to go to effect.

So we have the graduated income [Bente] Okay.

[Jesse] So if Initiative 232 though gets more votes than Initiative 195, then the income tax rates across the board could see the same.

Or the rates could actually go down for people earning up to $100,000 a year, which would actually reduce state revenue.

So it's very complicated.

And in that last scenario, this is important.

The folks who back Initiative 195, the graduated income tax, point out that they would just go back to the ballot in the future to try and impose their graduated income tax rate through a simple statutory change.

And that's a lot easier to get on the ballot for signature requirements.

And you can also get it on the ballot through the legislature with just a majority vote.

You don't need the 2/3 thing.

So, a lot to shake out a lot of interaction between those two measures.

[Bente] Definitely a lot of permutations and things for voters to consider.

So thank you, Jesse, and thank you for your... [Jesse] My merch table is outside.

Bravo, bravo.

[applause and music] [Gabriela] We've had a great first half.

Yeah?

[cheers and applause] Do you feel smarter?

Or do we still have some work to do?

[Ryan] I feel smarter just standing next to you.

[Gabriela] Oh thanks, Ryan.

Oh that's me.

At least I used to.

[laughing] [Gabriela] With us again to put these ballot experts to the test are our celebrity judges.

purplish host Bente Birkeland from Colorado Public Radio and Jesse Paul from the Colorado Sun.

[applause] [Ryan] Don't forget.

And not that you could.

That the prize is an all expense paid trip to Colorado's capitol.

There's a lot at stake.

[Jesse] Please don't pick me.

[Gabriela] I don't know, that song was pretty great.

[Ryan] Jesse doesn't want to spend a minute more under the dome.

Bente, Jesse, how do you feel about the competition so far?

I mean, Jesse was this dark horse with this breakout talent.

[Jesse] You have to keep up with that.

[Bente] But, you know, Dan, he had the great outfit.

[Gabriela] What about John break down complex taxes on the ballot [Jesse] He had the hardest... [Bente] Yes, John's was very hard.

They all did a great job.

[Jesse] Maybe we'll spin and John can go again.

[Ryan] John can go again.

Wow.

[Gabriela] How much taxes do you want to hear about?

[Ryan] What do you think of Dan's pedicure?

[Jesse] That was so good.

[Ryan] Okay, Jesse.

Who's the next contestant on purplish live?

[Jesse] I don't know.

Let's... [all] Spin the wheel.

[Ryan] It'll finish spinning by election day.

[laughter] [cheering] [Jesse] Kyle McKinnon.

[music and applause] [Jesse] Hailing from Columbus, Ohio, but more recently, downtown Denver.

It is Kyle McKinnon, the KUNC capitol editor.

[Kyle] Just remember both of you.

We're friends.

Okay?

Go easy on me.

[Jesse] We were friends.

[laughter] All right, well, Kyle, you are actually really in the hot seat with these initiatives.

You're here to talk about the three measures that some on Colorado's right described as a way to, quote, protect Colorado's children.

[Bente] But those who oppose these measures, say they are actually anti-trans.

Kyle, why don't you walk us through them one at a time, and we'll start with the male and female participation in school sports.

What would this do?

[Kyle] Yeah, a great place to start, Bente.

So basically that measure, it would block schools from letting transgender students play on sports teams that correspond with their gender identity.

So schools and Athletic Association's would have to designate each team as male, female or coed.

And that's essentially based on what the measure calls biological sex.

So transgender girls could not play on girls teams.

And again, this goes all the way up to women and men.

But we'll use this terminology here for now.

But transgender girls cannot play on girls teams.

Transgender boys could play on boys teams, but that's only if there wasn't a girls team available for that sport.

So this would apply to public and private schools from K-12 all the way up to higher education, covering school competitions and intramural sports.

And these schools, and each have to adopt their own policies to carry it out.

[Bente] And I do want to note that Colorado's anti-discrimination rules right now, that's interpreted by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission to me, that schools currently must let students join teams managing their gender identity.

[Jesse] All right, Kyle.

Let's move on to the second of these new measures.

The one that limits what kind of surgeries minors can have.

Well, so what procedures are we talking about here?

[Kyle] Yeah, so at its core, it would this measure would make it illegal for health care providers to essentially perform surgery on anyone under 18.

And, I mean, the surgery is gender affirming surgery we're talking about.

It would be illegal for anyone to perform that on anyone under 18.

And that would alter a person's biological sex characteristics.

It would not prohibit things like puberty blockers and hormone therapy because it only applies to surgery.

It also says, you know, government funding, Medicaid insurance, those sorts of things, they could not pay for these banned procedures.

There are exceptions for, you know, certain sex development conditions and acquired physical or chemical abnormalities according to this measure.

And male circumcision is also covered in terms of the exceptions.

[Bente] And finally, the proposal to increase penalties for human trafficking.

[Kyle] Yeah.

So at the most basic level, the measure would make sex trafficking punishable by life in prison without the possibility of parole or early release.

Human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude is already a class two felony in Colorado.

All this measure would do is make it a class one felony.

It would also, you know, outside of a side of that adjustment, the measure essentially aims to crack down on people you know, who arrange or sell travel that facilitates the exploitation of a minor.

[Jesse] All right.

So those are the three.

What are these measures like who's actually spending money on this stuff?

[Kyle] I will say before I answer that, this is a hot chair, everyone.

With these wonderful HD cameras, if they could capture beads of sweat rolling down my head.

[Jesse] I think they can.

I can see them.

[Bente] That's why they call it the hot seat.

[Kyle] That's right.

[Gabriela] Thanks for being a good sport, Kyle.

[Kyle] So who are these backed b [Jesse] Do you want some water?

[Kyle] In spirit?

We'll just go with that.

So all of these measures.

So we're all backed by Protect Kids Colorado.

Oh my God.

Water.

Wow!

This is wonderful.

[Jesse] Can we get an applause sign?

[Kyle] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[applause] [Ryan] You may sweat enough to put the fire out tough.

[laughter] [Kyle] It might happen.

I might just dump it on me after this.

Yeah.

So... All these measures are backed by Protect Kids Colorado.

Who, I'm not sure if we mentioned them tonight.

They're an anti LGBTQ+ political advocacy group that has put these measures under the broader messaging of protecting children.

Right?

And so this group is led by Erin Lee.

She's a prominent parents rights activist known for opposing LGBTQ inclusive policies in schools.

And it's worth noting the Colorado Catholic Conference and Focus on the Family are also supporting these.

[Bente] Tell us about the opposition to these initiatives and the reasons there.

[Kyle] Yeah, so the main campaign against these initiatives, and I'll start with the transgender surgery and the gender or the gender affirming surgery and the transgender sports measures.

The main campaign against both of those are families, not is families, not politics.

That's led by One Colorado and supported by various reproductive rights and LGBTQ organizations.

On the sports measure, opponents say, essentially singles out transgender students and doesn't explain how, you know, schools would specifically verify a student's sex.

You know, this is also part of, you know, a national you know, we're seeing this in, you know, national news and whatnot around, you know, with slogans like protect our kids and protect our girls and whatnot.

So they're also pushing back against that where there isn't a lot of data to support it.

On surgery; they say those decisions belong with, you know, individuals and families and doctors, not the government.

And then for the human trafficking measure, the National Survivor Network opposes that measure, arguing that essentially trafficking policy should be centered on survivors and it should be evidence based.

[Jesse] Alright, we'll let you go after that.

So you don't melt.

[Kyle] Oh, wow.

[Bente] Thank you, Kyle.

[Kyle] Oh, okay.

That works.

Alright!

[applause] [Gabriela] Yeah Kyle.

[applause] [Jesse] Alright everyone.

You say it.

You do it.

[together] Spin that wheel.

Yeah.

[applause and cheers] [Jesse] From Highlands Ranch, Colorado, The lovely, Jennifer Brown.

[cheers] [Jesse] Alright, Jennifer Brown, my colleague from the Colorado Sun.

It's your turn in the hot seat.

[Jennifer] Finally, my turn.

[Bente] You ready?

You've got the great outfit for it.

[Jesse] Is there a lot of sweat on that chair?

[mild laughter] [Gabriela] Too much.

[Jennifer] (Yeah.)

[laughter] [Jesse] Alright, Jen, so you're here to talk about two statewide issues on the ballot dealing with law enforcement.

Let's start with the fentanyl proposal known as Initiative 85.

So explain what that does.

[Jennifer] So basically this is a crackdown on fentanyl.

It's a major increase in the punishment that you would get for selling fentanyl, making fentanyl and even having any on your person.

So we're talking about fentanyl the synthetic opioid.

That's very deadly.

Even in a small amount.

It's often mixed with other drugs.

You know, may be in meth, in fake pills.

You sometimes don't even know that you're taking it or if you have it.

So what this this measure does, is it basically it's an automatic felony if you have any possession of fentanyl, which in current law some is a misdemeanor or some is a felony, depending on how much you have.

It also jacks it way up to a level one drug felony if you distribute any fentanyl.

So this could be even one pill to another person.

This is punishable by up to 32 years in prison.

One more thing I wanted to add on that, Jesse, right now we have a provision under the law that says that if you're with somebody who is overdosing and you call authorities, you can have immunity from prosecution.

That would be stripped from the law.

[Jesse] Okay, so who's behind this measure and why are they saying this is needed?

[Jennifer] Well, you're never going to guess... It's Advance Colorado.

[Jesse] I think I've heard of them.

[Jennifer] Yes.

People have written songs without them.

[laughter] Yes.

Really good songs.

Yeah.

So they're behind this one.

And basically what they're saying in this case is that our our laws on fentanyl are too lenient.

And, you know, the deaths around the nation have been going down of fentanyl, but it is still the number one cause of death [Bente] I was going to say; What are the opponents saying?

[Jennifer] Well, the opponents have formed an issue committee, and they're called Coloradans for Real Safety Solutions.

And basically what they're saying is - a lot of things.

One is that, you know, based on one analysis, about 900 more people per year with go to prison So they don't like it for that reason.

Other reasons are, you know, if you don't have immunity after you call it an overdose, more people will die and more people will do this drug in the shadows and also people who sometimes possess fentanyl.

As I said before, don't even know that the the fake Oxy or whatever they have actually has fentanyl.

[Bente] Okay.

Well, I want to shift to the other initiative on immigration.

Initiative 95, also backed by... Let's see if the crowd can guess... [audience vocalizes] [Bente] Advance Colorado.

So tell us what this would do.

[Jennifer] Well, let's start with... I mean, we're probably all aware, but in Colorado it's against state law, passed by legislature for law enforcement to cooperate with ICE.

There are some county sheriffs who do it anyway.

It's very controversial.

Big topic of Colorado.

So this is a ballot measure that would change our constitution.

So it needs a 55% vote to pass.

It would reverse that basically and say that you're required as a police officer, a sheriff's deputy, a prosecutor, if you're charging someone with a violent crime or somebody who has committed a felony in the past, you must tell the Department of Homeland Security about them.

[Bente] Big change.

[Jennifer] Yeah, big change.

Opposite.

[Jesse] And who are we seeing oppose this one?

[Jennifer] Well, there's a lot of people opposed.

One is the League of Women Voters.

[audience reaction] And some of the... Woo, hoo.

They're here.

Some of the arguments against this one.

You know, first of all, it could lead to racial profiling.

Also, if someone's picked up by the police and charged with something, it doesn't mean they're guilty of it.

And now they're being reported to Homeland Security.

[Jesse] Do we know, is this is a constitutional change?

[Jennifer] It is, yes.

[Jesse] Okay, so and that means another one that the legislature couldn't just overturn.

It would require voter approval to make any changes to it if it passes this time.

[Jennifer] Correct.

[Jesse] All right.

Well, thank you so much, Jen.

[Bente] Thank you, Jen.

[applause] [Jesse] There's not much mystery as to who's next.

Let's do it anyway.

[Bente] If you really want to spin the wheel, yeah.

[Jesse] Let's do it anyway.

[together] Spin that wheel.

[Jesse] Whoa!

Wow, what a surprise.

[Ryan] Bente takes the hot seat.

[music and applause] [Jesse] All the way from - two feet to my left.

Bente Birkeland.

[cheering] Sorry, I'm trying to get organized here.

It's hard to do this by yourself.

Okay, Bente, you're on the hot seat for this one.

And there's plenty to talk about with three measures dealing with elections and voting on the ballot this year that you're about to cover.

So tell us about them.

Let's start with Initiative 362 called Mail Ballot Voter Identification.

[Bente] So as you guys are aware, everyone gets a mail ballot.

You can vote in person, return it in the dropbox.

Mail it back.

And what this would do is required voters to include the last four digits of the Social Security number.

Or you would have to include your driver's license ID or Colorado ID on the envelope.

[Jesse] All right, so not to be too blunt about this, but like what's the point.

Don't we already have safeguards in place to make sure people filling out the ballots are who they say they are?

I've heard a lot about signature verification?

[Bente] That is right, Jesse.

Signature verification.

So currently, you're signing your ballot, and election judges from different parties are looking at that signature and seeing if there's any discrepancy based on previous legal documents you've signed.

If there is an issue, you the voter has a chance to fix that.

Opponents or I'd say supporters first of this, feel like there is still voter fraud, that this will add another layer to safeguard against that and ensure that only citizens are voting and that there isn't any fraud.

Opponents note that voter fraud is exceptionally rare with all the checks and balances we have.

They feel that this will effectively reduce turnout and then we already know become what's process of, you know, having mail ballots and all of the steps that go into place, that tabulating those paper ballots, that it would make it less efficient and harder for counties to administer elections.

[Jesse] All right.

Since we're talking about ballot measures, maybe this is a good time to point out the extremely confusing thing that all of these numbers that we're talking about tonight will actually change before we see them on the ballot.

So all of these initiatives become propositions, and the only one that stays consistent is Proposition NN.

So just to confuse you a little more there.

Alright... [Bente] That's not helpful.

[Jesse] Yeah I'm sorry.

I had to put it out there.

Okay.

So for a fun title and even better number than Initiative 234, the Plain Ballot Questions Initiative.

Tell me about it.

[Bente] This is very fun because it's a ballot initiative about ballot initiatives.

[Jesse] We seen those before.

[Bente] Yes.

So essentially this says that ballot language would have to be written at an eighth grade reading level or go below.

[Jesse] That would be helpful for me.

[Bente] (laughing) Yeah.

[Jesse] So do you have an example of how a ballot measure would look before a new Initiative 234?

Should it pass before and after?

[Bente] You know, maybe at the end we can have John explain the Proposition, you know, NN and the Graduated Income Tax at an eighth grade level.

But, you know, for backers of this, which is Advance Colorado, But, um, yes.

They actually said they don't feel like they will necessarily, make it more favorable to conservative versus liberal, you know, campaigns.

But the goal is to increase transparency and make it more understandable.

I don't know that there's a huge opposition campaign against this.

I think it's kind of worth noting that that is the standard for the state government on our state government websites.

It should be an eighth grade reading level.

There are some exceptions with technical topics and things like that.

So, you know, that's still a fairly advanced level, but it would be interesting to see if this passes, how that does change, and maybe it could make future ballots less confusing.

[Jesse] Did we say who the first one is brought by, too?

[Bente] No, we didn't yet.

[Jesse] Is it?...

Do you want to say?

[laughing] [Bente] well, it's you know, it's it's filed with the legal law firm that's behind it and it's in Denver and it's conservative attorneys, one as a former Colorado Clerk, from Mesa County.... I'm sorry, not Mesa Count... You can tell, I've covered Tina Peters too much.

[laughter] No, it's actually the El Paso County clerk.

But, Yes, that's behind one of the first one.

[Jesse] Okay.

So, let's talk about the third one of these bunch.

This is the hot word of 2026, and it's Redistricting.

And Initiative 256.

Tell us about.

[Bente] Yes, this will be confusing because I'm talking about a ballot initiative in response to a ballot initiative that didn't make the ballot.

So.

[Jesse] Love it.

[Bente] Well, yes.

So we're just talking then in the national news a lot after President Trump kicked off the effort, asking Texas to draw more red seats, which Texas did that.

Years ahead of schedule, mid-cycle.

And that was the domino.

We saw other red states follow and then Democratic states scrambling to respond.

And Colorado was one of those states that wanted to respond.

And that brings us to Initiative 256 on redistricting.

[Jesse] Okay, so maybe we should talk about the donkey that's not in the room, so to speak.

There was that Democratic redistricting effort this year, too, in Colorado, but it's not on the ballot.

Remind us what happened.

[Bente] Yes.

So what is on the ballot is the conservative measure.

But the reason it's on the ballot is because of what Democrats wanted to do but weren't able to accomplish.

So Democrats were hoping to ask voters this fall to suspend Colorado's independent redistricting commission to draw more blue seats.

Colorado has four Republicans, four Democrats in our congressional delegation.

And Democrats felt like it would be fairly easy to draw seven blue seats and only one red seat, which would primarily be the Eastern Plains.

Currently, Congresswoman Boebert district, the state's Supreme Court said how that was written technically couldn't be on the ballot.

But on a parallel track, Republicans had an effort to block that.

They decided to keep the effort going, even though the Democratic proposal won't be on the ballot.

And so what this does is it essentially prevents any type of gerrymandering.

A nonpartisan commission and the state Supreme Court would need to approve any map that's done mid-cycle.

So before Trump kicked all this off, redistricting was done every decade after the census.

So this conservative effort would would seek to, I guess, preemptively prevent any type of gerrymandering in the future.

[Jesse] I think the youth call that going "Full Send."

And who's behind this last one?

[Bente] That is... [audience] "Advance Colorado."

Advance Colorado.

Yes.

[Jesse] Oh.

Interesting.

I was surprised by that.

Just kidding.

Thanks Bente, I appreciate it.

[Bente] Thank you.

[music and applause] [Gabriela] Thank you to Bente for that.

We are back now for a bonus round.

[cheers] Our quiz masters will quiz... Ryan Warner.

[cheers and applause] On an issue that few will pay for, but many may ride.

[train horn sounds] [Ryan] Will you hand me my glockenspiel?

And Theremin.

I wrote a song.

[laughter] [Bente] How's it feel to be in the hot seat?

[Ryan] It's still schvitzy, from earlier.

[Jesse] I don't think that's a verb, but, I'll take it.

[Ryan] It's an adjective.

[Jesse] Alright, so you are on the hot seat for something that won't be statewide, but it will be a big deal.

And we want to talk about it.

So we're chugging along the long.

[groans and laughter] [Bente] Good job, Jesse.

So Ryan, I do want to ask though... [interrupted by train horn sound] [Gabriela] Thank you so much for that control room.

[Ryan] You're gonna hear a lot of train noises, train puns.

It's going to go off the rails.

[Bente] Whenever Ryan talks.... [groans and laughter] [Jesse] Okay, so it's called the Colorado Connector.

And as I mentioned, it's not statewide, but it was on the very, very big impact.

Let's talk about CoCo, the train from Pueblo to Fort Collins.

[Ryan] maybe even Trinidad to Fort Collins.

But the first leg would be Denver to FoCo.

And that's if... if select-voters approve.

[Bente] And Ryan, I mean, this has been a huge priority for Governor Jared Polis.

He's outgoing.

Right?

This is a huge goal of his.

It is not yet on any ballots.

Where are we in that process?

Well, there's a Front Range Passenger Rail Commission.

And I know that's your favorite commission.

You've all been to their meetings, and they have the power to land a sales tax measure on the ballot.

I mean, that's a power the legislature has.

And so does this commission.

[Bente] The entire scene won't be paying for this.

It's just areas that will have stops along this route?

[Ryan] Correct.

CoCo needs buy-in from Colorado Springs, Littleton, Westminster, Boulder, Longmont and Loveland, just to name a few.

That is the communities on the corridor.

[Bente] And talk about the total dollar figures to build this out [Ryan] Well, they're not laying tracks because they're using existing ones, but there are stations to erect, train cars to buy, connectivity to build.

You know, so you're not dropped off in a meadow.

The total cost approaches $5 billion.

The commission is considering a sales tax of 1/3 of a penny on a dollar purchase.

[Jesse] Okay.

So if this passes in November, trains are going to start running in January.

Right?

[Ryan] You don't know how things work.

Do you?

[laughter] This would be in phases.

The first leg Denver to Fort Collins would open in three years.

And then it would be closer to five years for the rest of the corridor.

There's even a vision that this might go into Wyoming and into New Mexico, but those are truly on the horizon.

And do you know about the mascot that CoCo has adopted?

[Jesse] No, but I think you're going to tell us about it.

[Ryan] It's a cute little native fox, and the idea is to outfox I-25.

[Bente] Ooh.

[mild applause] [Bente] Well, thank you Ryan.

We have to sign off with Choo [Jesse] Choo.

[train horn sound] [laughter] [Ryan] Are you sure you have to though?

[Gabriela] Ryan Warner, ladies and gentlemen.

[applause] [theme music] [Gabriela] Now, I think that we can all agree that everyone here is a winner, but only one person gets that coveted trip under the golden dome of dreams.

Let's go down the list one more time.

Will it be John Daley and the revenue raiser?

[applause] [Ryan] John!

Or maybe it will be Jesse Paul and the revenue constraints.

[Gabriela] Kyle McKinnon on the social initiatives.

[Ryan] Dan Boyce on hunting and fishing and gas.

[Gabriela] Jennifer Brown.

(Dun-dun.)

on law and order.

[Ryan] Or will it be Bente Birkeland on ballots, on ballots, on ballots?

[applause and cheers] [Gabriela] And the winner is.... [drum roll sound] [Ryan] We're going to take the applause-o-meter.

... If it's Jen?

[applause] Dan?

[applause and cheers] Kyle?

[applause and cheers] Jesse?

[loud cheers and applause] Bente?

[applause and cheers] And John?

[applause and cheers] [Gabriela] I think the winner is... Jesse, shameless panderer, Paul.

[laughter, cheers and applause] [Gabriela] Jesse.

This dollar and your boots will take you all the way to the Colorado Capitol.

[Gabriela] That is it for us at the Buell Public Media Center.

Thank you so much for being here tonight with us.

From the Colorado Capitol News Alliance, Colorado Public Radio, the Colorado Sun, KUNC, and Rocky Mountain PBS.

Thanks for joining purplish live!

[cheering] [Jesse] And thank you to Ryan and Gabriela.

[cheering]