Colorado Common Cause v. Meyer

Decision Date16 May 1988
Docket NumberNo. 86SC279,86SC279
Citation758 P.2d 153
PartiesCOLORADO COMMON CAUSE, the Colorado affiliate of Common Cause, a District of Columbia nonprofit corporation, and Rosalie Schiff, a qualified elector of the State of Colorado, Petitioners, v. Natalie MEYER, in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State, and Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, a Colorado corporation, Respondents.
CourtColorado Supreme Court

Buchanan, Gray, Purvis & Schultze, Ross B.H. Buchanan, Andrew W. Loewi, Denver, Greene, O'Reilly, Broilett, Paul, Simon, McMillan, Wheeler & Rosenberg, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioners.

Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., Maurice Knaizer, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondent Natalie Meyer.

Holland & Hart, Peter C. Houtsma, Steven C. Choquette, Denver, for respondent Colorado Ass'n of Commerce and Industry.

QUINN, Chief Justice.

The question in this case is whether for-profit corporations which make contributions, contributions in kind, or expenditures to or on behalf of a state political campaign out of their ordinary corporate treasuries are "political committees" within the meaning of Colorado's Campaign Reform Act of 1974, §§ 1-45-101 to -121, 1B C.R.S. (1980 & 1987 Supp.), and are thus required to comply with the filing and reporting requirements of the Act. In Colorado Common Cause v. Meyer, 731 P.2d 744 (Colo.App.1986), the court of appeals held that such corporations are not "political committees" within the meaning of that term in section 1-45-103(10) of the Campaign Reform Act. We reverse the judgment and remand the case with directions.

I.

In 1974, the Colorado General Assembly enacted the Colorado Campaign Reform Act. Ch. 57, sec. 1, §§ 49-27-101 to -121, 1974 Colo.Sess.Laws 261-70 (currently codified at §§ 1-45-101 to -121, 1B C.R.S. (1980 & 1987 Supp.)). The Act contains the following legislative declaration:

The general assembly hereby finds and declares that the interests of the people of this state can be better served through a more informed public; that the trust of the people is essential to representative government; and that public disclosure and regulation of certain campaign practices will serve to increase the people's confidence in their elected officials. Therefore, it is the purpose of this article to promote public confidence in government through a more informed electorate.

§ 1-45-102, 1B C.R.S. (1980).

In order to effectuate this purpose, the Act specifies the circumstances and manner in which candidates, persons, and political committees must disclose contributions received and expenditures made for the purpose of supporting or opposing a candidate for public office at an election, or for the purpose of influencing the passage or defeat of any issue.

A "candidate" is any person who "[s]eeks election to any public office which is to be voted for in this state at any general election, special district election, or municipal election." § 1-45-103(3)(a), 1B C.R.S. (1980). The Act defines a person as "any individual, partnership, committee, association, corporation, labor organization, or other organization or group of persons." § 1-45-103(9), 1B C.R.S. (1980). A "political committee" is defined in section 1-45-103(10), 1B C.R.S. (1980), as follows:

"Political committee" means any two or more persons who are elected, appointed, or chosen or who have associated themselves or cooperated for the purpose of accepting contributions 1 or contributions in kind 2 or making expenditures 3 to support or oppose a candidate for public office at any election or seek to influence the passage or defeat of any issue. "Political committee" includes any political party or committee thereof at any level or a political organization as defined in section 1-1-104. "Political committee" also includes a separate political education or political action fund or committee which is associated with an organization or association formed principally for some other purpose and includes an organization or association formed principally for some other purpose insofar as it makes contributions or contributions in kind or expenditures. (emphasis added).

An "election" means "any general or primary election or any election at which an issue is submitted to the electorate as required or permitted by law." § 1-45-103(6), 1B C.R.S. (1987 Supp.). 4 An "issue" is "any proposition or initiated or referred measure which is to be submitted to the electors for their approval or rejection." § 1-45-103(8), 1B C.R.S. (1980). 5 The Campaign Reform Act provides, in pertinent part, that "[a]ny person who believes a violation of this article has occurred may file a written complaint no later than sixty days after the date of the final report of a candidate or political committee with the secretary of state." § 1-45-113(2), 1B C.R.S. (1980).

On three occasions during the tenure of former Secretary of State Mary Estill Buchanan, the Attorney General's office responded to inquiries by Secretary Buchanan with opinion letters interpreting the emphasized portion of the definition of political committee in section 1-45-103(10) to include for-profit corporations which make contributions, contributions in kind, or expenditures to or on behalf of a political candidate or issue. Accordingly, in late October 1976 Secretary Buchanan sent letters to 333 corporations which had failed to report political contributions made in opposition to ballot issues in the November 1976 general election. In these letters Secretary Buchanan informed the corporations that they were required to follow the disclosure requirements for political committees as specified in the Campaign Reform Act. All but fourteen of the corporations complied, although fifty-six of the corporations filed their reports under protest.

In August 1978 the Secretary of State's office sent a copy of the Attorney General's opinion letter to all political committees registered with the Secretary of State's office. In an accompanying memorandum the Secretary of State stated that corporations making expenditures in support or opposition of candidates or issues are required to comply with the reporting provisions of the Campaign Reform Act.

In 1978, 1980, and 1982, Secretary Buchanan issued manuals to the public containing instructions for complying with the Campaign Reform Act, and these manuals expressly included for-profit corporations within the category of political committees. 6 The Secretary of State's internal guidelines, however, which apparently were intended only for internal use of the Secretary of State's office, stated that those for-profit corporations which made contributions from corporate general funds to a political committee were exempt from the filing and reporting requirements of the Act, that for-profit corporations which made independent expenditures from corporate general funds to support or oppose candidates or to seek to influence passage or defeat of any issue were not exempt, and that those for-profit corporations which accepted or solicited contributions from any source other than the corporate general funds were also not exempt.

During the 1981 and 1983 legislative sessions, amendments were proposed to the Campaign Reform Act, including language which in various ways partially exempted for-profit corporations from the reporting requirements. In 1981, House Bill 1460 sought to amend the definition of "political committee" by limiting that term to an organization or association which makes contributions or expenditures in excess of "fifty percent of its annual budget to support or oppose candidates for public office at any election or to seek to influence the passage or defeat of any issue." This proposed definition underwent further changes as the bill worked its way through the legislative process, 7 but no part of the bill was ultimately enacted. In 1983, Senate Bill 180 sought to amend various provisions of the Campaign Reform Act without, however, changing the definition of "political committee." The House State Affairs Committee amended the senate version of this bill to include within the definition of a "political committee" the subcategory of "corporation committee," which was defined as "any for profit corporation which associates or cooperates with any other person in receiving contributions or contributions in kind or any for profit corporation which makes expenditures other than to a political committee." This bill, however, was never enacted into law.

On January 28, 1983, Rosalie Schiff, pursuant to section 1-45-113(2), 1B C.R.S. (1980), and acting in the capacity as a qualified elector and as executive director of Colorado Common Cause, which is the Colorado affiliate of Common Cause, a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia, sent a letter of complaint to Secretary of State Natalie Meyer, who had recently assumed office. In her letter, Schiff advised Secretary Meyer of her belief that Adolph Coors Company and Colorado Disposal, Inc. had violated the Campaign Reform Act by failing to register as political committees or to file reports of their contributions made to political candidates in the 1982 general election. Secretary Meyer did not conduct an evidentiary hearing, but notified the corporations of the complaint and solicited written responses. On June 16, 1983, Secretary Meyer sent a letter to Schiff and Common Cause notifying them, as well as Adolph Coors Company and Colorado Disposal, Inc., that she was denying the complaint. The Secretary on the same day issued a written statement declaring that the Campaign Reform Act "does not include individuals, partnerships, corporations or labor organizations unless they cooperate with another entity in political activities." Secretary Meyer in her statement pledged to "consistently apply this statute."

In October 1983, Schiff and Colorado...

To continue reading

Request your trial
68 cases
  • Weinman v. Crowley (In re Blair)
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Colorado
    • 9 Noviembre 2018
    ... ... Pro. No. 17-1195 TBM United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado. Signed November 9, 2018 594 B.R. 719 Kenneth J. Buechler, Jonathan ... Elmira Street, Denver, Colorado (the "Real Property"); and (2) a new cause of action for declaratory relief. 11 The Chapter 7 Trustee asserted that ... familiar to the law of fraudulent conveyances, and was used at the common law, and in the statute of Elizabeth, and has always been held to 594 ... Meyer , 758 P.2d 153, 163-64 (Colo. 1988) ("The word ‘includes’ has been ... ...
  • People v. Crouse
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • 19 Diciembre 2013
    ... 412 P.3d 599 The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, PlaintiffAppellant, v. Robert Clyde CROUSE, DefendantAppellee. Court of ... See Colo. Common Cause v. Meyer, 758 P.2d 153, 159 (Colo.1988) ("Since the Attorney ... ...
  • Carruthers v. Carrier Access Corp..
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • 28 Octubre 2010
    ... ... No. 09CA2138. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. III. Oct. 28, 2010 ... [251 P.3d 1201] ... to a statute that the plain language does not suggest or demand.); Common Sense Alliance v. Davidson, 995 P.2d 748, 753 (Colo.2000) (court would ... Common Cause v. Meyer, 758 P.2d 153, 161 (Colo.1988); cf. North Marion School Dist ... ...
  • Colorado Dept. of Revenue v. Woodmen of the World
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • 1 Julio 1996
    ... ... Cache La Poudre, 758 P.2d 164, 172 (Colo.1988); accord, e.g., Colo. Common Cause v. Meyer, 758 P.2d 153, 159 (Colo.1988). Because we find the Department's current position ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT