1437 Bannock St . Denver , Colorado 80202 - Brennan Center for ...

the history of election laws plainly discloses, the legislature consolidated supervision andenforcement of election laws under the Secretary in order to achieve uniformity throughout thestate. The defendants’ interpretation undermines the purpose of the consolidation.Clerk Johnson argues that the legislative declaration in 1-7.5-102, C.R.S. (2012) supportsher broad interpretation. (Clerk Johnson’s Summary Judgment Motion, p. 16) This argumentignores specific narrowing language within the legislative declaration:The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares thatself-government by election is more legitimate and better acceptedas voter participation increases. By enacting this article, thegeneral assembly concludes that it is appropriate to provide formail ballot elections under specified circumstances.Section 1-7.5-102. (Emphasis added) The legislative declaration does not establish an intent tomail ballots to all registered voters. Instead, the intent is to mail ballots only under thecircumstances specifically mentioned in the statute.Nor does the Secretary’s interpretation violate the declaration in § 1-1-103(1). (Clerk’sMotion, p. 19). This section states that the “code shall be liberally construed so that all eligiblevoters may be permitted to vote.” The Secretary’s interpretation is consistent with thedeclaration. Voters who are designated as inactive-failed to vote may vote in person at theclerk’s office or at a place designated by the clerk, or may receive and vote a mail ballot byapplying for a ballot, completing and returning a voter information card, or updating their voterregistration record. § 1-7.5-107(3)(c), C.R.S. (2012); § 1-2-605(4), C.R.S. (2012).iv.The Demise of H.B. 12-1267 Supports the Secretary’s Interpretation.Actions taken in the 2012 in the Colorado General Assembly also confirm the Secretary’sanalysis. In interpreting a statute, the court may look to the legislature’s failure to amend an act25