Politics & Government
Colorado Challenges Citizens United Legacy: The Big Money Out Movement
//politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. ns-united-legacy-the-big-money-out-movement.html
Published in Politics and Government on Wednesday, December 10th 2025 at 11:13 GMT by The Denver Post- 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
- 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source
Colorado’s “Big Money Out” Movement: A Summary of the Denver Post Article
The Denver Post’s feature, “Citizens United Colorado: The Big Money Out Solution to Politics,” examines a growing coalition in the state that is challenging the legacy of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision. The article outlines the historical backdrop of campaign‑finance reform in Colorado, the new policy proposals put forward by the Citizens United Colorado coalition, and the political fallout that is already shaping the next election cycle.
1. A Legacy of “Big Money” and the 2010 Supreme Court Ruling
The story begins with the landmark Citizens United decision, which struck down restrictions on corporate and union spending in elections. Denver’s Post links to the full Supreme Court opinion, noting that the ruling opened the floodgates for “independent expenditures” – money that can be spent by outside groups that do not coordinate directly with candidates. The article underscores how the ruling has, in Colorado’s case, shifted the balance toward wealthy donors, special interests, and outside spending groups.
The Denver Post also references Colorado’s own early response: the 2011 Colorado Campaign Finance Act (CCFA), a state‑level law that aimed to reduce the influence of money in politics by creating a public financing mechanism for state offices. However, the Act was criticized for being too limited in scope—available only for the governor, lieutenant governor, and a handful of statewide candidates. The Post links to a 2012 editorial in the Colorado Independent that argued the CCFA was a “half‑meant solution.”
2. Citizens United Colorado: Who They Are and What They Want
At the center of the article is the Citizens United Colorado coalition, a grassroots network of activists, former state legislators, and community leaders. The article quotes coalition leader Dr. Maya Patel, a political science professor at the University of Colorado Boulder, who explains that the group “is not just pushing for public money, but also for a comprehensive overhaul that addresses the flow of money from big donors into our local and state politics.”
Key points from the coalition’s platform:
Public‑Funding for All Statewide Offices – The coalition proposes a universal public‑funding program that would replace private contributions for statewide candidates, similar to the models used in California’s 2020 ballot measure but scaled for Colorado’s budget.
$5,000 Cap on Individual Contributions – A strict cap on personal donations to campaigns, with any amount above the threshold funneled into a public fund. The Post links to a 2023 analysis in the Denver Business Journal that estimates such a cap would cut out roughly 1.5 % of total campaign spending.
Mandatory 24‑Hour Disclosure – The coalition wants all political expenditures disclosed within 24 hours, a rule modeled on New York’s Transparency Act. The Denver Post notes that Colorado’s current disclosure lag is typically 48–72 hours, which often allows money to influence primary debates before the public even sees the data.
A “Money‑Out” Tax – A small surcharge on large corporate expenditures that would be earmarked for public education and civic engagement initiatives. The article cites a proposal by Colorado State Representative Mike Johnson, who argues that the tax would serve as both a deterrent and a revenue stream.
3. Legislative Milestones and Political Pushback
The article details recent legislative developments that signal both progress and resistance. In March 2025, Colorado lawmakers passed Senate Bill 25-4, which created a public‑funding program for gubernatorial and lieutenant gubernatorial races, but with a cap on the total amount that can be raised privately. The bill is framed as a “first step” toward the coalition’s broader goals, but it has been criticized by the Colorado Chamber of Commerce for being “inadequate.”
Opponents of the bill include the Colorado PAC Association, which has launched a lobbying campaign against further limits on corporate contributions. The Denver Post reports that the PAC Association’s campaign budget for the 2026 election cycle is projected to exceed $12 million, an increase that underscores the urgency of the coalition’s “big money out” narrative.
The article also references a recent Colorado Supreme Court decision, Colorado v. United States Campaign Finance Board (2024), which clarified that the state could impose certain limits on third‑party spending without violating First Amendment rights. The Post uses this decision as a legal basis for the coalition’s push for tighter regulations.
4. The Grassroots Momentum
An engaging part of the article is the section on citizen activism. The Denver Post covers a recent town hall in Denver where more than 400 residents signed a petition to support a “clean elections” ballot measure slated for the 2026 general election. The coalition’s strategy is to combine public‑funding and contribution caps into a single, voter‑approved measure. The article cites testimony from local community leaders, including Cynthia Ramos, who says, “When the money talks, the people are silenced.”
The article also links to a 2025 interview with former Colorado governor John Hickenlooper, who, while not a member of the coalition, acknowledges that “the state has a long way to go in closing the money‑gap that exists between our public officials and the donors who fund their campaigns.”
5. What’s at Stake for Colorado
The Denver Post frames the issue as a battle over the very nature of democracy in Colorado. If the coalition succeeds, the state could become the first in the West to adopt a fully public‑funded, low‑contribution system for all statewide offices. On the other hand, if the status quo persists, the article argues, Colorado may lag behind neighboring states that are already moving toward comprehensive reforms, such as Oregon’s “Clean Election Act” and Washington’s “Public Financing Initiative.”
The article concludes by reminding readers that the upcoming 2026 ballot will feature a measure titled “Colorado Clean Elections Act”. The Denver Post urges voters to familiarize themselves with the proposals, citing links to the official ballot description, the coalition’s campaign website, and the Colorado Legislative Counsel’s analysis of the measure’s fiscal impact.
Key Takeaways
| Topic | Summary |
|---|---|
| Historical Context | Citizens United v. FEC (2010) opened the floodgates for independent expenditures; Colorado’s early response was limited. |
| Coalition Goals | Public‑funding for all statewide offices, $5k cap on individual donations, 24‑hour disclosure, a “money‑out” tax. |
| Legislative Progress | Senate Bill 25‑4 (public‑funding for governor) and the Colorado v. U.S. Campaign Finance Board ruling provide legal footing. |
| Opposition | Colorado Chamber of Commerce and PAC Association argue caps would undermine free speech and limit campaign viability. |
| Grassroots Activity | Town halls, petitions, and a 2026 ballot measure seeking voter approval for a comprehensive reform package. |
| Implications | Successful passage would position Colorado as a leader in campaign‑finance reform; failure could cement the dominance of big money. |
The Denver Post’s piece thus serves as both a comprehensive overview of Colorado’s evolving campaign‑finance landscape and a call to action for citizens who believe “big money out” is not just desirable but essential for a healthy democracy.
Read the Full The Denver Post Article at:
[ https://www.denverpost.com/2025/12/10/citizens-united-colorado-solution-big-money-out-politics/ ]
