A political advertisement was sent to voters supporting Amendment 80 that included a quote from Kevin Vick, the head of the Colorado Education Association. Vick does not support the amendment, which, if passed, would enshrine school choice in the state’s constitution. (Mobile screen capture of text message via Megan Schrader/The Denver Post)
A political advertisement sent to voters last week falsely implied that the head of Colorado’s largest teachers union supports Amendment 80, which, if passed in next month’s election, would enshrine families’ right to school choice in the state constitution.
The advertisement, which was sent via text message, doesn’t explicitly say Kevin Vick, president of the Colorado Education Association, supports the measure. But it features Vick’s photo, an audio recording and a quote from him saying, “School choice has worked very well for students for years.”
The text message encouraged Coloradans to vote in favor of Amendment 80 in the Nov. 5 election. It did not include a disclosure of who paid for it — which has spurred former state Rep. Bri Buentello to file a campaign finance complaint with the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office.
Vick said he was surprised by the text message, but felt that it was reflective of the amendment, which the teachers union opposes and has previously called “an unnecessary, duplicative and misleading proposal.”
“We feel that (the amendment is) hiding its true purpose, which is to put private schools in the constitution,” Vick said.
Colorado parents can already request that their children attend any public K-12 school in the state for free, even in a different district from which they live, under state law.
Advance Colorado, which petitioned to get the amendment on the ballot, wants to “cement” school choice in the state constitution so that it’s always available to families, said Michael Fields, president of the conservative advocacy group, in a statement.
The measure needs 55% of support to pass because it would amend the Colorado Constitution.
“Any statute can be changed by politicians at the Capitol whenever they want,” he said. “We’ve already seen bills introduced to go after charter schools. By putting school choice in the constitution, it will always be up to the people instead of politicians.”
Fields said that Advance Colorado was not behind the pro-Amendment 80 text that featured Vick.
Last week, Buentello, who is now chair of the Pueblo Democratic Party, filed a campaign finance complaint against Colorado Dawn IEC over the political ad because it didn’t disclose who paid for it. In the complaint, Buentello said she suspected the independent expenditure committee, which she said has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for mail and text messages, was behind advertisement.
Buentello said she filed the complaint because the text “was a blatantly dishonest ad that didn’t even bother with a disclaimer on who paid for it — their campaign tactics are as deceptive as the measure itself.”
The Colorado Secretary of State’s Office found that the text potentially violated state campaign finance law by not including a disclaimer, “but that one or more of the alleged violations may be curable” and has given Colorado Dawn IEC until Nov. 5 to respond, according to an initial review filed on Tuesday.
It’s unclear whether Colorado Dawn IEC or a nonprofit with a similar name that has supported Amendment 80 — Colorado Dawn — are behind the text message as Daniel Cole, a consultant with both groups, declined to comment.
Vick and others who oppose the measure say that Amendment 80 is the first step toward a voucher program in Colorado, which would take taxpayer money from public schools and give it to private schools. Voucher programs have gained popularity across the U.S. in recent years, with The Washington Post reporting that billions of public dollars are going toward tuition at religious schools.
“That measure is completely not needed because (school choice) is already very well protected in statute and the reason we say this is kind of a trojan horse type of amendment is because it takes something that has been popular and tries to use it as a vehicle to get what we believe are their end goals placed in the constitution,” Vick said.
Fields, with Advance Colorado, said “it’s not true” that the amendment would open the door for a voucher program in Colorado by including private schools in the measure’s language.
“The opponents of this measure don’t like school choice so they are using scare tactics,” he said.
Previous attempts to create a voucher program in Colorado, including in the Douglas County School District, have failed.
“The state has been clear that this is not something… we’re interested in,” said Van Schoales, who worked on a failed attempt to get a voucher program for low-income children in Denver about two decades ago. He is now a senior policy director at Keystone Policy Center, a nonprofit that conducts education research.
Related Articles
Colorado early voting numbers show Democrats with slight edge over GOP voters
How does Colorado keep noncitizens and dead people from voting in elections?
Endorsement: “Do not retain” votes on Colorado judges could inadvertently give a win to Trump supporters
Opinion: Serving only half a sentence for armed robbery? Colorado’s weak parole laws can be fixed with Prop 128
Trump hurls a string of insults at Harris including ‘lazy,’ a racist trope against Black people
Schoales said he is not in support of Amendment 80 because it includes private school choice, adding that his view on vouchers has changed because he doesn’t think such programs have significantly improved academic outcomes for students in other states.
Get more Colorado news by signing up for our Mile High Roundup email newsletter.