With just 59 days until the election, competition for the hearts and minds of voters has begun. But with 18 different questions poised for this November's ballot, campaigns are fighting an uphill battle not only for that coveted "yes" vote, but also for sources of communication, including advertising space.
On Wednesday, Secretary of State Mike Coffman announced that his office had concluded its review of all signatures submitted in favor of 15 proposed ballot initiatives. Just one, a measure designed to preserve race and gender preferences, didn't make the cut. In addition, voters will be asked to consider four referred measures--proposed constitutional amendments introduced by state legislators.
Such daunting statistics make it hard for a campaign to stand out. Colorado has seen 53 proposed initiatives and referred measures since 1998. Less than half, 42 percent, were passed by voters. “Unless you have a lot of money, you can’t take voters from point A to point Z,” said political strategist Katy Atkinson. “You need to communicate with them on the basis of what they already know. Too many people try to change public opinion with a campaign.”
Denis Polhill, co-founder of the University of Southern California's Initiative and Referendum Institute, says the odds are stacked against most of the proposed initiatives. The most complicated the issue, he believes, the less likely voters are to say yes. In this environment, it's easier to kill an initiative than it is to keep one alive.
In 1998, Polhill ran an initiative campaign seeking to create voluntary congressional term limits. The 11 measures on the ballot that year were met with an active campaign urging people to vote "no" on everything. Polhill’s initiative was one of only three that passed. He credits his success to the understandability and preexisting popularity of term limits.
“Popularity is a function of how easy it is to grasp your issue,” he said. “When you’re talking about a severance tax you’re already in trouble because a lot of people don’t know what that is.”
Coloradans for a Stable Economy is a coalition opposing this year's Amendment 58, an effort backed by Gov. Bill Ritter that would increase taxes on the state's oil and gas industry. The coalition has spent $10 million fighting the measure, and while the money certainly helps, spokesman Bill Ray believes an opposition’s major advantage is that the burden of proof falls on the initiative campaign. Ray describes Ritter’s tax hike as “vague” and “convoluted.” He said voters are skeptical of the measure and that polling reflects that sentiment.
An August survey of 800 likely voters revealed that 57 percent of survey respondents opposed Ritter’s tax hike, while 34 percent supported it. Coloradans for a Stable Economy funded the poll. Ray also points to the "shifting national mood" about energy issues after the summer's record high gas prices.
But less complicated initiatives, like Amendment 46, which is only a paragraph in length, poll much higher than Ritter's tax hike. A June survey conducted by the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post.com, and Quinnipiac University shows that 66 percent of Colorado voters overwhelmingly support the measure, also known as the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative. The proposed constitutional amendment would prohibit government from considering race or gender in education, government employment, or public contracting.
Atkinson believes it is possible to run an effective opposition campaign with modest resources if they are leveraged correctly. She said traditional campaign tools, such as mail and radio, are more appropriate for supporting messages. According to Atkinson, mail is most effective when highly targeted and used very early. “But you can’t beat the power and reach of television,” she said.
Some initiative campaigns bought ad space before even being certified for the ballot. Amendment 59 backers made their media buy back in June. The proposal would prohibit government contractors holding no-bid contracts from making campaign contributions to political parties and candidates. "Media buys are a lot like commodities," said Tom Lucero, spokesman for Amendment 59. "You hedge your bet hoping the price will go up." Lucero estimates that his campaign paid about 65 percent less that what media buys are going for today.
Federal law requires that stations offer the lowest rate to federal candidates, and that rate is usually extended to local candidates even though it is not required by law. But campaign consultant and media buyer Walt Klein says ballot initiatives have to pay the market rate for ad space, which he added is "not cheap." He said it is ideal for a campaign to make its media buy before the market gets competitive but most don't have the funds on hand until closer to Election Day, and by then rates have already gone up. "There is also a finite amount of ad space, and the closer you get to an election the fast it sells out," he said.
Klein estimates that campaigns have to pay about $400 per gross rating point in today's Denver market. A gross rating point is the way stations measure viewership. He said a small buy of 100 gross rating points means the average TV viewer would see your commercial once during the week, and a big media buy of 1,000 gross rating points means the average viewer would see your commercial ten times during the week. Klein recommends a buy somewhere in the middle, meaning campaigns buying in the Denver market have to spend up to $250,000 for just one week of advertising.
But Polhill maintains that opposition campaigns can rely heavily on voter skepticism. "It's easier to win a no vote than it is to win a yes vote," he said.