Comments on: Group assails ex-con petition collectors

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 01:35:00 +0000

Neither beliver nor reject anything,Cheap Jordans because any other person has rejected of believed it.

By: rckymtnsurfer

rckymtnsurfer — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:37:58 +0000

I really hope #53 doesn't make the ballot. As I just posted on a related article, #53 is one o the most deceptive measures ever to be thrust upon Colorado. The language and packaging of it is completely misleading, nothing in what the backers are calling the

By: jenny4240

jenny4240 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:14:47 +0000

I really don't want convicted sex offenders and thieves knowing exactly where I live. I'm sure there are other jobs these people can find that don't involve going up to people who are with their children and asking for their address.

By: mtnmike

mtnmike — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:36:38 +0000

Erin Rosa

Posted 07/14/2008 11:22am with +0 votes

What I

By: thegrunt

thegrunt — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:01:46 +0000

No, your position is that federal law covers compulsory unionism. If so, why do you worry about Amendment 47.

Here is what you get with Beck rights…

By: wendynorris

wendynorris — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:36:03 +0000

So, since compulsory union membership is already prohibited by federal law, are you admitting that Amendment 47 is redundant and an unnecessary provision to the Colorado constitution?

By: protectcoloradosfuture

protectcoloradosfuture — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:35:37 +0000

I would like to think of felons as people who can be able to work any job, with any kind of co-worker and customer. But logic tells you that sometimes temptation can become to much for someone who has already crossed that line of morality. Why give these people the temptation that may be to much for them to handle? Signing petitions should not be like playing a game of chance with the criminally minded.

By: thegrunt

thegrunt — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:37:25 +0000

"As for state employees who do not wish to join a union, they will not be forced to do so. That is illegal under federal law, and any union that does successfully organize state employees in Colorado will be required to operate in a "right-to-work" environment, not unlike the Denver Newspaper Guild's agreement with The Denver Post, in which employees have the choice not to pay agency fees or dues to a union despite the fact that the union contract covers all applicable workers." - Erin Rosa The Colorado Independent 11/07/07

Sounds like 67,000 state workers have a Colorado specific Right to Work to me!

Shouldn't all Coloradans have the real employee free choice provided by the governor?

By: wendynorris

wendynorris — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:25:46 +0000

Jeebus, once more with feeling...

(1) Federal law prohibits compulsory union membership.
(2) Gov. Ritter's executive order on employee organizing is in no way, shape or form an endorsement of Right-to-work.

Right-to-work proponents, like you, really do your cause a disservice by repeating known inaccuracies. So knock yourself out but I won't allow these untruthful comments to stand unchallenged on The Colorado Independent.

By: erinrosa

erinrosa — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:22:07 +0000

What I'm so curious about is why PCF chose this issue in particular? The fact that ex-cons are collecting signatures is certainly nothing new, especially when considering that the work is hard and that it can be very difficult to find jobs with a criminal record.