by Ashley Zimmerman

Somehow, somewhere, in Colorado in 1937, the governor’s office appeared to have a mole problem.  The names of judicial and political appointees were being published in the Denver Post before the appointees had even been notified. Teller Ammons, the colorful and somewhat profane governor of the state, was upset and confused. Who could possibly be leaking his information to the press?

The young governor, elected at age 39, was born in Denver and spent his younger years on his father’s cattle ranch in Douglas County.  He attended and graduated from North High School in Denver before serving in the United States Army during World War I. After returning home, Ammons hired on as a clerk for Denver Mayor Ben Stapleton.  While clerking, Ammons also attended Westminster Law School and earned his law degree in 1929.

The next year, in 1930, Ammons was elected to the state senate. During his years in the senate, he served as chair of the Temperance Committee and Judiciary Committee. He introduced the bill that outlawed hanging as the method of capital punishment for the state, and he was instrumental in passing the bill authorizing use of the gas chamber for executions. In 1935, Senator Ammons resigned when Mayor Stapleton appointed him Denver city attorney. It was clear that Ammons was working his way up the political ladder, and he became known as a power player in the Denver Democratic Party.  He was elected governor in 1936.

As governor, Ammons pushed through a service tax to fund the state’s expenses instead of using already-raised funds from the recently enacted state income tax that were earmarked for education.  Despite numerous special interest groups pressuring him, Governor Ammons refused to tamper with the existing funds. As a result, he was highly criticized for his handling of state funds and attracted intense public opposition.  During the later years of the Great Depression, Governor Ammons established the State Game and Fish Department and the State Water Conservation Board, and he dealt with water rights disputes between New Mexico, Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas.

Perhaps the most memorable moment from his term, however, was the aforementioned mysterious mole incident.

Governor Ammons was frustrated.  Appointments were being made public, information was being leaked to the press, and no one seemed to have a clue as to who was breaking the confidence of the governor.  Governor Ammons remarked, years after the incident, “One day a man came into my office, called me over to the window and whispered that there were microphones in my office.”  The man, who was not identified by Governor Ammons, was right.  A sweep was conducted of the governor’s office, and two microphones were found in the vents. The microphones were connected to a phone line that led to an apartment five blocks away, which belonged to a private detective named Jack H. Gilmore.

Gilmore was in cahoots with Walden E. Sweet, a reporter for the Denver Post, and Earl H. Ellis, an attorney who hired both Sweet and Gilmore. The entire scandal prompted a grand jury investigation, and the three men involved were convicted on eavesdropping charges.  Ellis was disbarred. The transcripts obtained were printed in the newspapers, and the entire situation earned a mention in the September 20, 1937, issue of TIME.  “I don’t know. . . what they were trying to get on me,” Governor Ammons reflected, later admitting that he brought a lot of it on himself. “When I took office, I resolved that I would not be dominated by any man or any faction or any newspaper.”

Though the recordings from Governor Ammons’ office did not produce any incriminating information against the governor, he did not win a second term in office. “It was embarrassing to a lot of people, but the worst thing was what my mother said: ‘I didn’t know Teller used that kind of language!’.”

As you’re probably aware, Joint Rule 24 (b) (1) (A)¹ allows a member of the General Assembly to introduce only five bills during a regular session of the legislature.  However, there are many circumstances under which you may be able to introduce more than just five bills.

If you sponsor one or more interim committee bills, they will not count against the limit.  And, you can sponsor an interim committee bill even if you don’t actually serve on the interim committee.  But the bill must be approved by the Legislative Council before it can be introduced.  See Joint Rule 24 (b) (1) (D)².

Bills for appropriations and bills introduced by the audit committee, the joint budget committee, the capital development committee, the legislative council, the executive committee, the committee on legal services, the legislative emergency preparedness, response, and recovery committee, or the commission on uniform state laws also do not count against the bill limit.

Also, each year certain committees of reference participate in the sunset review process.  Through this process, a committee reviews reports from the department of regulatory agencies concerning the continuation or repeal of state programs and advisory committees and the committee reviews certain statutory reporting requirements.  The committee then introduces bills to either continue or repeal the programs, advisory committees, or reporting requirements, and these bills do not count against the five-bill limit.

Finally, you may seek permission for extra bills from the Committee on Delayed Bills for the house in which you serve.  In the House of Representatives, the Committee on Delayed Bills consists of the Speaker of the House and the majority and minority leaders.  In the Senate, it’s the President of the Senate and the majority and minority leaders.  To introduce more than five bills, you will need the signature of two of the three members of your delayed-bill committee.

1. https://www.leg.state.co.us/inethsr.nsf/Rule.xsp?id=JNTRULES.24&catg=Joint&pg=3.0 ↩︎
2. https://www.leg.state.co.us/inethsr.nsf/Rule.xsp?id=JNTRULES.24&catg=Joint&pg=3.0 ↩︎

The title of a bill provides notice to the public as to the contents of the bill.  Article V, section 21 of the State Constitution requires that a bill contain only one subject and that the subject be “clearly expressed in its title…”.  The title must also state the purpose of the bill.  This means the title must accurately reflect the substance of the bill without being so broad as to violate the Constitution’s single subject requirement.

The bill title not only tells the public what’s in the bill, but it controls the amendments that may be added to the bill as it goes through the legislative process.  Because the title expresses the single subject and purpose of the bill, an amendment that would add a subject or language that is broader than the title would arguably add a second subject to the bill in violation of the single-subject requirement.  For this reason, the chairperson of the committee in which the amendment is offered may rule the amendment out of order.

If a bill is introduced with a broad title, a legislator may offer an amendment to narrow the title so that it is more specific as to the provisions in the bill.  A legislator may also try to narrow a bill title in order to control the amendments that can be offered to the bill. Remember, however, that another legislator can offer an amendment at any time to broaden the title back to its introduced form.  So, tightening a title after a bill is introduced, with the goal of limiting the possible amendments, is unlikely to be successful, because another member may amend the title back to the introduced version to allow for his or her substantive amendment.

A legislator may also try to amend a title to make it broader than the introduced version.  While there’s no actual rule that says a legislator cannot broaden an introduced title, by custom and practice these amendments are generally not allowed.  Logically, if the introduced bill title is a single subject, the effect of broadening it would be to allow for one or more additional subjects — a clear violation of the constitutional single-subject requirement.