Colorado voters this year rejected Proposition 131, the ballot measure that would have moved the state to an all-candidate primary system in which the top four vote-getters advanced to ranked choice general elections.
As of this week, 54% of the votes cast on the measure were opposing it, and 46% were in support.
The failure of the measure comes despite the $19 million raised by Colorado Voters First, the issue committee that supported Proposition 131. Kent Thiry, the wealthy former CEO of the Denver-based dialysis giant DaVita, donated about $6 million to the group, including $2.1 million in the final week of the campaign.
Thiry is the cochair of the board overseeing Unite America, an election reform nonprofit that works to implement all-candidate primaries and ranked choice voting across the country.
Voter Rights Colorado was the issue committee opposing the measure. It raised and spent a few hundred thousand dollars, a fraction of what Colorado Voters First did.
We caught up with Thiry after Election Day to get his thoughts on the loss and find out what’s next for his election-overhaul efforts:
The following has been edited for clarity and length.
The Colorado Sun: What do you think went wrong for Proposition 131? You all released polling in September that seemed to be so positive for the measure.
Kent Thiry: Well, first, this hurts. This is a loss. We own that. And as the leader, I, in particular, need to take full accountability for the loss. Having said that, we also actually won in the broader sense. The fact that 45% of Coloradans – or maybe more by the time it’s over – were willing to make this kind of change, we built one heck of a foundation for the future. We’ve contributed to a discussion about democracy that’s so important for our state and country to have. The current system is driving America to a bad place. It’s not happening because Americans are bad people. It’s happening because it’s a bad system.
The Sun: Do you think people just didn’t understand the initiative? Why did they reject it?
Thiry: That’s the right question. It’s very clear from all our work the last year that a strong majority of Coloradans are angry, frustrated, worried about our democracy in Colorado and in the rest of the country. We moved a huge percentage of those people unhappy and worried and frustrated about the status quo to say, “wow, this other idea will be vastly superior, and we should pursue it.” But for the others, as much as they agree with that diagnosis of the shortcomings of the status quo, they still weren’t quite comfortable with exactly why Proposition 131 would be a big improvement.
The Sun: Is that what you found across the country? Measures similar to Proposition 131 that you or Unite America backed failed this year in Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Arizona and South Dakota, and it looks like Alaska may repeal its all-candidate primary and ranked choice general election system. Or do you think the failures are a bigger sign that people just really don’t want this?
Thiry: I think it’s exactly the same across the country as what happened in Colorado. I think my comments apply not only to Colorado, but to most of the states where the proposals failed.
The Sun: It sounds like you’re pretty committed to trying again in Colorado. Do you think you’ll break the proposal into pieces? What does the future look like?
Thiry: We will stare at every aspect of the proposal we made and the way that we educated people about it. We may come back with exactly the same approach. We may come back with a different approach. But what hasn’t changed is that our current system, the status quo, is not working well for our state, our country or the world. In fact, if anything, it’s been exacerbated by what’s going on this week. We remain committed to rejuvenating our democracy and getting us back to where the majority in the middle have their proportionate voice and the far left and far right do not have grotesquely disproportionate power.
The Sun: In the future, will you push for some of these changes to be made at the Legislature instead of through a ballot measure? And what do you plan to do about the bill passed by the Colorado General Assembly this year putting up roadblocks to the implementation of your proposal?*
*A clause added to Senate Bill 210, a broader elections measure passed by the Legislature this year, requires 12 Colorado municipalities in counties of a certain size and with a specific demographic makeup to conduct ranked choice elections before a ranked choice election could be used in a race for state or federal office. Additionally, the provision said that Colorado could not move to the new primary system until that requirement has been met.
Gov. Jared Polis nearly vetoed Senate Bill 210 because of the provision, which was added in the final days of the state’s 2024 lawmaking term and first reported publicly by The Colorado Sun. Polis wrote in a statement explaining his decision to sign the bill that he will bring state leaders together to find a path forward for all candidate primaries and ranked choice voting in Colorado.
Thiry: We haven’t made any decisions on the roadblock front. That was an unethical, antidemocratic, desperate step taken by a small number of legislators. We’re certainly open to a legislative approach to our proposals. But, in general, people with power tend to use power to keep power. And right now, the two parties have a stranglehold on ballot access for both the state and federal legislatures. It’s difficult to imagine the legislature taking action. Having said that, there were a number of legislators who grabbed me by the elbow, figuratively speaking, and said, “KT, I cannot say this publicly, because my party would punish me, but I hope Proposition 131 passes, because I would like to be able to govern more and compromise more.”
The Sun: You spent $6 million of your own money trying to get Proposition 131 passed. How are you feeling now about the investment? Was it worth it?
Thiry: It’s a fair question. I worked very hard for a very long time – and got very lucky. That led me to be financially well off. I can think of no better way to invest my savings than to invest it in trying to rejuvenate America’s democracy. I’m very active in the environmental area with the Nature Conservancy. But all the philanthropy in the world cannot make up for the deficiencies of an ineffective set of legislatures. Does it hurt to spend $6 million on an initiative and lose? You’re damn right it does. But I cannot think of a better way for me to try to create a good world for my kids and their kids. Our opponents, who are talking about big money, they have taken multiples – multiples – of the amount that we spent. The hypocrisy of these people talking about big money when they have been living off that big money for election cycle after cycle. I could have done all my giving through dark money vehicles. I didn’t think going the dark money route was the right thing to do. I think Colorado voters should know where the money was coming from. I certainly hope all those elected officials who were critical of the big money spent in support of Proposition 131 are going to forgo and turn down any contributions from wealthy donors and special interests and dark money in the future.
Editor’s note
The Thiry O’Leary Foundation, which is run by Kent Thiry and his wife, Denise O’Leary, has been a financial supporter of The Colorado Sun. Donors have no influence over editorial decisions.
