A Denver family physician said she will vote no on Amendment 82, arguing the measure would not change what people can already do with gas in their homes but could make it harder for Colorado to protect public health. The proposed amendment would add two sentences to the Colorado Constitution, one giving consumers a right to buy natural gas for cooking and heating and the other giving distributors and utilities a right to sell it to homes and businesses.
That is why the measure is drawing attention now: it would put a question about gas use into the state constitution before voters decide whether to approve it. Buying and using gas is already legal in Colorado, and a no vote would not change anything about a furnace in the basement or a range in the kitchen. The physician said she has seen mailers from supporters describing gas as clean and affordable, but she said nothing in Amendment 82 makes gas cleaner or cheaper, and nothing in it requires any company to lower prices.
Her case is built on health, not supply. She said the oil and gas industry is responsible for the majority of Colorado’s air pollution and that the state’s air pollution causes thousands of deaths every year. She said fracking has been associated with higher rates of blood cancer for children who live nearby, and that burning methane indoors releases pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, which is linked to asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pneumonia. In her view, Amendment 82 is really about whether the Colorado Constitution should be rewritten to protect a single industry’s profits at the cost of public health.
The fight turns on what those rights would mean in practice. She said no right is absolute and that the limits would be settled in court, case by case. That, she warned, could put rules that keep fracking away from homes and schools at risk, along with limits on pollution in the air people breathe. She also said the measure would give the industry a powerful new way to challenge policymakers if they try to hold fracking companies, monopoly utilities or corporate polluters accountable when they harm health or safety.
Her concern is as much about delay as it is about defeat. She said industry-backed legal action can do damage even when the industry loses, because lawsuits cost the public real money and can stall vital protections for years while cases move through the courts. Local officials, she said, may decide a new public safeguard is not worth the fight if they expect a legal challenge. If Amendment 82 passes, undoing it would take another statewide vote of 55 percent. The question for Colorado voters is not whether gas can be bought and used today; it is whether that right should be locked into the constitution in a way that could reshape future regulation through the courts.
