Two leading state senators want voters next year to decide whether to repeal a sweeping ethics law that is so flawed that even its backers admit it has had unintended consequences.

A proposal by Sen. Peter Groff, D-Denver, and Senate Minority Leader Andy McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, would narrow the 2006 voter-approved Amendment 41 so that it impacts only elected officials, policymakers and the governor's Cabinet and department heads.

The measure now includes all government workers, their families and government contractors.

Under Amendment 41, they're prevented from accepting gifts worth more than $50 in a calendar year, leading to lawsuits over whether the children of a janitor at the Statehouse, for example, can accept a college scholarship.

"This is the cleanest way to do it so it makes sense," Groff said. "I've always been of the opinion that we can't begin to cut and paste provisions of the constitution. If it's ethics in government the voters want, let's give them that."

Meanwhile, Groff and McElhany also will move forward with a separate bill to set up an ethics commission that would rule on ethics questions until voters weigh in November 2008.

The Senate's latest measure is one of several proposals to limit the long reach of Amendment 41, which backers maintain was meant to simply rein in influence peddling at the state Capitol.

The Senate's latest chess move sets the stage for a fierce battle between the House and Senate.

The House has a separate plan that seeks to provide government workers immediate answers and clear up confusion surrounding Amendment 41.

House Bill 1304 defines terms in Amendment 41 such as gifts for special occasions.

A companion resolution asks the Colorado Supreme Court to confirm some lawmakers' conclusions that college professors can accept Nobel Prize money and children of government workers can accept scholarships.

House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver, said both proposals accomplish the same thing, but that the Senate's measure leaves government employees and their families in limbo for another 18 months.

"We all want to get to the same place," he said. "This should not become a game of assured mutual destruction. We are here to make laws and not war."

Mark Grueskin, an attorney hired to draft implementation legislation, agreed. He said there is no reason why the Senate cannot embrace the House's approach to fix Amendment 41.

"The downside of (the Senate) proposal is that it forces people to live with uncertainty for another year and half," Grueskin said. "The House has drafted an implementation bill that will provide clarity now."

washingtonam@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5086