Colombia's president sends congress referendum proposal that could overhaul labor laws
With much of his agenda repeatedly blocked by Congress, Petro is now betting that the same lawmakers who twice rejected his labor reform will allow voters to decide whether they want his proposed changes. Congress has one month to approve or reject the 12-question referendum.
Petro, Colombia's first ever leftist president, sought to rally support for his project by participating in a union demonstration in the capital, Bogota, marking Labor Day.
'The people of Colombia want to vote for their fundamental rights, for their dignity,' Petro said before thousands of demonstrators, asking them to not vote to reelect any lawmaker who votes against the referendum.
If approved by lawmakers, Petro will have to issue a decree summoning Colombians to the polls within three months. Questions for voters would include whether daytime workdays should end at 6 p.m. and whether open-ended contracts should be offered to workers to prioritize job stability.
But overcoming Congress is not Petro's only concern in seeing his project become a reality. He needs referendum participation to exceed 13 million – that's more than the number of votes he obtained to become president – and more than half of those votes must be in favor of his proposal.
Analysts agree that Petro has the upper hand in several scenarios, even if Congress does not approve the referendum or if he fails to obtain the necessary votes at the polls. In the former scenario, Sandra Borda, political science professor at the University of the Andes, said lawmakers would give Petro's government the tools to 'play the victim' and strengthen its rhetoric against Congress.
'The message the government has constantly tried to send is that Congress is no longer an entity that represents the interests of the people... but rather defends the interests, as they call them, of the private sector oligarchies,' Borda said.
On the other hand, if voters end up going to the polls, the government could consider itself the winner by securing support from its electoral base, said Javier Garay, a political science professor at the Externship University of Colombia. He noted that the referendum's underlying purpose is to test the government's electoral support ahead of the 2026 presidential election.
Union members who were among the thousands of people demonstrating Thursday in Bogota expressed support for the referendum.
'The referendum is a vindication of workers' rights, which have been a struggle for decades and were taken away from us by previous far-right governments,' said Jesús Parra, 53, one of the protesters.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
20 minutes ago
- USA Today
Are stimulus checks coming? What to know after Trump proposed tariff rebate
Last month, President Donald Trump teased that a potential rebate could be attached to the worldwide tariffs he announced earlier this year. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate,' Trump said on July 25 ahead of his trip to Scotland, where he planned to iron out the details of a United Kingdom trade agreement. The White House has announced that some of the tariffs, which were disclosed on April 2, have raised $100 billion in revenue. Trump didn't provide further details on the potential rebates, which are unlikely to pass in Congress, except to say they would only be available to people from certain income levels. The president would need congressional approval to authorize the rebates. While details are scarce, here's what you need to know about a potential tariff rebate. Previous story: Trump considers 'rebates' to US taxpayers from tariff income Sen. Josh Hawley introduces rebate bill Shortly after Trump's July comments, Sen. Josh Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, introduced the American Worker Rebate Act of 2025. The proposed legislation would send rebate checks of at least $600 per individual to U.S. residents. A family of four could receive up to $2,400. The legislation allows the credit to increase if tariff revenues exceed 2025 projections. 'My legislation would allow hard-working Americans to benefit from the wealth that Trump's tariffs are returning to this country,' said Hawley in a news release announcing the bill. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said tariff revenue is expected to reach $300 billion annually. Yet, economists have said the policies could increase inflation and cost taxpayers thousands of dollars per year, especially if Trump doesn't reach trade deals with key partners like Canada and Mexico. For joint filers with an adjusted gross income of over $150,000 and people filing single who earn more than $75,000, the benefit would be reduced by 5%. The legislation has been referred to the Senate Finance Committee. It would need to pass both the Senate and the House of Representatives to become law. What are some of the hurdles facing the rebate? Republican lawmakers are unlikely to be excited about increasing federal spending. The stimulus checks issued during the COVID-19 pandemic cost the government about $164 billion. If checks were issued, it would mean a significant percentage of tariff revenue would be going back to taxpayers at a time when Trump himself has said his priority is paying down $37 trillion in debt. "The big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said in July. 'But we're thinking about rebates.' In an interview with Semafor, one conservative lawmaker shot down the idea. "People love spending money and granting new tax cuts when we can't afford it," Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, told the outlet. 'We're $37 trillion in debt and running $2 trillion a year deficits – some time, this madness just has to end.' How is a tax rebate different from a stimulus check? A tax rebate is a reimbursement made to a taxpayer for an excess amount paid in taxes during the year, while a stimulus check is a direct payment from the federal government to households. Tax rebates can be issued at any point during the year. Hawley's news release states that the parameters for the tax rebate would be similar to the stimulus checks issued in 2020 during the economic slowdown caused by the pandemic. When could a tax rebate be implemented? Hawley's bill has until the end of the current congressional calendar to pass through both chambers of Congress, or it will be considered dead and would need to be introduced again if lawmakers want to move forward with it. Michelle Del Rey is a trending news reporter at USA TODAY. Reach her at mdelrey@
USA Today
20 minutes ago
- USA Today
How DC's unique status let Trump take control of police, deploy National Guard
As Trump sends the National Guard to bolster immigration enforcement, Democratic governors and mayors are fighting his use of the military for law enforcement. WASHINGTON – Although President Donald Trump threatened to extend his takeover of the DC Metropolitan Police Force to fight crime and homelessness to other cities, it can't be replicated elsewhere, according to legal experts. The capital's unique status as a federal city, rather than part of a state, grants the federal government unique power to manage it directly. But the president is unlikely to be able to take control of the entire DC government because that would require a change in federal law, which would be difficult to get through the Senate, experts said. Trump also has special authority to deploy the National Guard in DC, in contrast to governors traditionally overseeing mobilizations in their states. But the military is typically blocked from participating directly in law enforcement, which is why California filed a federal lawsuit against Trump's recent deployment of thousands of troops in Los Angeles. 'DC as a federal enclave is fundamentally different than a state or a local government,' Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University, told USA TODAY. Here's what to know about Trump's authority to bolster law enforcement in states and cities − and the limitations on that power: Trump becomes first to take over DC police under 1973 Home Rule Act The Constitution ratified in 1787 provided for a federal capital district to serve as the seat of government controlled by Congress, and DC was founded a few years later. In 1973, Congress approved the Home Rule Act that gave the city a mayor and city council. But Congress kept control over the city's spending and the ability to overturn DC laws, as happened in 2023 when the council tried to reduce penalties for some crimes. A provision in DC law allows the president to take control of the Metropolitan Police Force temporarily during an emergency. 'I think Washington DC is the only city where the president can do that,' Tom Manger, the former chief of Capitol police and departments in the DC suburbs of Montgomery County in Maryland and Fairfax County in Virginia, told USA TODAY. Trump invoked the provision for the first time Aug. 11 aiming to rid the city of what he called was an emergency of 'crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse.' He said the city was overrun with "violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals," despite a declining crime rate. Trump had to notify the leaders of congressional committees overseeing DC in order for him to keep control of the police for 30 days. A longer extension would require authorization by lawmakers. Trump told reporters Aug. 13 that he would ask Congress to 'long-term extensions' for him to remain control of the DC police, which he expected to be approved 'pretty much unanimously.' But he said he could call a national emergency if needed. 'We're going to be essentially crime free,' Trump said. 'This is going to be a beacon.' Trump declared the initial emergency despite DC reporting a 35% drop in violent crime from 2023 to 2024, and a 26% drop in crime so far in 2025. Kreis said 'a lot of people would contest' the declaration of an emergency, but the challenge would be difficult to litigate. 'You almost by default have to defer to the president's judgment on this, no matter who the president is,' Kreis said. Taking away DC home rule would require change in federal law Trump is unlikely to be able to take control of the entire DC government because that would require a change in federal law. The legislation could be blocked by filibuster in the Senate, which requires 60 votes to overcome in a chamber with 53 of Trump's fellow Republicans and 47 members of the Democratic caucus. Trump also criticized crime in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Baltimore as 'bad, very bad.' Trump threatened to expand the deployment of the National Guard to help fight crime in other states and cities. He specifically cited New York, Chicago and other cities as targets for more troops. "We're not going to lose our cities over this. This will go further. We're starting very strongly with DC," Trump said. 'This will go further,' Trump said. "We're going to take back our capital," Trump added. "And then we'll look at other cities also. In August 2023, Trump criticized Atlanta's crime in August 2023 as 'WORST IN NATION' and a 'GIANT MURDER WAVE!' despite a decline in the crime rate. But other cities and states aren't part of the federal government, so experts say he could not directly take over their police or local governments.'The federal government does not have the authority to commandeer state and local officials against their will to do their (its) bidding,' Kreis said. 'He just fundamentally cannot do that as a federalism matter.' DC Mayor Muriel Bowser called Trump's takeover of the police force 'unsettling and unprecedented' but didn't challenge it in court. 'It's times like these when America needs to know that DC should be the 51st state,' Bowser said in a social media post Aug. 12. Trump leads DC National Guard as commander in chief Trump didn't need any additional authority Aug. 11 to assign 800 National Guard troops to bolster crime fighting in DC because as commander in chief he oversees the Guard in the federal city. Joseph Nunn, national security counsel at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice, said presidents can deploy the National Guard where they want, but the troops are prevented from helping with law enforcement under a law called the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. NOT CLEAR TO ME HERE WHAT THIS MEANS WRT THE ASSIGNMENT IN DC? IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE SAYING THEY WON'T BE ALLOWED TO DO LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT IN DC THEY WILL. DO YOU MEAN HERE TO SAY THAT PRESIDENTS CAN DEPLOY THE DC NATIONAL GUARD OUTSIDE DC? BUT OUTSIDE DC THEY CANNOT DO LAW ENFORCEMENT? CAN YOU CLARIFY HERE? This is why WHAT KIND OF? troops in Los Angeles WERE THEY DC NATL GUARD? SPECIFYwere described as protecting federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and buildings rather than helping arrest undocumented immigrants. 'He can put those troops wherever he wants to put them, but they will be constrained by the Posse Comitatus Act in terms of what they want to do,' Nunn told USA TODAY. THAT LAST PHRASE IS CONFUSING. WHO IS THEY? FIRST THEY WOULD BE THE TROOPS, BUT SECOND IS MAYBE REFERRING TO THE PRESIDENT? BC WHAT THE TROOPS THEMSELVES WANT TO DO SEEMS LIKE A WEIRD CONCEPT... IF HE MEANT PRES CAN YOU REVISE TO CLARIFY? 'Up to now, the sort of logistical support we've seen provided to ICE during in the interior country has largely been provided by federalized National Guard and by active-duty armed forces.' National Guard deployments have been routine Before Trump's latest directives, National Guard deployments were routine in DC and elsewhere for purposes other than law enforcement. For example, after the Capitol attack Jan. 6, 2021, Manger was given the authority to request National Guard reinforcements FROM THE PRESIDENT? OR JUST DIRECTLY FROM THE GUARD ITSELF? on his own as chief of Capitol police, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT SITUATION PREVIOUSLY?. Manger said he appreciated the extra staffing to protect the Capitol or help with traffic during protests, such as when he set up dozens of traffic posts to keep vehicles moving during a trucker protest against public health restrictions by truckers. 'The National Guard is terrific,' Manger said. Local authorities also often coordinate with federal law enforcement such as the FBI to fight organized crime or the Drug Enforcement Administration to combat drug trafficking. 'There's a symbiotic relationship between federal and local police across the country,' Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum think tank, told USA TODAY. 'What happened in Washington is distinctly different from what happened in pretty much any city in the country.' Wexler added that the National Guard has a role to play, but troops are traditionally use 'sparingly.' 'They will never be a replacement for local police,' Wexler said. 'No police chief I know would ever put the National Guard in a position where they're making an arrest or their dealing directly with a volatile crowd. They have to be used strategically.' But Manger was uncertain how Trump would move homeless people out of the capital. 'I'm not aware of any other cities or towns around the country that are clamoring for homeless," Manger said. "Where is he going to put them?" Richard Stengel, a former undersecretary of state during the Obama administration, warned against the use of military to bolster law enforcement at a time when violent crime in DC is at a 30-year low. 'Throughout history, autocrats use a false pretext to impose government control over local law enforcement as a prelude to a more national takeover,' Stengel said in a social media post Aug. 11. 'That's far more dangerous than the situation he says he is fixing.' Trump bolsters immigration enforcement with National Guard The Pentagon announced on July 25 that 1,700 National Guard personnel – 1,200 already deployed plus 500 additional troops – will work on "case management, transportation and logistical support, and clerical support for the in- and out-processing" of ICE arrests. GIVEN THE IMPORTANCE OF DISTINGUISHING IN THIS PIECE WHETHER THEY ARE FROM DC OR A CERTAIN STATE, CAN YOU CLARIFY WHICH LOCALITY THEY ARE FROM HERE? The duties of some will also include taking DNA swabs, photographs and fingerprints of people held at ICE facilities, according to a defense official speaking on condition of anonymity. California fights Trump's use of National Guard for law enforcement A landmark federal trial began Aug. 11 in San Francisco challenging Trump's deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 active-duty Marines to support deportations and quell immigration protests in Los Angeles. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco will determine if the government violated the Posse Comitatus Act. California sued the Trump administration by arguing the deployment violated federal law and state sovereignty. But a federal appeals court allowed Trump to retain control of California's National Guard during the legal fight. California Gov. Gavin Newsom seeks a ruling that would return its National Guard troops to state control and a declaration that Trump's action was illegal. What is the Insurrection Act? One option for Trump to get around the prohibition on troops conducting law enforcement would be to invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act, which aimed to suppress armed rebellion or insurrection. Despite the harsh terms, president have invoked the law throughout the country's history. Former President George H.W. Bush was the last to invoke the law in 1992, in response to rioting in Los Angeles after the acquittal of four white police officers charged with beating a Black motorist, Rodney King. CAN YOU SAY HERE WHAT BUSH DID WITH THAT INVOCATION? LIKE HE SENT ARMY TROOPS INTO LA? TO DO WHAT? Trump threatened repeatedly after Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 to invoke the Insurrection Act but hasn't done so recently. Legal experts said any challenge to Trump invoking that law would turn on similar semanatics defining whether the emergency or rebellion justified taking over the DC police or deploying National Guard troops in other cities. 'I think it would be naïve to suggest that the president would not try or could not try to stretch the definitions of insurrection or rebellion beyond their common political usage to suit his political needs,' Kreis said. 'The law might say one thing but its ability to be stretched and molded into a political weapon for the president's benefit is not really purely speculative.' Contributing: Cybele Mayes-Osterman and Reuters
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
UN rejects plans by Sudan's paramilitary group for a rival government amid civil war
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. Security Council on Wednesday rejected plans by Sudan's paramilitary group to establish a rival government in areas it controls, warning that the move threatens the country's territorial integrity and risks further exacerbating the ongoing civil war. The strongly worded statement by the U.N.'s most powerful body 'unequivocally reaffirmed' its unwavering commitment to Sudan's sovereignty, independence and unity. Any steps to undermine these principles 'threaten not only the future of Sudan but also the peace and stability of the broader region,' the statement said. The 15-member council said the announcement by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces also risks 'fragmenting the country and worsening an already dire humanitarian situation.' Sudan plunged into conflict in mid-April 2023, when long-simmering tensions between its military and paramilitary leaders broke out in the capital, Khartoum, and spread to other regions, including western Darfur. Some 40,000 people have been killed, nearly 13 million displaced and many pushed to the brink of famine, U.N. agencies say. The RSF and their allies announced in late June that they had formed a parallel government in areas the group controls, mainly in the vast Darfur region where allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity are being investigated. The deputy prosecutor of the International Criminal Court said last month that the tribunal believes war crimes and crimes against humanity are taking place in Darfur, where the RSF controls all regional capitals except el-Fasher in North Darfur. The Security Council reiterated that its priority is a resumption of talks by both parties to reach a lasting ceasefire and create conditions for a political resolution of the war, starting with a civilian-led transition that leads to a democratically elected national government. Council members recalled their resolution adopted last year demanding that the RSF lift its siege of el-Fasher, 'where famine and extreme food insecurity conditions are at risk of spreading.' They expressed 'grave concern' at reports of a renewed RSF offensive on the besieged city. U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said Wednesday that a year ago, famine was declared in the Zamzam displacement camp in North Darfur. The risk of famine has since spread to 17 areas in Darfur and the Kordofan region, which is adjacent to North Darfur and west of Khartoum, he said. The U.N. World Food Program is calling for access to el-Fasher to deliver aid to people facing starvation, Dujarric said. 'As a coping mechanism, some residents of the area are reportedly surviving on animal fodder and food waste,' Dujarric said. WFP is providing digital cash to about 250,000 people in el-Fasher to buy dwindling food left in markets, he said, but escalating hunger makes it imperative to scale up assistance now. Sudan's foreign ministry accused the United Arab Emirates last month of sending Colombian mercenaries to fight alongside the RSF, saying the government has 'irrefutable evidence' that fighters from Colombia and some neighboring countries were sponsored and financed by Emirati authorities. The UAE's foreign affairs ministry said the government 'categorically rejects' the allegations and denies involvement in the war by backing armed groups. Without naming any countries, the Security Council urged all nations 'to refrain from external interference which seeks to foment conflict and instability' and to support peace efforts. The Security Council also condemned recent attacks in Kordofan that caused a high number of civilian casualties.
