Colorado's unique tax-limiting amendment could face legal challenge from Legislature
Colorado Democrats want to pursue a lawsuit challenging a state constitutional amendment that limits how much tax revenue the state can retain and spend, a Colorado-specific provision that Democrats have criticized for a long time over its restraints on the state budget.
House Joint Resolution 25-1023 would direct the Legislature's legal arm to sue over the constitutionality of the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights. It passed the House Finance Committee on a 7-6 vote on Monday night.
'TABOR is not sacred. The constitution is. When a state law breaks a system of government that the constitution was built to project, we have a duty to challenge it,' said resolution sponsor Rep. Sean Camacho, a Denver Democrat.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The resolution is sponsored by Camacho, Rep. Lorena Garcia of Adams County, Sen. Lindsey Daugherty of Arvada and Sen. Iman Jodeh of Aurora, all Democrats. It has over three dozen other Democrats signed on in support, including members of leadership in both chambers.
The litigation considered in the resolution would challenge TABOR in state district court on the basis that it limits Colorado's functioning as a republican form of government as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
'Can a state call itself a republican form of government if its elected representatives of the people are constitutionally barred from governing?' Camacho said. 'Under TABOR, this legislature is prohibited from making critical fiscal policies … without launching a costly campaign, raising money and rolling the dice in an election cycle.'
A 2011 constitutional challenge to TABOR was dismissed in 2021 in federal court on technical grounds because the court determined the lawsuit had the wrong plaintiffs. Sponsors say the resolution would allow the courts to finally settle the question.
'The courts could come back and say TABOR is 100% constitutional and that would be fine too. But I think we have an obligation to figure out whether or not it is,' Camacho said.
Colorado voters approved TABOR in 1992. Broadly, it sets an annual cap on state spending determined by population and inflation. If the state collects more revenue than that cap, it must refund the money to taxpayers through a variety of mechanisms, such as temporary income tax reduction or flat check sent to taxpayers.
A recent forecast from the nonpartisan Legislative Council Staff predicts that the state will collect about $618 million over the cap set by TABOR in the 2026 fiscal year.
TABOR also requires voter approval for tax increases in the state. In 2023, for example, voters rejected a proposition that would have let the state keep more money than allowed under TABOR in order to fund a property tax rate cut.
But as the cost of some state programs, such as Medicaid, grow faster than consumer inflation, TABOR limits how much the state has left over to pay for non-mandatory programs. Democrats say it's partially why the state faced a $1.2 billion budget hole this year, which will likely be filled by an array of program repeals and agency cuts.
'The point of this is to be able to have a more flexible fiscal policy in this state that allows us to be responsive to the needs of the community,' Garcia said. 'That doesn't mean extraction of more taxes, but it would mean being flexible with how we use the revenue we have.'
Rep. Bob Marshall, a Highlands Ranch Democrat, during the committee hearing questioned whether allowing a lawsuit would open up every citizen-referred initiative to litigation, such as the recently approved constitutional amendment to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution and another measure directing lawmakers to spend $350 million on law enforcement and public safety. Witnesses responded that court cases all stand on their own, so there wouldn't be such unintended consequences.
People representing educational associations, health care organizations, left-leaning economic groups, former lawmakers and lawyers from the previous TABOR challenge case testified in support of the resolution. They repeatedly pointed out the unique nature of TABOR in Colorado, as no other state has such a system.
'Although TABOR has had decades of significant negative impacts on Colorado's finances, similar proposals have surfaced in other states in the past decade. However, not one of those proposals was approved,' said Maggie Gómez, the Colorado state director for the State Innovation Exchange.'It's obvious that other states don't believe TABOR is a risk worth taking.'
The opposition primarily comprised individual citizens who argued that TABOR set limits on a growing government and allows voters to have a say in state spending.
'TABOR ensures government lives within its means and gives people the final say on tax increases,' said Hope Scheppelman, the former vice chair of the state's Republican Party.
Republicans will likely uniformly oppose the resolution. It needs a simple majority in both chambers to pass. Democrats control strong majorities in the state House and Senate.
'TABOR is the protection of the taxpayer. When the government overtaxes you, they have to return the money back to your pocket,' said Rep. Ron Weinberg, a Loveland Republican. 'This bill looks to overrun and override a basic transparency between government and the taxpayer.'
The resolution now heads to the full House for consideration.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
a few seconds ago
- Boston Globe
California is set to act fast after Texas advances congressional maps to boost Republicans
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The added complexity is because California has a voter-approved independent commission that Newsom himself backed before Trump's latest redistricting maneuver. Only the state's voters can override the map that commission approved in 2021. But Newsom said extraordinary steps are required to counter Texas and other Republican-led states that Trump is pushing to revise maps. Advertisement 'This is a new Democratic Party, this is a new day, this is new energy out there all across this country,' Newsom said Wednesday on a call with reporters. 'And we're going to fight fire with fire.' Texas Democratic lawmakers, vastly outnumbered in that state's legislature, delayed approval of the new map by 15 days by fleeing Texas earlier this month in protest. They were assigned round-the-clock police monitoring upon their return to ensure they attended Wednesday's session. Advertisement That session ended with an 88-52 party-line vote approving the map after more than eight hours of debate. Democrats have also vowed to challenge the new Texas map in court and complained that Republicans made the political power move before passing legislation responding to deadly floods that swept the state last month. A battle for the US House control waged via redistricting In a sign of Democrats' stiffening redistricting resolve, former President Barack Obama on Tuesday night backed Newsom's bid to redraw the California map, saying it was a necessary step to stave off the GOP's Texas move. 'I think that approach is a smart, measured approach,' Obama said during a fundraiser for the Democratic Party's main redistricting arm. The incumbent president's party usually loses congressional seats in the midterm election. On a national level, the partisan makeup of existing districts puts Democrats within three seats of a majority. Trump is going beyond Texas in his push to remake the map. He's pushed Republican leaders in conservative states like Indiana and Missouri to also try to create new Republican seats. Ohio Republicans were already revising their map before Texas moved. Democrats, meanwhile, are mulling reopening Maryland's and New York's maps as well. However, more Democratic-run states have commission systems like California's or other redistricting limits than Republican ones do, leaving the GOP with a freer hand to swiftly redraw maps. New York, for example, can't draw new maps until 2028, and even then, only with voter approval. The struggle for — and against — Texas redistricting Texas Republicans openly said they were acting in their party's interest. State Rep. Todd Hunter, who wrote the legislation formally creating the new map, noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed politicians to redraw districts for nakedly partisan purposes. Advertisement There was little that outnumbered Democrats could do other than fume and threaten a lawsuit to block the map. Because the Supreme Court has blessed purely partisan gerrymandering, the only way opponents can stop the new Texas map would be by arguing it violates the Voting Rights Act requirement to keep minority communities together so they can select representatives of their choice. House Republicans' frustration at the Democrats' flight and ability to delay the vote was palpable during the Wednesday vote. House Speaker Dustin Burrows announced as debate started that doors to the chamber were locked and any member leaving was required to have a permission slip. The doors were only unlocked after final passage more than eight hours later. Republicans issued civil arrest warrants to bring the Democrats back after they left the state Aug. 3, and Abbott asked the state Supreme Court to oust several Democrats from office. The lawmakers also face a fine of $500 for every day they were absent. Associated Press journalists John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas, and Sara Cline in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, contributed to this report.
E&E News
a few seconds ago
- E&E News
California voters still support high-speed rail but don't think it will be finished, says poll
California voters have not given up on the state's high-speed rail project, even though they aren't confident it will ever be completed, according to an exclusive POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll. What happened: Sixty-two percent of the 1,445 registered voters polled said they support the state continuing construction on the rail line that is supposed to link the Bay Area to Los Angeles, but which has been beset by delays and massive cost overruns. The poll revealed a sharp partisan split on the project, which has served as a political punching bag for the Trump administration: 62 percent of Republican voters said the project is too expensive or mismanaged and should be canceled, while only 21 percent of Democrats took that stance. More than half of independents — 55 percent — said construction should continue. Democrats' support for high-speed rail, however, is far from absolute. While a third of respondents said they back California spending more state funds after President Donald Trump's Department of Transportation canceled $4 billion in federal grants, 38 percent said they will support continued construction only if the project keeps to its current budget. Advertisement Despite their support, Democratic voters are not confident that the rail line will be built all the way from San Francisco to Los Angeles. Just 27 percent said there's a high likelihood the project will be finished, while 47 percent said there's a low likelihood and 26 percent were unsure. Those numbers largely mirrored feelings across political affiliation, as 23 percent of Republicans and 20 percent of independents said there's a high likelihood the project will be completed. The project, originally slated for completion by 2020, is expected to open its initial line connecting Bakersfield to Merced in 2033, with no projected date for final completion. The project is now estimated to cost up to $128 billion, nearly four times its original $33 billion price tag.
Los Angeles Times
a few seconds ago
- Los Angeles Times
Former top aide to NYC mayor among 7 facing new charges in City Hall corruption probe
NEW YORK — A former top aide to New York City Mayor Eric Adams was hit Thursday with a second wave of bribery charges in a swirling corruption investigation of City Hall, with prosecutors alleging she exchanged political favors for cash, home renovations and a speaking role on a TV show. Ingrid Lewis-Martin, Adams' former chief of staff and closest confidant, her son Glenn D. Martin, former state Sen. Jesse Hamilton and two of Adams' political donors, siblings Tony and Gina Argento, are among those facing new charges. Lewis-Martin and the other defendants were expected to appear in court on Thursday. Adams himself has not been charged, but the case will thrust the corruption allegations that have dogged the Democrat back into focus as he seeks to regain voters' trust ahead of a contested election in November. A spokesperson for Adams did not immediately return a request for comment. On Thursday, Lewis-Martin was charged with four additional counts of conspiracy and bribe receiving in a series of indictments Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg described as 'classic bribery conspiracies that had a deep and wide-ranging impact on city government.' 'As alleged, Lewis-Martin consistently overrode the expertise of public servants so she could line her own pockets. While she allegedly received more than $75,000 in bribes and an appearance on a TV show, every other New Yorker lost out,' Bragg said in a statement. Lewis-Martin's attorney, Arthur Aidala, vowed to fight the charges, saying, 'This is not justice — it is a distortion of the truth and a troubling example of politically motivated 'lawfare.'' She resigned last December ahead of her indictment in a separate case in which she and her son are accused of taking bribes in exchange for speedy approval of construction projects. That case is still pending. She has continued to volunteer for the Adams campaign while awaiting trial. The fresh round of indictments brought against Adams' close allies could add to political headwinds already facing the mayor, whose own indictment on federal bribery charges was abandoned by President Trump's administration earlier this year. The corruption scandals have opened the door to challengers in the upcoming election, including the Democratic primary winner, Zohran Mamdani, and former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Adams is running as an independent, claiming the case brought against him — in which he was accused of accepting bribes and travel perks from foreign interests — had prevented him from campaigning in the Democratic primary. Those charges were dismissed in April following an extraordinary intervention by U.S. Justice Department officials, who said the case was impeding Adams from assisting in Trump's immigration crackdown. In the months since, the status of other federal probes linked to Adams' key allies, including his former police commissioner and several deputy mayors, has remained uncertain. The new charges were brought by Bragg, who prosecuted Trump last year and who is also running for reelection. Both federal and state investigators seized Lewis-Martin's phone at Kennedy Airport last September as she returned from a trip to Japan with several colleagues. Hours later, Lewis-Martin appeared on her attorney's radio show, denying that she had 'done anything illegal to the magnitude or scale that requires the federal government and the DA's office to investigate us.' Both she and her son pleaded not guilty to charges of accepting improper gifts worth more than $100,000 in exchange for speeding construction approvals for two real estate investors. Earlier this week, a spokesperson for Adams' campaign, Todd Shapiro, said the mayor would stand with Lewis-Martin. 'Ingrid has dedicated her life to the people of New York City,' Shapiro said, 'and she deserves the presumption of innocence and the support of those who know her best.' Last week, federal prosecutors wrapped up their two remaining Adams-related cases. Mohamed Bahi, who served as the mayor's chief liaison to the Muslim community, pleaded guilty to soliciting straw donations to Adams' campaign, and Brooklyn construction magnate Erden Arkan was sentenced to a year of probation for his involvement in a straw donor scheme. Offenhartz, Sisak and Izaguirre write for the Associated Press.
