Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.

Colorado House Bill 15-1057 (2015)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
House Bill 15-1057
Flag of Colorado.png
Legislature:Colorado State Legislature
Text:HB 15-1057
Sponsor(s):Representatives Lois Court (D-6) and Brian DelGrosso (R-51); senators Jerry Sonnenberg (R-1) and Mary Hodge (D-25)
Legislative history
Introduced:January 7, 2015
State house:May 4, 2015
State senate:May 6, 2015
Governor:Gov. John Hickenlooper (D)
Signed:May 18, 2015
Legal environment
State law:Initiative laws
Code:Elections code
Section:1-40-102, 105, 110 and 124


Colorado House Bill 15-1057 was introduced on January 7, 2015. It was approved in a 41-23 vote by the Colorado House of Representatives on May 4, 2015, and passed by the Colorado State Senate two days later in a vote of 18 against 17. Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) signed the bill into law on May 18, 2015.[1]

The bill was designed to require an initial fiscal impact statement to be prepared for any submitted initiative. The impact statement would have to be posted on the legislative council staff's website.[1]

The bill also required the fiscal impact statement to be summarized in a two-sentence abstract, which must be displayed on the petition signature sheets during circulation.[1]

Moreover, HB 15-1057 had provisions requiring each of two designated initiative sponsors to attend all review and comment meetings on the proposed initiative, dictating that the absence of any designated initiative sponsor automatically withdraws the initiative.[1][2][3]

Supporters argued the bill would make voters more informed about initiatives before they signed the initiative petitions.[3]

Opponents saw the bill as an effort by corporate lobbyists and the legislature to suppress direct democracy and prevent citizens from using the power of initiative to enact laws opposed by big corporate interests and legislators.[3]

Legislative summary

The following summary of House Bill 15-1057 was provided by the state legislature:[4]

“

Under current law, the director of research of the legislative council of the general assembly (director) is required to prepare a fiscal impact statement for each initiative in the ballot information booklet (blue book). This fiscal impact statement includes an abstract.

The bill requires the director to prepare an initial fiscal impact statement for each initiative submitted to the title board and to further summarize the abstract into a 2-sentence fiscal impact summary. When preparing the initial fiscal impact statement, the director is required to consider the proponents' fiscal impact estimate, which the proponents are strongly encouraged to submit along with the initiative for review and comment.

The abstract from the initial fiscal impact statement must be printed at the beginning of an initiative petition section that is circulated for signatures and the fiscal impact summary must be printed on each succeeding section page. The director is also required to post the initial fiscal impact statement on legislative council staff's web site. When preparing the fiscal impact statement for the blue book, the director is permitted to update the initial fiscal impact statement.

The bill also requires the designated representatives of the initiative proponents to appear at all review and comment meetings. If either designated representative fails to appear at a review and comment meeting, the initiative is considered withdrawn, but the proponents are permitted to resubmit the initiative for another review and comment meeting.[5]

”
—Colorado state legislature[4]

Support

Supporters and sponsors

The primary sponsors of this bill in the Colorado House were Rep. Lois Court (D-6) and Rep. Brian DelGrosso (R-51).[2]

The primary sponsors of this bill in the Colorado Senate were Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg (R-1) and Sen. Mary Hodge (D-25).[2]

Arguments in favor

Those who supported the bill argued that it would provide more transparency to the public, giving them more information before they signed any initiative petition. Supporters argued that this would allow voters to make more informed decisions concerning what they supported through signatures and would also result in more informed voters on any initiative that did reach the ballot.[3]

Tamra Ward, President and CEO of Colorado Concern, said, “Our organization was one of 38 that were in support of the measure. And we have two contract lobbyists that were at the capitol on a daily basis. We just believe that additional transparency for Colorado voters makes good sense.” Colorado Concern is a coalition of private sector CEOs whose purpose is to promote "an environment that maximizes business profitability and certainty," according to its website.[3][6]

Opposition

Opponents of the bill thought it was passed as a way to restrict and possibly prevent initiatives that the legislature or state lobbyists did not like. Specifically, many opponents said HB 1057 was passed because of huge pressure from the oil and gas industry. They alleged that oil and gas businesses wanted to see the bill used to keep initiatives that could hurt the industry off the ballot. They pointed to an initiative to establish local control of the oil and gas industry that failed to reach the ballot in 2014 as an example of the kind of initiative this bill could be used to prevent.[3]

Cecelia Gilboy, writing for Boulder Weekly, summarized the position of this particular set of HB 1057 critics:

“

When it comes to the oil and gas industry, those who oppose HB 1057 believe that the state will intentionally be creating a one-sided message in order to pacify the industry and thwart initiatives that could hurt its bottom line. For instance, a cost analysis note on local control over drilling operations would not include any analysis of benefits to air, water, human health, tourism, property values or quality of life, even though several of these categories could create greater positive economic impact to the people of Colorado than any revenue that will ever be generated by the oil and gas industry.[5]

”
—Cecilia Gilboy[3]

A group called Food and Water Watch opposed HB 1057 for this reason. The group's regional director, Sam Schabacker, said, “When you only see that limited fiscal impact statement, people will be less wiling to sign. When less people are willing to sign, it’s harder to get something on ballot. We don’t have the deep pockets of the oil and gas industry, so when they throw more barriers like this in place, it just makes it harder for people to participate in the democratic process.” Common Cause also opposed the bill.[3]

Dennis Polhill, hailing from a more libertarian perspective as a senior fellow at the Independence Institute, argued that HB 1057 was another effort by the legislature to keep initiatives in general off the ballot, saying, “They’re disenfranchising people."[3]

Sen. Matt Jones (D-17), who stated that the fate of House Bill 15-1057 was definitely influenced by the action of lobbyists, said, “People should have access to petitions without a bunch of extra language added just to confuse them. And why are you just looking at fiscal impacts?”[3]

Lobbyists

Mandatory lobbyist reports showed that HB 1057 was lobbied 700 times. Notably, lobbyists for the Colorado Oil and Gas Association filed nine separate lobbying reports.[3]

See also

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Open States, "Colorado House Bill 15-1057," accessed June 23, 2015
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Colorado State Legislature, "House Bill 15-1057," accessed January 23, 2015
  3. ↑ 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.07 3.08 3.09 3.10 Boulder Weekly, "With the passage of HB 1057, have Democrats once again killed your right to vote on fracking, this time in 2016?" May 21, 2015
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Colorado State Legislature, "House Bill 15-1057," accessed June 23, 2015
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  6. ↑ Colorado Concern, "Home," accessed June 25, 2015
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Colorado_House_Bill_15-1057_(2015)&oldid=8446700"