Skip to main content

Republican Minority Party Disadvantage in Upcoming Session

The Colorado General Assembly will convene on January 8, 2020. There are many issues to be tackled during this session and it is rumored to be one of the most controversial and busy sessions yet. One of the top priorities of Governor Jared Polis is to repeal tax breaks and lower the state’s income tax. Since 2016, the state auditor’s office has begun the process of reviewing more than 200 tax breaks in Colorado in order to learn of their impact (Frank, 2019). After reviewing these tax breaks in 2018 and 2019, it is up to the lawmakers to decide whether to keep them or do away with them. In order to determine what should be done, a Tax Expenditure Evaluation committee has been created to consider policy recommendations from the auditor’s office. They will then determine what to do with the tax credits. The committee will consist of four Democrats and two Republicans. They will meet up to four times and are able to sponsor up to five bills (Frank, 2019).

Taxation is largely a polarized issue. Republicans most often only desire taxes that are necessary for the basic functions of government. They want low taxes and low government involvement. They would be in favor of keeping these tax breaks. Democrats, on the other hand, are usually in favor of more taxes for more government involvement and programs. They will like to see these tax breaks eliminated. Because of this polarization, there is going to be a lot of debate regarding this issue in the 2020 General Assembly. 

In an article by Kelsey Hinchliffe and Frances Lee, they discuss how polarized some state legislatures have become, especially in states that are more competitive between parties. Colorado is currently controlled by the Democratic party, so the Democratic majority will have a much easier time passing their legislation through the chambers. A quote from Alan Rosenthal in 1990 in regard to opposing parties defeating each other in elections, he says, “… each tries to discredit the other, not only during an election campaign but also during the conduct of government” (Hinchliffe and Lee, 2016). This will be the position of the Republicans during the next session. Because they are the minority, they will be trying to discredit the Democrats and block their legislation. Adler, Jenkins, and Shipan (2019) say that when a party is in the minority and without their party in the presidency, their goal is to just oppose the majority and/or president. These authors spoke of it on a congressional level, but this can be translated down to a state legislature level as well. With Republicans in the Colorado General Assembly opposing the elimination of tax breaks, their main goal will be to take down any legislation on the topic proposed by Democrats and the Tax Expenditure Evaluation committee. Below is the division in the Colorado General Assembly between Republicans and Democrats. Across the Assembly, Democrats have a large margin of 60% control against 40% Republican control, so it will be very difficult for Republicans to block legislation in this upcoming session.

Data from https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_House_of_Representatives and 
https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_State_Senate

https://coloradosun.com/2019/05/29/colorado-lawmakers-interim-study-committees/ 

Comments

  1. LauraDecember 8, 2019 at 8:22 PM

    Kaitlyn, I found your post to be very informative. It is great that the committee looking into this issue is made up of both Republicans and Democrats. Hopefully this bipartisan effort will lead to a consensus of whether tax breaks should exist or not.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Proposition DD: Let the Bets Flow

On November 5 th , 2019, one of the two measures placed on the ballot in Colorado was Proposition DD, giving the electorate a referendum on the legality of sports betting within the state; it also would impose a tax upon the net revenue of those establishments accepting such bets, the majority of which would provide funding for the Colorado Water Plan and the remainder of which would be used to regulate sports betting and provide services for gambling addiction. Since 1992, gambling on the outcome of most sporting events had been outlawed nationally under the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, or PASPA, though with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association , this Act was deemed unconstitutional, and state legislatures became free to legislate regarding sports betting and its legality. Proposition DD was put to a public ballot under the provisions of the TABOR amendment to the Colorado Constitution, a ‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights’ ...
2 comments
Read more

The Proponents of Proposition DD

Proposition DD and its proponents One of the most significant and noteworthy results of the recent elections in Colorado was the passing of Proposition DD. A legislative proposition is a proposal placed on the ballot by the state legislature itself. The legislature in Denver referred the measure with House Bill 1327 during the spring season, with easy bipartisan support. [1] The proposition however did not receive such widespread support from the public, only narrowly passing, and being too close to call on election night. This is illustrated below. [2] The passage of Proposition DD legalised gambling on sports events, beginning in six months’ time; making Colorado the nineteenth state to legalise sports betting. Colorado’s seventeen casino operators will be eligible to apply for licenses for both physical and online sportsbooks, with the Colorado Division of Gaming being tasked to regulate the market. [3] ‘Yes on Proposition DD’ raised about $2.83 million for ca...
Post a Comment
Read more

Immigration Visas and Polarization

Megan King  The story I decided to investigate in National News is , “ Federal Judges Block Trump Policy Targeting Legal Immigrants on Public Benefits ” by Claire Hansen demonstrates how difficult the policymaking procedure can be. In regard to the separations of powers, this ideology does give each branch equal representation, which in this case was to block a new policy. In this situation, three judges filed lawsuits because the new policy the Government was going to implement that visas could be denied if they think that immigrants who are going to use public benefits. It is known as the “public charge” policy which is basically, “any individual who is deemed likely to accept a benefit is considered a public charger” which was just another attempt from the Trump Administration desiring to stop immigration (Hansen). There has already been policies in place that set up circumstances that Immigration Courts and the Government have set up to deny immigration residence just in...
2 comments
Read more