Latest stories

Trump administration proposes union dues cancellation rule

TRUMP ADMIN. PROPOSES RULE EASING CANCELLATION OF UNION DUES

On July 3, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) asked the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) to issue a rule change that would allow federal employees to resign from their unions, and revoke dues payroll deductions, at any time after the first year of membership.  

  • What is the current policy? Section 7115(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute states any “written assignment which authorizes the agency to deduct from the pay of the employee amounts for the payment of regular and periodic dues” cannot be revoked for a period of one year. FLRA has construed this statute to mean that dues deductions can only be revoked at one-year intervals. 
     
  • What is the proposed policy? OPM has asked FLRA to issue the following statement of policy: 
     
    • “The constitutional principles clarified in Janus have general applicability to agencies and labor organizations in the area of federal employees’ requests to revoke union-dues assignments under Section 7115(a) of the Statute.”
       
    • “Consistent with Janus, upon receiving an employee’s request to revoke a previously authorized union-dues assignment, an agency should process the request as soon as administratively feasible, if at least one year has passed since the employee initially authorized union-dues assignment from the employee’s pay.”
       
  • What comes next? FLRA issued a request for comment on the proposed rule change in the July 12 edition of the Federal Register. Comments are due on or before Aug. 12, 2019. 

THE BIG PICTURE

Number of relevant bills by state

We are currently tracking 101 pieces of legislation dealing with public-sector employee union policy. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking. 


 

Number of relevant bills by current legislative status


 

Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s)

RECENT LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS

Below is a complete list of legislative actions taken since our last issue. Bills are listed in alphabetical order, first by state then by bill number. 

  • Massachusetts H3854: This bill would authorize employers to disclose personal employee information to unions. It would also permit unions to require non-members to pay for the costs associated with grievance and arbitration proceedings. It would require employers to provide unions with access to employees, and it would allow for dues deduction authorizations to be irrevocable for a period of up to one year. 
    • House rejected governor’s proposed amendments July 22.


2020 Dems release union, climate change, and housing policies

Ballotpedia's Daily Presidential News Briefing
July 26, 2019: Several 2020 Democratic candidates released major policy proposals on unions, climate change, housing, and indigenous communities. Elizabeth Warren received her millionth donation.



Each Friday, we’ll highlight a presidential candidate’s key campaign staffer.

Daily Presidential News Briefing Staffer Spotlight - Justin Buoen

Justin Buoen is a longtime Democratic campaign staffer who worked on two of Klobuchar’s Senate campaigns

Previous campaign work:

  • 2014 Mark Dayton Minnesota gubernatorial campaign
  • 2012 Amy Klobuchar U.S. Senate campaign, campaign manager
  • 2010 Mark Dayton Minnesota gubernatorial campaign
  • 2008 Tim Walz U.S. House campaign
  • 2008 John Edwards presidential campaign
  • 2006 Amy Klobuchar U.S. Senate campaign
  • 2004 John Kerry presidential campaign, field organizer

Other experience:

  • 2013-2019: New Partners, partner

What he said in 2018 about Klobuchar:

“Many people have approached Amy about running for president but right now she is still thanking people who helped her lead a major winning ticket in Minnesota. Her support in rural counties and ability to get things done are the reasons most often mentioned to me.”

Notable Quote of the Day

“Yang and Williamson might not have found supporters in the pre-podcast era, said Yphtach Lelkes, an assistant professor of communication at the University of Pennsylvania.

‘Some have called this the hidden primary,’ Lelkes said. ’The ability to easily share podcasts and other forms of new media allow fans to also act as conduits of information, getting past gatekeepers.’”

– Omar Sanchez, The Wrap

Democrats

  • CNN will host a climate change town hall on Sept. 4 in New York City. Candidates must have reached at least 2 percent support in four eligible polls by Aug. 28.
  • Michael Bennet will campaign in Iowa on Saturday and Sunday. He also participated in the NowThisNews “20 Questions for 2020” series, discussing education, social mobility, and discrimination.
  • In a radio interview Thursday, Joe Biden discussed his debate performance, civil rights, and mass incarceration.
  • Following a rise in cycling fatalities in New York City in 2019, Bill de Blasioannounced a $58 million bike safety plan that would create a citywide network of protected bike lanes.
  • Cory Booker wrote an op-ed on CNN.com about antitrust, agribusiness, and food mergers.
  • Steve Bullock spoke about emerging technology jobs at the National Governors Association summer meeting in Salt Lake City Thursday.
  • Pete Buttigieg released a workers policy plan Friday that would allow all workers, including gig economy workers, to form a union; seek to establish gender pay equity; and set the minimum wage at $15.
  • Julián Castro expanded his campaign staff Thursday, bringing on former Arizona Democratic Party finance director Joseph Czajkowski and two other finance team members. He also hired a digital director, creative director, and two deputy communications directors.
  • Castro also issued an indigenous communities policy proposal that would create tribal advisory committees within top government agencies and increase spending on healthcare, economic, and other programs for indigenous communities.
  • Tulsi Gabbard filed a lawsuit against Google Thursday, alleging the company violated her First Amendment rights by suspending her advertising account in the hours following the first Democratic presidential debate.
  • Kirsten Gillibrand and Kamala Harris will speak at a presidential forum Friday hosted by the National Urban League in Indianapolis, Indiana.
  • The New York Times profiled John Hickenlooper’s presidential campaign and messaging.
  • Jay Inslee announced his platform on unions and workers Friday. In addition to a $15 minimum wage, guaranteed paid family leave, and banning right-to-work laws, Inslee called for barring companies to hold meetings with individual workers to discourage them from unionizing or asking prospective employees for their salary history.
  • In her housing plan released Thursday, Amy Klobuchar said she would raise the capital gains tax rate for households making more than $400,000 to help fund additional spending on housing vouchers, rural housing assistance grants, and other housing programs.
  • WBUR News profiled Seth Moulton’s presidential campaign, military record, and four tours in Iraq.
  • Beto O’Rourke opened a South Carolina field office in Columbia.
  • Bernie Sanders posted a social media ad Thursday focused on women who support his campaign.
  • Tom Steyer issued his $2.3 trillion climate change platform focused on five pillars: reach a 100 percent clean energy economy by 2045, create a Civilian Climate Corps, provide assistance to communities dependent on the extraction economy, invest in infrastructure, and improve national security and disaster prevention processes.
  • The Elizabeth Warren campaign announced Friday it has received more than 1 million donations. Sanders is the only other candidate to have crossed this threshold in the 2020 election cycle.
  • Marianne Williamson will campaign in South Carolina Friday and Saturday.
  • Andrew Yang discussed A.I. technology and universal basic income in an interview on The Daily Show with Trevor Noah.

Republicans

  • Donald Trump held a meeting in the White House Thursday to discuss the Democratic primary, small donor platform WinRed, and field operations. Party and campaign officials identified Biden, Harris, and Warren as top challengers.
  • Bill Weld appeared on The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell Thursday night.

What We’re Reading

Flashback: July 26, 2015

Hillary Clinton called for an increase in renewable energy production, including the installation of more than half a billion solar panels nationwide during her first term if elected.



New York City 2019 Charter Revision Commission puts 19 proposals on the November ballot, including ranked-choice voting

On July 24, the 2019 New York City Charter Revision Commission gave final approval to 19 proposals grouped into five separate ballot questions. Voters will decide in favor or against all proposals grouped within a question together. The questions must now be sent to the city clerk before August 5 for inclusion on the November 5 ballot. The five questions relate to the following topics:
  • Question 1: Elections (three proposals)
  • Question 2: Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) (five proposals)
  • Question 3: Ethics and Government (five proposals)
  • Question 4: City Budget (four proposals)
  • Question 5: Land Use (two proposals)
One proposal concerning units of appropriation approved in June by the commission for drafting by staff was removed from the list.
 
Question 1 proposes implementing ranked-choice voting for primary and special elections beginning in 2021 for the offices of mayor, public advocate, comptroller, borough president, and city council. It would not apply to any regular general elections.
 
Ranked-choice voting is a system in which voters rank candidates by preference on their ballots. If a candidate wins a majority of first-preference votes, he or she is declared the winner. If no candidate wins a majority of first-preference votes, the candidate with the fewest first-preference votes is eliminated, and second choices from those ballots are counted instead. The process is repeated until a candidate wins an outright majority. New York City Question 1 would allow voters to rank preference for up to five candidates.
 
Currently, New York City uses a plurality voting system—also called first-past-the-post or winner-take-all—for most municipal elections. In a plurality voting system, the candidate with the most votes wins outright. A combination of plurality and run-off voting systems is used for primary elections for the offices of mayor, comptroller, and public advocate.
 
Question 1 would also change the timing of special elections to fill vacancies and for city council redistricting.
 
Question 2 has five proposals concerning the city’s Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB). The CCRB investigates complaints by members of the public against NYPD officers and recommends disciplinary actions. Changes include adding board members appointed by the public advocate and jointly by the mayor and speaker of the council, allowing the council to appoint members without approval from the mayor, establishing a minimum budget for the CCRB based on a ratio of CCRB staff and city police officers, and provisions concerning the board’s authority to investigate false statements and delegate its power to issue and enforce subpoenas.
 
Question 3 changes the structure of the Conflicts of Interest Board (COIB), sets rules and restrictions related to ethics and campaigns for certain city staff and members of the COIB, and makes changes to the reporting requirements and operations of the Minority- and Women-Owned Business Enterprise.
 
Question 4 contains four proposals related to the city’s budget. It gives authority within the charter to establish a city rainy-day fund. The fund could not be established without changes to state law. It would also establish minimum budgets for the public advocate and borough presidents and would add requirements regarding the timing of financial reports submitted by the mayor to the city council.
 
Question 5 makes changes to the reporting and timing requirements for Uniform Land Use Review Procedure projects.
 
The ordinance creating the 15-member New York City Charter Commission of 2019 was approved by the New York City Council on April 11, 2018, and signed by the mayor on April 30, 2018. The commission is tasked with reviewing the New York City Charter and putting proposals for amending the charter before voters at the November 2019 ballot. The commission has 15 members appointed as follows:
  • four members appointed by the mayor;
  • four members appointed by the speaker of the city council;
  • five members appointed by the five borough presidents (one each);
  • one member appointed by the public advocate; and
  • one member appointed by the comptroller.
The last charter revision commission tasked with a full revision of the city charter put proposals on the 1989 city ballot. The revisions proposed by the 1989 commissioner were approved by voters. There have been other charter revision commissions approved for more specific purposes since 1989, including a commission launched by the mayor to put charter amendments on the November 2018 ballot.
 
Additional reading:


Two Republican U.S. representatives announce retirements

U.S. Reps. Paul Mitchell (R-Mich.) and Pete Olson (R-Texas) announced this week that they would not seek re-election in 2020. So far, 10 members of the U.S. House—three Democrats and seven Republicans—have announced they are not seeking re-election in 2020. Seven are retiring from public office, two are seeking a U.S. Senate seat, and one is running for governor. In 2018, 52 members of the U.S. House—18 Democrats and 34 Republicans—did not run for re-election.
 
Mitchell was first elected to represent Michigan’s 10th Congressional District in 2016 and won re-election in 2018 by 25 percentage points. Michigan’s 10th district intersects with one or more pivot counties, which are counties that voted for Donald Trump in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012.
 
Olson was first elected to represent Texas’ 22nd Congressional District in 2008. He won re-election in 2018 by 5 percentage points after winning the previous four cycles by double digits. The upcoming election in Texas’ 22nd district is one of Ballotpedia’s 2020 battleground races.
 
Elections for all 435 U.S. House seats will take place in 2020. Heading into the election, the Democratic Party holds a majority of 235 seats to Republicans’ 197 seats.
 
Additional reading:


Trump administration proposes rule easing cancellation of union dues

On July 3, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) asked the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) to issue a rule change that would allow federal employees to resign from their unions and revoke dues payroll deductions at any time after the first year of membership.
 
What is the current policy? Section 7115(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute states any “written assignment which authorizes the agency to deduct from the pay of the employee amounts for the payment of regular and periodic dues” cannot be revoked for a period of one year. FLRA has construed this statute to mean that dues deductions can only be revoked at one-year intervals.
 
What is the proposed policy? OPM has asked FLRA to issue the following statement of policy:
  • “The constitutional principles clarified in Janus have general applicability to agencies and labor organizations in the area of federal employees’ requests to revoke union-dues assignments under Section 7115(a) of the Statute.”
  • “Consistent with Janus, upon receiving an employee’s request to revoke a previously authorized union-dues assignment, an agency should process the request as soon as administratively feasible, if at least one year has passed since the employee initially authorized union-dues assignment from the employee’s pay.”
What comes next? FLRA issued a request for comment on the proposed rule change in the July 12 edition of the Federal Register. Comments are due on or before Aug. 12, 2019.


President Trump vetoes three resolutions related to arms sales, bringing his veto total to five

President Donald Trump (R) vetoed three congressional resolutions limiting sales and export of Paveway laser-guided bombs July 24.
 
Senate Joint Resolutions 36, 37, and 38 were introduced by Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) on June 5, 2019. They prohibited elements of a June 3 proposal involving export of the Paveway II and Paveway IV laser-guided bomb system to six countries, including the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia.
 
All three resolutions passed the U.S. Senate on June 20 and the U.S. House on July 17. None received two-thirds support, which would be required for a veto override, in either chamber.
 
In his veto messages, President Trump said that the three resolutions would limit U.S. security capabilities, prolong the war in Yemen, threaten the safety of U.S. citizens living in Saudi Arabia, and “damage the credibility of the United States as a reliable partner by signaling that we are willing to abandon our partners and allies at the very moment when threats to them are increasing.”
 
President Trump has issued five vetoes since taking office. During their two terms in office, Presidents Barack Obama (D) and George W. Bush (R) each issued 12 vetoes, while Bill Clinton (D) issued 37 vetoes.
 


The Daily Brew: Oregon voters to decide cigarette tax increases

Today’s Brew highlights an Oregon measure raising cigarette taxes for healthcare programs + an optometry-related veto referendum in Arkansas  
The Daily Brew
Welcome to the Friday, July 26, Brew. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

  1. Oregon amendment that would increase cigarette taxes goes to voters in 2020
  2. Arkansas group attempts to qualify 2020 referendum on bill that allows optometrists to perform surgical procedures
  3. What’s the tea?

Oregon amendment that would increase cigarette taxes goes to voters in 2020

Oregon voters will decide a state constitutional amendment in 2020 that would increase the tax on cigarettes and create a new tax on e-cigarettes to fund healthcare-related programs. The new tax revenue would be appropriated to the Oregon Health Authority for medical and healthcare-related programs such as the state’s Medical Assistance Program, mental health programs, and other programs concerning tobacco and nicotine health issues.

If approved by voters, the state would apply the following taxes beginning Jan. 1, 2021:

  • Increase the cigarette tax from $1.33 per pack to $3.33 per pack;

  • Impose a tax on inhalant delivery systems (such as e-cigarettes) at a rate of 65% of the wholesale price; and

  • Increase the cap on cigar taxes from $0.50 to $1.00.

Oregon’s current tax rate on cigarettes of $1.33 per pack is the 32nd highest rate in the country. 

The measure was introduced at the request of Gov. Kate Brown (D). The state House passed the amendment 39 to 21, largely along party lines. Most Democrats voted for the proposal, while most Republicans opposed it. One Democratic representative voted against the measure, and two Republican representatives voted in favor. The Senate passed the measure 18-8, also along party lines. Four Republican senators were absent or excused. In Oregon, legislature-referred statutes are not subject to gubernatorial veto and do not require the governor’s signature.

The last state to vote on a cigarette tax measure was Montana, in 2018, where voters defeated that measure, 52.7% to 47.3%. That measure would have raised taxes on tobacco products, including cigarettes, electronic cigarettes and vaping products, and chewing tobacco. The state would have used the revenue to extend and fund expanded eligibility of Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act as well as other healthcare-related programs.

Cigarette tax rates vary from state to state and, sometimes, between localities within a state. Cigarettes are also subject to a federal excise tax of approximately $1.00 per pack. Washington, D.C. has the highest cigarette tax rate of $4.50 per pack and Missouri levied the lowest state-imposed cigarette tax of $0.17 per pack. Eighteen states, including Oregon, levy a tax rate ranging from $1.00 to $1.98 per pack.  

Cigarette tax by state

E-cigarette (vapor) taxes are levied by state or local governments and vary by method. Some authorities tax a percentage of the wholesale price, while others tax per unit or milliliter of e-liquid. Eighteen states have enacted a tax on vapor products. Washington, D.C., has the highest vapor tax at 96% of the wholesale price. Oregon has not enacted a tax on e-cigarettes or vapor products.

Learn more

Forward This blank   Tweet This blankblank   Send to Facebook


blank

Arkansas group seeks 2020 referendum on bill allowing optometrists to perform surgical procedures

In other ballot measure news, an Arkansas group—Safe Surgery Arkansas—submitted more than 84,000 signatures in support of a veto referendum in 2020 regarding HB1251, a bill that allows optometrists to perform surgical procedures. 

Petitioners were required to submit 53,491 signatures—6% of votes cast for governor in the last gubernatorial election—by July 23 to qualify the veto referendum for the ballot.

Safe Surgery Arkansas seeks to overturn HB 1251 and are advocating for a ‘no’ vote on the referendum. HB 1251 amended the definition of “practice of optometry” in Arkansas law to allow optometrists to perform certain surgical procedures, such as injections, removal and biopsy of skin lesions with low risk of malignancy, and specific laser procedures that are sometimes required after cataract surgery or are related to the treatment of glaucoma. 

The state House approved HB 1251 by a vote of 70-19. Fifty-seven Republicans joined 13 Democrats in approving the measure and 11 Republicans and eight Democrats voted against. The state Senate passed the bill 25-8, with 20 Republicans joining five Democrats in favor and five Republicans joining three Democrats in opposition. 

Safe Surgery Arkansas states on its website that the bill “jeopardizes patient safety and lowers the quality of surgical eye care in the state of Arkansas. This new law would allow optometrists— who are not medical doctors or trained surgeons— to perform delicate surgery on the eye and surrounding tissues using scalpels, lasers, and needles.”

Arkansans for Healthy Eyes is leading the opposition to the veto referendum effort and advocating for a ‘yes’ vote. A representative from the group said the bill “gives Arkansas patients better access to quality care by allowing optometrists to perform more of the procedures we are absolutely qualified to safely perform.”

Since the state’s first veto referendum in 1934, 10 such measures have appeared on the ballot in Arkansas. The most recent referendum was decided by voters in 2004. In all but one instance, the referendum efforts resulted in the targeted law being repealed or overturned.

Nationwide, 521 veto referendums have appeared on the ballot in 23 states since the first veto referendum in 1906. Voters have repealed 340—or 65.3 percent—of the targeted laws. The states with the most veto referendums were North Dakota (75), Oregon (68), and California (48). The states that allowed for veto referendums but had the fewest number of them were Wyoming (1), Nevada (2), and New Mexico (3).

What's the tea?

We’re debuting a new feature in the Brew—”What’s the tea?”—where I’ll ask a question about a political topic and you can tell us what you think.

All you need to do is read the question and click on the answer that most closely matches your opinion. That’s it. We’ll generally do this at the end of the week and share the results with you the following week.

Sound good? Let’s get started.

Will you be watching next week’s Democratic presidential debates?


 

 



Signatures submitted for Arkansas optometry referendum

Petitioners for the Arkansas Practice of Optometry Referendum reported submitting more than 84,000 signatures by the July 23 deadline to qualify a veto referendum on House Bill 1251 for a statewide vote in 2020. A total of 53,491 signatures need to be valid to qualify the measure for the ballot. The requirement is based on 6% of votes cast for the office of governor in the last gubernatorial election. Sponsors of the referendum petition effort hope voters will overturn HB 1251 and are advocating for a no vote on the referendum.
 
HB 1251 amended the definition of “practice of optometry” in state law to allow optometrists to perform certain surgical procedures including the following:
  • injections, excluding intravenous or intraocular injections;
  • incision and curettage of a chalazion;
  • removal and biopsy of skin lesions with low risk of malignancy, excluding lesions involving the lid margin or nasal to the puncta;
  • laser capsulotomy; and
  • laser trabeculoplasty.
 
Safe Surgery Arkansas is sponsoring the veto referendum petition seeking to overturn HB 1251. The group argues that the bill “jeopardizes patient safety and lowers the quality of surgical eye care in the state of Arkansas. This new law would allow optometrists— who are not medical doctors or trained surgeons— to perform delicate surgery on the eye and surrounding tissues using scalpels, lasers, and needles. HB 1251 removes … critical patient safeguard[s] by granting optometrists broad surgical privileges to operate on the eyes while bypassing these critical training requirements.”
 
Arkansans for Healthy Eyes is leading the campaign in opposition to the veto referendum effort and in support of HB 1251. The group is advocating for a yes vote on the referendum. Arkansas for Healthy Eyes argued that the bill “gives Arkansas patients better access to quality care by allowing optometrists to perform more of the procedures we are absolutely qualified to safely perform… For some patients, especially in rural parts of the state, being able to receive enhanced care from their optometrist, instead of having to go through the wait, travel, and added cost of a specialist visit, may mean the difference between getting a needed procedure, or going without.”
 
HB 1251 was approved in the House on March 6, 2019, in a vote of 70-19. Among Democratic representatives, eight voted against, 13 voted in favor, and three were absent or did not vote. Among Republican representatives, 11 voted against, 57 voted in favor, eight were absent or did not vote for or against the bill. The bill was approved in the Senate on March 20, 2019, in a vote of 25-8. Among Democratic senators, three voted against, five voted in favor, and one was absent or did not vote. Among Republican Senators, five voted against, 20 voted in favor, and one was absent or did not vote.
 
Since the first in 1934, 10 veto referendum measures have appeared on the ballot in Arkansas. The most recent referendum was on the ballot in 2004. In all but one case, the referendum efforts resulted in the targeted law being repealed or overturned.
 
Nationwide since the first in 1906, 521 veto referendums appeared on the ballot in 23 states. Voters repealed 340 (65.3 percent) of the targeted laws. Voters upheld 181 (34.7 percent) of the targeted laws. The states with the most veto referendums were North Dakota (75), Oregon (68), and California (48). The states that allowed for veto referendums but had the least number of them were Wyoming (1), Nevada (2), and New Mexico (3).


Harris, Biden, and Sanders top PredictIt Democratic primary markets

Ballotpedia is tracking PredictIt markets relating to the 2020 presidential election, including the general election and Democratic and Republican primaries.
 
PredictIt is an online political futures market in which users purchase shares relating to the outcome of political events using real money. Services such as PredictIt are being used to gain insight into trends over the lifetime of an election and the event’s probable outcome.
 
While Sen. Kamala Harris leads the overall Democratic primary market at 25 cents a share as of Wednesday, PredictIt primary election markets in early states favor other candidates. Former Vice President Joe Biden leads in Iowa, South Carolina, and Nevada, while Sen. Bernie Sanders is on top in New Hampshire.
 
In the Democratic primary market, only five candidates are trading at 10 cents or more: Harris, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Biden, Sanders, and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
 
In the general election, PredictIt markets favor a winner from the Democratic Party over a winner from the Republican Party, 53 cents to 48 cents.


Signature deadlines nearing for 2019 Colorado initiatives

Signature deadlines for pending ballot measures in Colorado:
  • 2020 veto referendum petitions: 124,632 valid signatures due by August 1, 2019
  • 2019 ballot initiative petitions: 124,632 valid signatures due by August 5, 2019
The number of required signatures increased 26.54% for Colorado ballot measures following the 2018 elections due to higher voter turnout. Initiative signature requirements in Colorado are calculated by taking 5 percent of the number of total votes cast for the office of Colorado Secretary of State. Citizen initiative signature requirements increased in 13 states based on 2018 elections. In these 13 states, the signature requirement increases ranged from 3.2 percent in Maine to 70.3 percent in California, where the signature requirements are higher than they’ve ever been in the state’s 106 years of direct democracy.
 
For 2019 ballot initiatives, proponents must submit signatures by August 5, 2019. Just one measure was approved for signature gathering to qualify for the 2019 ballot in Colorado: Initiative #22, the Colorado Oil and Gas Severance Taxes Initiative. This initiative was designed to change the tax structure for oil and gas severance taxes. Proposed changes include eliminating a tax credit given to oil and gas producers for property taxes paid. Though the initiative was approved for signature gathering on March 5, 2019, it is unclear if the petition is being actively circulated.
 
Signatures for veto referendum petitions targeting the 2020 ballot are due on August 1, 2019. Two veto referendum petitions were filed with the Secretary of State: the Early Childhood Development Districts Referendum (targeting House Bill 1052) and the National Popular Vote Referendum (targeting Senate Bill 42). Sponsors of the referendum efforts seek to put bills passed by the legislature in the 2019 session to a statewide vote of the people in the hopes that voters will overturn the bills.
 
The Early Childhood Development Districts referendum concerns House Bill 1052. HB 1052 was designed to create special districts to provide early childhood development services for children from birth through 8 years of age. Under the bill, early childhood development services include early care and educational, health, mental health, and developmental services.
 
The National Popular Vote referendum concerns Senate Bill 42. SB 42 was signed by Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D) on March 15, 2019. SB 42 would award all of Colorado’s nine electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. SB 42 joined Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The National Popular Vote (NPV) refers to the concept of allocating a state’s presidential electors to the candidate who wins the national popular vote regardless of the state results in a presidential election. As of July 2019, 15 states (and Washington, D.C.) representing 196 electoral college votes adopted legislation to be a part of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The compact cannot take effect until enough states have joined that the system would possess the required 270 of 538 electoral votes to elect a president.
 
The most recent veto referendum on the ballot in Colorado appeared on the ballot in 1932. From 1912 to 1932, 13 veto referendums were on the ballot. Of the 13 referendum efforts, 10 were successful in overturning the targeted legislation. The targeted legislation was upheld on three occasions.