Ballotpedia’s Federal Vacancy Count shows 15 federal judges confirmed in past month

The Daily Brew: Want your city to host the Olympics? Denver voters may decide to put it to a vote
Welcome to the Friday, May 31, Brew. We are halfway through our Ballotpedia Society membership drive! If you haven’t already, please consider supporting the work we do through a monthly donation. You can find more information about the program here. Now, here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- Denver ballot measure requires voters to approve spending public funds to host Olympics
- Illinois voters to choose whether to change state’s income tax from flat to graduated rate
- State regulation of plumbers in Texas to expire in September
Denver ballot measure requires voters to approve spending public funds to host Olympics
Denver voters will decide Tuesday whether a future attempt to bring the Olympics to the city will require citywide voter approval.
Initiated Ordinance 302 (I-302) would prohibit the city and county from using public funds in connection with future Olympic Games unless a majority of voters approve at a municipal election.
In 2018, the city of Denver proposed spending $1.9 billion to host the 2030 Winter Olympic Games in a bid to the United States Olympic Committee (USOC). The USOC identified Denver and Salt Lake City as its top two finalists and ultimately selected Salt Lake City as its choice to bid for the games before the International Olympic Committee.
After Denver’s USOC proposal, the group Let Denver Vote led the petition effort to place I-302 on the ballot. Proponents were required to collect 4,726 valid signatures or 5 percent of the votes cast for mayoral candidates in the preceding mayoral election.
Proponents of the measure submitted their arguments supporting it in the city’s official local ballot question guide, which included, “Hosting the Olympics brings significant financial risk and long-lasting impacts. Host cities are expected to cover the consistent (every year since 1968) cost overruns of the Olympic games, and Denver voters deserve a right to decide if they are comfortable writing a blank check to cover such overruns.”
Opponents submitted arguments against I-302 to the official ballot question guide, which included, “This seemingly innocuous initiative to ‘protect the taxpayer’ is dangerously broad, has extensive unintended consequences, and is brought by a group that is woefully misinformed about the risks, namely potential costs to the taxpayer of bidding and hosting an Olympic & Paralympic Games, that the ballot initiative seeks to mitigate.”
I-302 is the only local ballot measure being voted on in Denver on Tuesday. The city is also holding runoff elections for mayor, city clerk and recorder, and five seats on the city council, since no candidate in any of those races received a majority of the vote in the city’s municipal election on May 7.
Last month, Denver voters approved a measure that decriminalized the adult possession and use of psilocybin mushrooms and rejected a measure which would have allowed people to engage in activities— such as resting and sheltering oneself in a non-obstructive manner—in outdoor public places without limits.
Illinois voters to choose whether to change state’s income tax from flat to graduated rate
Illinois—one of eight states that has a flat tax rate—may join the 33 states with a graduated income tax.
Voters in Illinois will decide on a constitutional amendment in 2020 that would repeal the current requirement that the state personal income tax be a flat rate and instead allow the state to enact legislation implementing a graduated income tax.
In 1970, Illinois held a constitutional convention and drafted a new state constitution, which voters approved on December 15, 1970. That document enabled the state to assess a flat-rate income tax but prohibits a graduated one. The constitution also set limits on the relationship between the tax rates imposed on corporations relative to individuals.
To approve the 2020 ballot measure, both chambers of the state legislature needed to approve it by a 60% supermajority. All 40 state Senate and 73 state House Democrats voted in favor, and all 19 Senate and 44 House Republicans voted against. In 2018, Democrats gained seven seats in the state House to achieve a supermajority in that chamber.
The ballot measure itself would not enact a graduated income tax, just allow for one. In 2018, the personal income tax in Illinois was a flat rate of 4.95 percent. On May 1, 2019, the state Senate passed Senate Bill 687 (SB 687), which would go into effect only if voters approve the constitutional amendment in 2020. SB 687 would change the state’s income tax from a flat rate to six graduated rates—ranging from 4.75 to 7.99 percent—beginning on January 1, 2021. It is estimated that the new tax rates would bring in $3.3 billion of additional state revenue. The state House has not yet passed SB 687.
House Speaker Michael Madigan (D)—a supporter of the measure—issued a statement which said, “Middle-class families bear too much of the burden under the current tax system, and a Fair Tax will enable us to make the wealthy pay their fair share to balance the budget and invest in critical resources like education and health care—all while providing relief for 97% of taxpayers.”
Republican representative Paul Schimpf (R), who opposed the initiative, told the Belleville News-Democrat, “Changing our taxing structure, without providing a means to limit spending or make it more difficult to raise taxes in the future, solves nothing. In fact, this plan will most likely only lead to more tax increases and higher spending in the future.”
In Illinois, a ballot measure amending the state constitution must be approved by either a 60 percent vote of those voting on the ballot measure or a simple majority vote of those voting in the election. The initiative allowing for a graduated income tax will be the 23rd constitutional amendment to be decided by state voters since 1970. Fourteen of the previous 22 amendments have been approved, while eight were rejected.
State regulation of plumbers in Texas to expire in September
The Texas Board of Plumbing Examiners will disband and the state’s plumbing regulations will cease to exist after the state legislature declined to approve sunset review legislation before it adjourned last Sunday. The state plumbing code will expire on September 1, 2019, and the state agency that enforced it will wind down operations by September 2020.
Sunset review legislation—a type of legislation that establishes a date on which an agency or law will expire without specific legislative action—was proposed to move the responsibilities of the plumbing board under the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. Lawmakers who supported the bill stated that the move would improve efficiency, such as reducing the state’s eight-month processing period for issuing a plumbing license. Opponents stated that the lengthy licensing period and other alleged inefficiencies served to protect public health and safety in a specialized industry. A proposal to maintain existing plumbing regulations and delay the sunset review process to the next legislative session—which in Texas is not until 2021—was not voted upon.
The Texas Tribune reported that some plumbers have asked Governor Greg Abbott (R) to call a special legislative session to address plumbing oversight. While Abbott has not specifically commented about plumbing regulations, on Monday he tweeted his thanks to state legislators for their efforts during the session which included the phrase, “NO SPECIAL SESSION.”
In the 2017 session, the legislature did not pass reauthorizations for five government agencies, including the Texas Medical Board. Abbott called a special session where the legislature passed the reauthorizations and also considered additional legislation proposed by the governor. The additional bills were related to bathroom usage, property taxes, school finance, and mail-in ballot fraud.
In the absence of a state plumbing code, oversight of plumbers will occur at the local level through municipal plumbing regulations and ordinances.
To stay up to date on actions at the federal and state level related to rulemaking, the separation of powers, and due process, subscribe to our free monthly Checks and Balances newsletter.
Learn more
Booker, Buttigieg, and Gillibrand call for impeachment proceedings for the first time
May 30, 2019: The 2020 Democratic candidates respond to Robert Mueller’s statement. Beto O’Rourke released his immigration platform.
Here’s the latest from the campaign trail.
Poll Spotlight
Notable Quotes of the Day
“For the [Democratic primary] debates to be meaningful, they have to winnow down the participants. This is the uncomfortable reality both the DNC and the candidates have to face.”
– Patti Solis Doyle, 2008 Clinton presidential campaign manager
“It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to look at that criteria and know who’s going to get kicked out. It’s easy to see that the debates in the fall are going to be a bunch of white men and, if that’s the case, that’s a big misstep.”
– Jess Morales Rocketto, 2016 Clinton presidential campaign adviser
Democrats
- Following special counsel Robert Mueller’s statement about his investigation into potential foreign intervention in the 2016 presidential campaign and obstruction of justice, Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, and Kirsten Gillibrand said for the first time that impeachment proceedings should begin against Donald Trump.
- Eric Swalwell said he was “preparing for impeachment” as a member of the House Judiciary Committee. “I’m the only candidate that has to try the case, so I want to make sure that I’m doing all I can as we go down this road,” Swalwell added.
- Neither Joe Biden nor Bernie Sanders called for impeachment. Sanders said he would support the House Judiciary Committee if it initiated proceedings.
- Michael Bennet joined four other presidential candidates in supporting the call for a Democratic primary debate dedicated to the issue of climate change.
- Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings (D) endorsed Biden. Dallas is the ninth largest city in the country.
- During an interview on The Gaggle podcast, Julián Castro discussed how his economic and immigration policies would affect Arizona.
- The Center for Responsive Politics examined personal finance information from the 12 Democratic presidential candidates who have filed financial disclosures with the Office of Government Ethics. John Delaney had the highest net worth with an estimated $56 million to $280 million.
- During a town hall in Greenville, South Carolina, Kamala Harris discussed increasing teacher pay, addressing gun violence, and the Mueller’s statement.
- John Hickenlooper proposed increasing Title X funding by $700 million to expand access to long-acting reversible contraception like intrauterine devices.
- Jay Inslee met with Washington state employees Wednesday to discuss ways to improve the safety, efficacy, and accountability of the workforce.
- Amy Klobuchar will campaign in Nevada Thursday, including a meeting with the Nevada Democratic Veterans and Military Families Caucus.
- Wayne Messam discussed his efforts to improve infrastructure in Miramar in Mass Transit Magazine.
- Beto O’Rourke released his immigration platform proposal, including ending plans for a border wall, creating a pathway to citizenship for 11 million individuals residing in the United States without legal permission, and expanding naturalization and visa processes.
- Sanders is campaigning in Nevada until Friday and California over the weekend. According to The Washington Post, Sanders is also developing a plan to mandate large businesses give a portion of their stocks to a fund paying out dividends for employees.
- Elizabeth Warren will hold a town hall in Oakland, California, Friday.
- Marianne Williamson will campaign in Santa Monica, California, Friday.
- VICE News interviewed Andrew Yang during a campaign stop in South Carolina.
Republicans
- Donald Trump responded to Mueller’s press conference, tweeting, “Nothing changes from the Mueller Report. There was insufficient evidence and therefore, in our Country, a person is innocent. The case is closed! Thank you.”
- Axios reported that the Trump campaign was developing digital micro-targeting operations for three demographic groups: black, Hispanic, and suburban women voters. The potential messaging would be criminal justice policy, school choice, and funding childhood cancer research for each respective group.
What We’re Reading
- FiveThirtyEight: The Movement To Skip The Electoral College Is Picking Up Steam
- Politico: Dems chafe at high bar to make DNC presidential debates
- Washington Examiner: Trump has the power to choose his opponent; that’s why he should be ripping Warren instead of Biden
Flashback: May 30, 2015
Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley announced he was running for president, joining Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary.
Voters in Denver headed to polls for runoff election four weeks after general election
In 2020, Nevada voters will decide a ballot measure to create a declaration of voters’ rights in the state constitution
- to have questions about voting procedures answered and have voting procedures posted in a visible location at the polling place;
- to vote without intimidation, threats, or coercion;
- to vote during any early-voting period or on election day if the voter is in line at the time polls close;
- to return a spoiled ballot and receive a replacement ballot;
- to request assistance in voting if necessary;
- to a sample ballot “which is accurate, informative and delivered in a timely manner;”
- to receive instruction on how to use voting equipment;
- to equal access to the elections system without discrimination, including on the basis of “race, age, disability, military service, employment or overseas residence.”
- to a “uniform, statewide standard for counting and recounting all votes accurately;” and
- to have “complaints about elections and election contests resolved fairly, accurately and efficiently.”