After nearly eight years working with Gov. Jared Polis, Colorado lawmakers are looking to reset their relationship with the governor’s office — and require future governors to be more transparent in how they exert influence over the legislative process.
They just have to get past Polis first.
Ninety-two of the Capitol’s 100 legislators voted for , which is now headed for an almost-certain veto by the term-limited governor. Among other things, the bill would require state employees who work as lobbyists for the governor and lieutenant governor to formally register with the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office and disclose their positions on bills — just as private lobbyists are required to do.
The bill was proposed as a direct reaction to Polis. Some lawmakers in the Democrat-controlled General Assembly have wanted to bring the bill for years in response to the Democratic governor’s hands-on approach to the legislature, which has included frequent veto threats and direct lobbying to amend bills.
The measure would also require the legislative liaisons for state agencies to publicly disclose their positions on each bill they weigh in on.
“It was born out of frustration, a universal experience among most of us,” said Rep. Meg Froelich, an Englewood Democrat sponsoring the bill.
Polis’ efforts in the Capitol have been unusual, she and other lawmakers said. Previous governors — some of whom had split or opposing partisan control in the legislature — were not nearly as engaged in lawmaking as Polis has been. His office “has been known to pull people out of committees ahead of a vote, and there’s a lot of stuff happening 15 minutes, 20 minutes before you’re going into committee or a vote. So this is born from that experience, when you’re caught unawares,” Froelich said.
Private lobbying already holds significant sway over the legislature in the Capitol, where lobbyists often have more experience in the building than lawmakers themselves because of Colorado’s term limits. That effect is magnified with Polis, who can veto any bill he dislikes. To survive veto threats, lawmakers frequently rewrite or abandon bills altogether — .
This year alone, Polis’ opposition has prompted changes to legislation regulating 3D-printed guns and immigration enforcement. His veto threat also prompted lawmakers to kill that would’ve closed some corporate tax cuts and directed the new revenue to a tax credit for working families.
Froelich said that if Polis is known to oppose a bill, some lawmakers will shift their votes to align with him.
But that opposition is often not made public.
Rep. Dusty Johnson, a Fort Morgan Republican who’s also sponsoring the state lobbyists measure, said lawmakers were frustrated about being “played like a puppet.” She said the first floor — shorthand for Polis’ office, which is located on one level below the legislative chambers in the Capitol — had not always been transparent in its position on bills.
Sen. Lisa Cutter, a Jefferson County Democrat and another sponsor, said the proposal was ultimately about transparency. She recounted negotiations that helped shape bills, only for them still to meet a veto once Polis officially weighed in. She’s also faced criticism from constituents upset that a bill was watered down — but with no record revealing that changes were made at the behest of the governor.
“The governor, they talk about being coequal branches. And that’s technically true, but does anyone really think that we have as much power as the governor?” Cutter said. “… And I think there’s the general feeling that this governor has weighed in a lot on policy, instead of being more of an executive branch.”
She said the bill was about “wanting to balance it out a little bit.”
Though Polis’ posture inspired SB-147, he’s unlikely to ever be subject to its requirements.
First, he will leave office early next year, before the next regular legislative session begins. Lawmakers said his departure gave them a chance for the legislature to reset its relationship with the first floor — and avoid letting Polis’ approach become the precedent for future governors.
The second reason is that Polis appears certain to veto the bill.
In a statement, spokesman Eric Maruyama said that the governor would be more open to SB-147 if lawmakers “held themselves to the same standards as defined in the bill.” (Because lawmakers vote, oftentimes repeatedly, on legislation, their positions are recorded publicly.)
“Staff members in the Governor’s office are not registered lobbyists, and it would be absurd to have them treated the same way when legislators are not,” Maruyama wrote in a statement. “The Governor’s Office always works with any legislators in good faith, most commonly in an informational capacity. This is a clear attempt to limit (future governors’) ability to meaningfully participate in the legislative process, and to curb the decision-making authority of any future governor.”
Polis’ office also provided a list characterizing how state legislatures elsewhere regulate lobbyists, arguing that SB-147 would put Colorado out of step with other states. Many of the states exempt government officials from lobby requirements.
Theoretically, the bill has enough legislative support to override a veto, but the clock is quickly running down on the legislative session. Had lawmakers acted more quickly, they could’ve passed SB-147 with enough time to override a veto before the session ends Wednesday night.
But the bill’s journey through the House went slowly — and the window to override a potential Polis veto before the session ended slammed shut.
The House’s top two Democratic leaders, Speaker Julie McCluskie and Majority Leader Monica Duran, were the only two House lawmakers to oppose the bill — and they also hold scheduling sway over legislation moving through their chamber.
Duran said she hadn’t factored the veto clock into her thinking and was focused on efficiently moving bills through the House.
“For me, just like right now, (it’s about) what’s coming out, what is ready — because we have six days left,” she said last week, citing the days then remaining. “So, I’m always looking at it through a different purview than that.”
She and McCluskie said they had concerns about SB-147’s impact on the Colorado Judicial Department. The measure would also have required more transparency around lobbyists for that agency.
Johnson said she’s unsure if she’ll bring the bill back next year, should Polis reject it. Froelich, who is term-limited and won’t return to the House in 2027, said some other lawmakers have discussed reviving the bill.
“Like I said, itap an opportunity to turn the page and have a different relationship,” she said. “A more transparent one.”
