Gov. Jared Polis vetoed a bipartisan bill requiring Colorado’s future governors to be more transparent in how they seek to shape legislation, rejecting a measure that lawmakers said was inspired by Polis’ own approach to working in the Capitol.
In his veto letter Friday, the term-limited Polis argued that signing and requiring lobbyists employed by the state to publicly disclose their positions on bills would be a “very mean thing to do to future governors, as it infringes on their ability to independently gather information and evaluate legislation.”
“Requiring a governor to take formal positions prior to final action would impede his or her independent decision making, and make it more challenging for (the) governor’s staff to do what they are often asked to do, which is provide counsel on legislation in the service of winning the governor’s ultimate support,” he wrote.
Had it been signed into law, SB 147 would’ve required legislative liaisons employed by the governor’s office or by state agencies to act like private lobbyists and to formally list their position on the bills for which they’re lobbying.
Lawmakers said the measure was an attempt to reset the legislature’s relationship with the governor’s office after Polis’ two terms, during which he became more involved in seeking to influence, amend and kill legislation than had his predecessor.
Some lawmakers have said they appreciate Polis weighing in so they can know whether to amend their bills to satisfy his concerns or to voluntarily kill them. But others have chafed at his involvement and his frequent veto threats. Of the legislature’s 100 lawmakers, only six voted against SB 147 during its journey through the Capitol.
“All this was saying was, ‘Hey, itap not fun to go into committee and see the governor’s team pulling people out into the hallway to get them to vote a certain way. So can we have a heads-up if you’re going to go full bore against a bill?’ ” Rep. Meg Froelich, an Englewood Democrat, said Monday.
SB 147 was both a response to Polis’ unique approach to the legislature and an example of how that style has worked in practice. His office’s staff told the bill’s sponsors that Polis would veto it should it reach his desk, as they have done in the past to reshape or summarily kill bills. But legislators did not amend or voluntarily kill SB 147, and, had it been moved more quickly by House leadership, lawmakers had sufficient support to attempt to override the governor’s looming veto.
“We could’ve changed this bill and preserved some of the other pieces in there,” said Sen. Lisa Cutter, a Jefferson County Democrat who also sponsored the bill. “But we ultimately decided that it was important — if he wants to kill this bill, then he’s going to have to kill it. In public.”
The bill’s passage through the House slowed in the final weeks of the session, and it missed key legislative deadlines that ended any chance of an override before the legislative session ended in mid-May.
In his letter, Polis noted that no other state in the country places similar requirements on lobbyists employed by governors or state agencies. He also told lawmakers that they should hold themselves to the same standard and publicly disclose their positions on bills.
“This is an unequal and burdensome infringement that erodes separation of powers by elevating one branch of government over others, under the guise of transparency,” he wrote.
Froelich and Cutter scoffed at those arguments.
“Itap absolutely bananas to say that,” Froelich said, noting that lawmakers’ positions on bills are repeatedly recorded during votes. “Dude, my name’s on the bill. How I vote in committee pretty much tells you how I feel, and I’ll say on the mic how I feel about it. What other mechanism would there be? You want me to register with the (state) my position on my own bills?”
Cutter said lawmakers wanted to preserve the separation between the governor’s office on the Capitol’s first floor and the legislative chambers above it.
“We’re the legislative branch, let us do the legislation,” she said. “Weigh in on it in a transparent way if you choose, but to work behind the scenes to influence our colleagues — I don’t think that’s equal. I don’t have that kind of power, as his lobbyists do. … ‘The governor is behind this, the governor doesn’t want this to happen.’ That means something to people. Itap ludicrous to suggest that we’re on an equal playing field if thatap the case.”
While Cutter and Froelich are both leaving the legislature this year, they said that other lawmakers planned to bring SB 147 back next year.
The veto was Polis’ sixth of the year. Elsewhere Friday, he also rejected , which would’ve made it easier for organized workers to negotiate the provision of their union contract related to dues collection. Polis has until later this month to sign or veto bills, or to let them pass into law without his signature.
