By Rayna Hetlage

Colorado made some big strides over the last decade when it comes to creating ways to make sure everyone, regardless of their income, can take care of their health by seeing a doctor for preventative care or when they’re sick. In the past few years, a historically high number of Coloradans have health insurance—either through their employer, through an individual plan purchased on the state health insurance exchange subsidized by federal tax dollars, or through the state’s expansion of Medicaid thanks to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Despite these successes, there is still a long way to go before every Coloradan gets the health care they need. As of 2019 more than 370,000 people—about 6.5 percent of Coloradans—still lack health insurance according to the Colorado Health Institute.

On November 15th, 2019 the Colorado Department of Healthcare Policy and Financing (HCPF) and the Colorado Division of Insurance (DOI) announced another way to help Coloradans find the right health insurance option when they unveiled their long-awaited state public option proposal. The proposed option has many features the Colorado Fiscal Institute believes will benefit Coloradans who earn low incomes: standardized plans, certain services provided before patients’ deductibles are met, and the inclusion of all Colorado residents all deserve to be lauded. Though these are real wins for the health of Coloradans, CFI was disappointed to see that the final plan did not thoroughly explore the potential impacts of creating a Medicaid buy-in option, despite the final report mentioning that the legislation can explore this as an alternative.

The reasoning given for not considering a Medicaid buy-in more thoroughly was concern over how the state would generate the initial funds to create such a program. In many other countries, governments are able to fund public health insurance through taxes and all residents share in the benefits and responsibilities of funding health care to create a healthier, more equitable society. Unfortunately, Colorado’s TABOR law—which locks our tax code into the state constitution, making it difficult to update—prevents state elected officials from raising the revenue required to create a Medicaid buy-in program without a contentious, costly election campaign or creating an enterprise, thereby adding more complexity to our government.

Colorado isn’t alone in seeking options outside of the plans currently allowed under federal law: 19 other states have introduced or passed legislation to implement or study such a policy solution. In Washington state, lawmakers passed a plan similar to the one Colorado is considering.

The actuarial analysis of Colorado’s proposed option estimates the plan will cover an additional 4,600-9,200 Coloradans within the first year. This is a positive step forward, but it still leaves hundreds of thousands of Coloradans without health insurance. While we do not know how a Medicaid buy-in program would increase the number of Coloradans with health insurance, our legislators are still unable to fully explore it as an alternative or addition to the proposed state option. Without the ability to raise revenue easily, Colorado has its hands tied once again by our constitutional tax code. That leaves lawmakers able to decide only between offering the current option or waiting until the federal government acts to provide more options for everyone in the country.

It will be important for Coloradans to pay attention to how well this plan works. If it does end up lowering costs and expanding health care access, more people may end up signing up. However, if this plan only ends up being a choice for a tiny percentage of people who still can’t afford to see a doctor, afford medication, and access other health services that give them opportunities to live long and healthy lives, it will be important for everyone to know the reason why solutions are so limited starts and ends with TABOR.

By Ali Mickelson

Tuition at Colorado universities has been skyrocketing and as the cost of a college education continues to shift to students and families, many Coloradans are struggling to cope. This is confirmed in a new report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) that highlights how deep cuts in state higher education funding have led to rapid increases in tuition and less support for students.

And while these challenges will persist regardless of the outcome of the 2019 election, voters can start reversing this trend if they pass Proposition CC. That measure, which would allow the state to invest all the revenue it keeps at current tax rates in good economic times, would direct an anticipated $135.7 million towards higher ed funding over the next two years.

In the last decade, state funding for public two- and four-year colleges has decreased by $6.6 billion across the country. In Colorado, state support has dropped by nearly 10 percent, or by roughly $510 per student. This has resulted in dramatic tuition increases across the state, with tuition in Colorado increasing 69.3 percent over the last decade. This is the sixth-highest increase in the country.  

This shift from state funding to family budgets has had many negative impacts, particularly for Black and Latinx students and for families with low incomes. The average cost of attending a public four-year institution – including room, board, fees, books and tuition – accounts for 24 percent of an average family’s budget in Colorado. This burden is even greater for Latinx and Black students (32 percent).

Research also shows that increasing tuition consistently results in declining enrollment, especially amongst students of color. As a result, tuition increases can lead to less diverse campuses and fewer opportunities for many Colorado students. 

Furthermore, tuition increases may cause students who struggle to pay for college to choose less selective public institutions, which can decrease their future earnings. Research from the Brookings Institution found that a large share of high-achieving students from struggling families don’t apply to more selective colleges and universities, in part due to financial constraints.

Finally, the rise in the cost of higher education has also driven unprecedented levels of student debt. According to the Pew Research Center, 54 percent of students took on some debt to pay for college and about one-third of all adults under age 30 have student loan debt. A 2018 survey showed that student debt prevented 80% of borrowers from saving for retirement, 56% from buying a home, 42% from buying a car, and 50% from contributing to charity, according to the report. More than 85% said student loan debt was a major source of stress, and one in three said such debt is the biggest stress in their lives.

As the CBPP report illuminates, lawmakers need to consider the increasing costs of education if they want to ensure that all Coloradans have access to the opportunities afforded by a college degree. Continued cuts in the state’s higher education budget make college less accessible and inclusive and jeopardizes the future of our communities.

Though the challenge will be slightly less daunting if voters approve Proposition CC, lawmakers will still have their work cut out for them.

By Camila Navarrette, Communications Associate

Over the past few years, Millennials and Generation Z have been popular scapegoats for pretty much every economic issue, from lower rates of homeownership to the demise of chain restaurants like Applebees. 

The truth couldn’t be further from the conventional narrative. Young people have inherited a range of problems, from skyrocketing health care costs to the impacts of climate change, all thanks to a system focused on making sure the wealthy and big corporations don’t have to pay their share that — surprise — still isn’t trickling down. 

Something else we’re blamed for? The increasingly inaccessible and expensive road to obtain a college degree. There is a solution to these problems, and Proposition CC, which is on the ballot for Nov. 5, is part of it. 

As in every state, some of the taxes Coloradans pay support higher education. It makes sense — college degrees are associated with higher wages, employment and economic mobility. Investing in higher education benefits all of us because when people are more secure economically, everyone is better off.  Unfortunately, we only need to glance at state funding for our colleges and universities to see our investments in higher education aren’t keeping up.

In 1995 — the year I was born — Colorado dedicated 14.9% of the General Fund (the part of the state budget that doesn’t have restrictions over where it can be spent) to higher education. In the 2017-2018 budget — the year I graduated college — the state gave  only 8.4% to higher education. In 2000, Colorado funded two-thirds of a student’s cost of higher education, while the student was responsible for one-third. By 2016, that ratio had flipped. Students now carry more of the financial burden.  

The combination of decreased state funding and skyrocketing tuition costs has been a contributing factor in nearly half of Colorado students’ needing to take on debt to afford college. And for those students, myself included, the average debt is $28,650. Currently, Colorado is at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to higher education funding and ranks 48th in the nation, according to the Colorado Department of Higher Education. Debt to pay for tuition, books, room and board, and all the other costs of going to college create more financial barriers for families trying to get ahead. 

The solution is in front of us — Coloradans can vote yes on Proposition CC to invest an anticipated $88.1 million in higher education. In total, the state would be able to provide about $264 million for other underfunded areas like K-12 education and transportation. 

Addressing our state’s neglected needs wouldn’t be free, of course, but it’s not a big ask. For someone earning the median income of $69,000, they would forgo $27 of their 2021 state tax refund to support and improve these crucial public investments. For college students, even $27 can be a nice boost to your budget, there’s no denying that. But the collective benefit of fixing potholes, reducing traffic congestion and reinvesting in students and families is worth it.

After years of seeing our roads and schools deprioritized, a majority of Coloradans are ready to invest more in education and transportation. Proposition CC won’t be a magic solution to solve all of our fiscal challenges, but it’s a starting point to help the state evolve our programs to match the growth of its population and make sure that we’re setting ourselves up for a brighter future. I’ll be voting yes on Proposition CC in November – and you should, too. 

Originally submitted as a letter to the editor to MyMetMedia.Learn more about Proposition CC here.

By Ali Mickelson, director of legislative and tax policy

On Labor Day, we published new research about the state of low-wage employment in Colorado. The main takeaway from that report is that about 25 percent of Colorado workers are still struggling to make ends meet as wages remain low and median income actually decreased over the last 20 years. This is especially true for people of color and women because they’re more likely to be employed in low-wage jobs. 

While that research showed increases in the state minimum wage have helped, there remains more we can do to boost incomes for people who have a hard time paying the rent, putting food on the table for their families, or affording other basic needs. What tangible policy changes help people working low-wage jobs support their families and obtain economic security?  A recent report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) offers one solution.

CBPP argues for the passage of the Working Family Tax Relief Act, a bill CFI supports that is sponsored by Senators including Colorado’s Michael Bennet. The Working Family Tax Relief Act would increase the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC), raising the incomes for tens of millions of families across the country.

Many of the workers in these families are employed in jobs which, while important to our economy and way of life, tend pay low wages. CBPP breaks out how many workers by occupation would benefit from the Working Family Tax Relief Act. Cashiers, retail salespersons, customer service representatives, and restaurant waitstaff would be the top occupations who would benefit. Put together, over 250,000 Colorado workers would see their incomes rise if the bill became law.

CBPP also found that the Working Family Tax Relief Act would increase incomes for millions of families whether they are Black, white, or Brown. That includes 24 million white households, 9 million Latinx households, 8 million Black households, 2 million Asian households, and roughly half a million American Indian and Alaska Native households. CBPP also notes that “white households constitute the greatest number of those benefiting because they’re the largest share of the population, but the bill would help a greater share of Black, Latino, and other households of color because they are over-represented in low-wage jobs due to long-standing racial barriers to economic opportunity.” That analysis mirrors the findings in our low-wage worker report.

The Working Family Tax Relief Act highlights the value of using tax policy to offset the racial and fiscal inequities in our economy. Policies like increasing the EITC and the CTC put money back into the pockets of the workers who do some of the most important jobs yet receive the lowest pay.  Colorado lawmakers also have the ability to expand and fund these kinds of policies at the state level.

Locally, CFI will continue to advocate for tax policy that lifts up and supports Colorado families who rely on low-wage jobs to make ends meet. Expect to hear more when the legislative session begins in January.

By Chris Stiffler

#1 – Reduction in Colorado income tax rate set for tax year 2019

via GIPHY

The September revenue forecast is important because it shows how much money will be available for the rest of the current year’s budget. When the economy isn’t as strong as it has been in recent years, this could mean budget cuts might be necessary if revenue comes in below previous projections. When times are good, Colorado is different than almost every other state in the country because Article X, Section 20 of the state constitution (AKA TABOR) mandates that revenue over a certain amount must be refunded instead of using it to make additional investments or save it for a rainy day. While TABOR says money over the cap must be returned, it does not specify how, and the mechanisms are set by the legislature.

In this case, after all was said and done, the state’s obligation for rebating revenue over the TABOR revenue cap is $428.5 million for tax year 2019. Some of that money will be returned via the Homestead Property Tax Exemption for Seniors and Disabled Veterans. And while the $428 million in rebates is less than the June projection of $575 million, it will still be large enough to trigger a temporary reduction in the income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.5%.

#2 – Volatility created by the ad valorem credit for severance taxes is apparent

via GIPHY

The state will collect $255 million in FY2018-19 from severance tax on minerals extracted from the ground, 95% of which is oil and gas (for more on severance tax, check out our video on the subject from earlier this year). Severance tax typically has large fluctuations because of the boom and bust nature of the energy sector and That figure is projected to fall by 43% next year to $147 million. This forecast also highlights how the state’s ad valorem tax credit (which allows energy producers to claim a property tax break) increases the level of volatility. 

Because oil and gas production in Colorado was lower in 2015 and 2016, the energy producers had smaller property taxes those years, and they get a small tax credit offset to be used in later years. Since the ad valorem credit lags production by two years, that means even though 2018 is a high production year with a low Ad Valorem credit, next year producers will get a bigger tax break and the credit will offset more of the state’s severance tax collections.

#3 – Potential economic slowdown could mean we will only have enough to keep up

via GIPHY

Colorado’s economists are predicting a slowdown in the economy. That means slower growth in revenue collections for the General Fund, which funds K-12 education, higher education, and other important priorities. After 7.2% growth in revenue last year, the General Fund is only expected to grow by 3% this year and by 2.7% the following year. For next year’s budget (FY2020-21), the General Assembly will have $833 million more to save or spend in the General Fund than what was spent in this year’s budget. While this sounds like a lot, because Colorado is a growing state, more students, prisoners, and patients, will mean most of that new money will need to be used for ongoing expenses. If appropriations grow by the historical rate of 6 percent, the General Assembly will have about $57 million more to spend or save in next year’s budget on top of the required 7.25% reserve.

While this is more good news than bad news, it’s important to remember that the state is currently underfunding education below what the state constitution mandated in Amendment 23 by hundreds of millions of dollars a year. This deficit is known as the Budget Stabilization Factor (previously known as the Negative Factor) for K-12 education. While keeping up with inflation and population growth is good, it means we won’t have much to invest in our schools so they’re funded at the level voters expected when they passed Amendment 23 in 2000.

#4 – The growth in the state’s older population is driving the cost of funding the Homestead Property Tax Exemption

via GIPHY

Older Coloradans who meet certain qualifications are eligible for a tax break known as the Homestead Property Tax Exemption (read our paper from earlier this year on the inequities of the exemption if you haven’t already). The cost of this tax expenditure has three components: home value appreciation, the statewide residential assessment rate set by Gallagher, and the amount of people aged 65 and older who qualify. Since the property tax break only impacts the first $200,000 of home value, and since 94% of filers who claim the exemption have houses worth more than $200,000, the growth in housing prices doesn’t really impact the cost of the exemption. The drop in the portion of housing property subject to the residential assessment rate also lowers the cost. The number of older Coloradans is expected to grow by 4.3% over the forecast period. 

#5 – Big swings in revenue expectations since March come from federal tax code changes.

via GIPHY

The 2019 March revenue forecast projected a $65 million TABOR rebate this year. The June estimate saw that figure jump to $575 million. Now the actual figure came in at $428 million.  Why the big swings in projections? Much of it can be explained by changes in behavior due to the federal tax code changes that took effect in 2018. In March, economists had very little data on income tax collections for tax year 2018, so they had to make assumptions on behavior. Because the federal tax code changes expanded Colorado’s tax base, the state collected more in income tax than projected. But because TABOR prevents us from investing this increase in revenue, even during very good economic times, this doesn’t mean more money available for schools and roads, it only means bigger rebates.

By Rayna Hetlage, policy analyst

Even during the best economic times, it’s still a struggle for some families to afford basic needs like putting food on the table. For people who are between jobs, experiencing a health emergency, or managing a long-term disability, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps, is an important lifeline to nutritious food for them and their children. Even for those who are working, wages for some jobs just aren’t keeping up with the cost of food. For those who use SNAP, it can be the difference between being able to pay the bills and living in poverty.

Hundreds of thousands of Coloradans use SNAP at one time or another to help pay for food, and most of them come live in a household with at least one worker. It’s especially important for families in communities in southern and southeastern Colorado, where upwards of 30% of households in some counties participate. In addition to reducing food insecurity, almost all of the dollars used to fund SNAP end up being spent locally. This is critical during economic downturns, when food assistance helps provide a stabilizing effect for local economies. Even during the current economic expansion, with many new jobs paying low wages it means SNAP is more than just a backstop in the event of a recession.

In July, the Trump administration proposed a change to SNAP that would end Broad Based Categorical Eligibility (BBCE). BBCE came about as a result of a 1996 change in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF), also known as basic cash assistance, that made it possible for states to offer non-cash benefits to eligible individuals and families. Families who qualify for TANF benefits are automatically eligible to get food assistance through SNAP. Currently, 43 states offer extended benefits to families who might not otherwise qualify for SNAP. Colorado is one of these states and allows individuals making up to 200% of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL) to qualify for SNAP benefits. Under the proposed changes more than 30,000 Coloradans will no longer be able to use SNAP to help pay for groceries. 

According to the US Department of Agriculture, which administers SNAP, the proposed changes will disproportionately affect a significant amount of people who rely on SNAP. This includes 13.2% of families who have someone 65 and older living with them, 12.5% of working families, and 10.1% of families and individuals with no children. 

Another rule announced In August by the Trump Administration will affect immigrant families seeking Lawful Permanent Status (LPS) who currently use SNAP, and even those who have used it in the past to avoid going hungry. This is because of changes to the guidelines for determining who is considered a “public charge.” Immigrants who are deemed to be a present or future public charge can have their LPS application or entry into the United States denied. Prior to the rule change, the two factors that were used to categorize someone as a public charge were whether or not an individual had been in long-term care at the governments’ expense and/or if they had received cash benefits from the government (including TANF and Supplemental Security Income, or SSI). 

Under the rule change, the government would penalize immigrants who make use of SNAP to afford food, Medicaid so they can see the doctor, and housing assistance (such as Section 8 housing). The new rule makes it confusing for immigrants to determine what support systems they can and cannot use and has led to many people being fearful to apply for any sort of assistance. Whether the rule goes into effect as planned or not, people going without healthcare, food, and housing for fear their applications will be denied. When our neighbors go without their basic needs being met, our entire state suffers the consequences. 

For families with children who turn to SNAP when they have trouble making ends meet, this new rule will be especially hard, and not just because they will have to find other ways to afford to feed their kids. Currently, children in households receiving SNAP automatically qualify for the free-or-reduced lunch program. When households lose their SNAP benefits, they will then have to undergo an additional application process and it is likely that some children will stop getting school breakfasts because of this additional bureaucratic barrier.

While SNAP is a critical support for families who are going through a hard time, or when the economic cycle goes from boom to bust, 

SNAP provides a boost to the economy in Colorado because recipients are spending their benefits at local grocery stores, corner stores and farmers markets. Colorado receives an average of $127 in SNAP benefits per person per month. One analysis by the Colorado Department of Human Services and a separate one by the Colorado Fiscal Institute in addition to losing out on $45 million in benefits each year, an estimated $21-$84 million in total economic activity will be lost due to the change in policy. For the counties where as many as 30% of residents turn to SNAP for food, the economic consequences will be more pronounced. 93% of the cost of SNAP goes directly to food for families.

The costs of food insecurity are not only apparent in direct spending and the economic activity generated by SNAP benefits. The health and other costs associated with families not having enough to eat are between $1.02 billion and $2.1 billion according to analysis from local anti-hunger advocates. With fewer families receiving benefits it is possible that Colorado will see these costs rise, standing in stark contrast to the goal of reducing US health care spending. We know that the majority of SNAP recipients are working adults, and because of how many work low-wage jobs, SNAP is a critical tool for lifting adults, older Coloradans, and kids out of poverty. 

This policy is one of many causing pressures on families and should be part of a broader conversation about how we pay low wage workers and the struggle to make ends meet. Throughout Colorado, families are having to make decisions between whether or not to pay their rent, maintain health insurance, put food on the table, or put gas in their car so that they can get to work. SNAP has been shown to help ease these struggles and keeps 117,000 Coloradans out of poverty, including 55,000 children, every year.

SNAP has time and time again been proven to provide important economic and health benefits for our communities. Ending BBCE could push many families who are making ends meet into poverty and punishes families and individuals that are attempting to save so they no longer need to turn to SNAP and can make ends meet on their own.

While this rule proposal is disheartening, there is still time for you to make a difference by telling the Trump administration an the USDA not to move forward with it. Please take a few minutes today to tell them why you think ending Broad Based Categorical Eligibility for SNAP would hurt people and communities across Colorado. There are several grassroots organizations like Center for American Progress, Feeding America, and Food Research Action Center who are making it easy for you to do just that.

Public comment is open until September 23rd. 

By Abbey Pizel

What do you picture when you think about the 4^th of July in Colorado? Flags, Fireworks with family, cookouts on the back porch, and spending time outdoors probably all come to mind. And if you’re planning on celebrating, you won’t be alone. Millions of people in the United States will spend billions of dollars on their Independence Day celebrations this year according to WalletHub.

But in addition to celebrating the day we officially declared independence from Great Britain in 1776, many of us use the holiday as an opportunity to pay tribute to veterans, active duty military members, and their families. Like many families in the US, some veterans don’t have the resources to meet basic needs like paying the rent, putting food on the table, being able to see a doctor, and giving their children a better start in life with quality early childhood education.

This 4^th of July, while we can never fully repay the debt we owe military members, veterans, and their families, Congress has an opportunity to make a difference in the lives of the thousands of people who bravely put their lives on the line and give up the things we take for granted by serving. The Working Families Tax Relief Act (WFTRA), sponsored by Senators Sherrod Brown, Richard Durbin, Ron Wyden, and Colorado’s own Michael Bennet, would give a much-needed boost to qualifying active-duty military and working veterans’ incomes by substantially expanding two federal tax credits – the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC).

Both the EITC and the CTC have proven to be two of the most effective ways of fighting poverty. In 2017, the EITC lifted about 5.7 million people out of poverty, including about 3 million children, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In 2017, the average EITC was $3,191 for families with children, increasing their income by more than $250 every month. For families struggling to make ends meet, an added boost like this can make a huge difference. In Colorado, about 364,000 people are lifted out of poverty because of this credit. Similarly, the CTC lifts 250,000 Colorado children out of poverty. When combined with the EITC, the CTC is an even more powerful tool for helping families build a strong future.

WFTRA would expand the EITC for families with children by roughly 25 percent. It also strengthens the credit for workers who earn low incomes whether they’re raising children or not. The act makes the CTC fully refundable, meaning families benefit from the credit whether they owe income taxes or not. That means the families who need it most are getting resources they need.

Of the over 400,000 veterans and 34,000 active-duty military members who choose to make Colorado home, nearly 20% are living paycheck to paycheck, according to analysis by the Center for American Progress. WFTRA would boot incomes for these veterans and their families, allowing them to move out of poverty. Similarly, a veteran single mother with two children earning $20,00 a year would see an increase in her EITC by about $1,460 and her Child Tax Credit by $2,210, for a combined gain of about $3,670. For these families, having to worry about how they will make rent, buy groceries, and pay for child care while they balance re-establishing themselves in civilian life or the challenges of active-duty make life even more difficult. WFTRA would help hundreds of thousands of Colorado families and individuals, including tens of thousands of veterans and active-duty military families. Providing these families with a modest boost in income helps honor the sacrifices they make. The people who serve our country and our communities, whether they serve in the military, teach our children, serve as first responders, or perform any of the other important service jobs that help make our country, states, and communities great places to live, should be able to do more than just get by. WFTRA will help them get ahead.

WFTRA lessens the challenges working veterans and military families face every day. This 4^th of July, as you spend time with your family or watch a firework show, we urge you to think about the sacrifices military veterans and their families have made to allow us to enjoy this holiday. WFTRA is one way that we can show our thanks.

By Chris Stiffler

1. Significant Upswing Since March Estimates

via GIPHY

In March, Legislative Council economists warned the Joint Budget Committee about an upside risk to their estimates and it turns out those upside risks were real. Revenue collections for the first three quarters of Fiscal Year 2019 came in much higher than projected. Much of the unanticipated revenue comes from shifting taxpayer behavior as they respond to recent federal tax policy changes and the intensifying global trade war.

2. Big TABOR Rebates Now

via GIPHY

The large upward revision in revenue means much larger TABOR rebates, especially for the wealthiest people and corporations. In March, FY ’19 TABOR rebates were projected at $65 million. The June estimates set them more than half a billion dollars higher at $575 million. That rebate amount is large enough to trigger a temporary income tax rate reduction for tax year 2019. The drop in the state income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.5%, gives a tax cut, on average, of $557 to top-tier income earners and $9, on average, to the lowest tier income earners. March estimates had state revenue $70 million below the TABOR cap for FY ’20. As of this estimate, TABOR rebates for FY 20 are projected at $310 million. 

3. Even during one of the strongest economic expansions on record, Colorado still can’t pay back our schools and fund our backlog in road repairs

via GIPHY

Colorado’s economy is, by any typical measurement, firing on all cylinders.  Average wages are at all-time high levels with very little inflation pressure. In July, the economy will have been expanding for 10 straight years, which marks the longest economic expansion in history. Colorado’s unemployment rate stands at a very strong 3.4%. Gross General Fund revenue, which grew at a white-hot pace of 14.1% in FY ’18 has grown by a still-robust 7.9% in the current year. 

But even with ideal conditions, next year’s budget will barely keep up with caseload growth. That means there’s no room to pay back the negative factor for schools or permanent funding for the billions of dollars of backlogged road projects. The benefits of our strong economy don’t translate into budget flexibility since that revenue must be returned as TABOR rebates that benefit the wealthiest people, rather than being used for public investments that benefit everyone.

4. What does the forecast mean for Prop CC on the November ballot?

via GIPHY

This November, Colorado voters will be asked whether they want to allow the state to keep and invest all the revenue it collects at current tax rates instead of receiving TABOR rebates. In March, when the idea was introduced, revenue estimates projected no TABOR rebates in 2020. However, due to the stronger-than-expected growth in tax collections, rebates are now expected to be about $310 million. Prop CC voters will choose between a rebate of about $35 to $40 for the average Colorado taxpayer (which they won’t receive until 2021, when they file their 2020 taxes) and an additional $310 million dedicated to roads and transit, schools, and higher education.

5. There’s extra uncertainty in the form downside risk

via GIPHY

Uncertainty on a variety of levels is causing state economists to warn of significant downside risk of their estimate falling short of expectations. Corporate income tax collections are expected to decline following a Colorado Supreme Court ruling regarding separate cases involving tech companies Oracle and Agilent Technologies. Additionally, escalation of the trade war with China is still a real possibility. And we still don’t fully know how taxpayers are changing their behavior in response to the most recent federal tax code changes. 

By Ali Mickelson

As Memorial Day approaches, many Coloradans are packing up their cars, trucks, minivans, and motorcycles for their first outdoor adventures of the summer. According to an estimate by AAA Colorado published in The Denver Post, 785,000 Coloradans will be traveling during the Memorial Day holiday, an increase of 3.75 percent from last year. And with beautiful weather expected this weekend, many of those travelers may be heading for one of Colorado’s four national parks – Rocky Mountain, Mesa Verde, Great Sand Dunes, and Black Canyon Of The Gunnison.

It’s impossible to miss the cascading gold peaks of the sand dunes or the remarkable Ancestral Puebloan heritage at Mesa Verde, but what we sometimes miss when we visit one of Colorado’s national parks on vacation is the public investment in the National Park Service (NPS) that keeps our parks clean, safe and accessible. The NPS is the reason we have roads, trails, wildlife and historic preservation, and modern-day amenities like water and electrical access in the national parks. While the first national park (Yellowstone, of course) was created by an act of Congress and signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant all the way back in 1872, it wasn’t until President Woodrow Wilson signed a bill authorizing the NPS in 1916 that the agency was first brought into existence. Since then, the NPS has been caring for the environment, preserving history, and revitalizing communities across the country for over 100 years. And with 331 million people entering national parks across the country, including more than 7.5 million in Colorado, people across the US are getting the most out of that investment of their taxes.

Unfortunately, NPS funding has been on the chopping block in recent years. A report commissioned by Pew Charitable Trusts late last year details how increasing funding for the NPS budget in order to address the agency’s $11.6 billion park maintenance backlog would impact the country’s economy. The study found increased investment could add nearly 110,000 jobs nationally, more than 2,200 of which would be in Colorado. The analysis further concluded the economic benefits from these jobs would accrue about equally between rural and urban areas. 

In Colorado, nearly $485 million was spent by those visiting our national parks in 2017 alone, resulting in a total of over $720 million economic impact, according to Pew.  Headwaters Economics also released research on federal public lands in 2018 that found huge economic benefits of national parks and other federal public lands. Not only do they have the ability to create new economic activity like spending and jobs, but to retain people, businesses, and retirees in certain areas.

That same Headwaters research found about half of the spending, visits, jobs, and income created by national parks in Colorado is generated by Rocky Mountain National Park. However, Mesa Verde National Park is not far behind. For areas like Southwest Colorado without the same economic diversity and advantages of the Denver Metro Area, tourism created by national parks and other public lands is even more important. That makes protecting these areas critical to ensuring widespread prosperity across Colorado. All of these data show just how valuable investments in our national parks are not only for the enjoyment of our family vacations, but also for our economy and workforce.

In addition to the threat of budget cuts at the Congressional level, environmental issues could also pose an existential risk to our national parks moving forward. A report that made international headlines earlier this month found 96 percent of national parks have hazardous air quality. Hazards from human-caused pollution, along with smoke from wildfires, are creating new challenges for conservationists who seek to preserve the experience of visiting a national park for future generations. And these concerns pale in comparison to the bigger threat posed by climate change. As global temperatures rise and weather patterns begin to bring drier, hotter summers with less snow in the winter, the fragile ecosystems in Colorado protected by the National Parks Service could go away without action on our part.

Thankfully, Colorado has taken steps to meet these challenges head-on. A bill to strengthen regulations on oil and gas development, frequently seen as a contributing factor in the rise of air pollution, was signed into law earlier this year, and other bills to address the problems associated with climate change and the shift away from fossil fuels are expected to be signed by Governor Polis soon. Continued efforts from policymakers, advocates, and the public will be important if we hope to stem the changes to our climate and the other issues threatening the future of our national parks.

So this Memorial Day, after you have the tent poles straightened and the marshmallows roasting, after you stop and glimpse the idyllic Colorado scenery, take a moment to remember how important our national parks are, why we need to do everything we can to protect and conserve these areas from issues like pollution and climate change, and how the National Park Service and the collective investments we make as a society create a big difference for communities across the state.

By Ali Mickelson

Moms hold a special place in our families and in our society. Our moms are the caregivers, the problem-solvers, the boo-boo kissers, and the boogie-man chasers. They are nurturers and providers (and maybe the kick in the butt we need every once in a while, too). Moms are the cornerstone of Colorado’s diverse communities. But there are also thousands of moms across racial and ethnic lines who give their all and still find it hard to make ends meet. For too many Colorado moms and their families, it keeps getting more and more difficult to put a roof over their families’ heads, afford health and child care, and meet other basic needs.

Fortunately, programs like the earned income tax credit (EITC) and the child tax credit (CTC) are there to help. The EITC and CTC use the tax code to help hardworking families. By employing refundable tax credits, they increase incomes for families and can lift them out of poverty altogether. Research shows the EITC and the CTC are two of the country’s leading anti-poverty programs.

The income boost provided by these credits contributes to higher earnings for families, but research has shown the EITC and CTC can also produce better health outcomes, increased academic performance for kids, and even higher earnings later in life. The EITC and CTC are continually documented as policies that change the lives of mothers and children in our communities. That’s one reason why US Senators Sherrod Brown, Michael Bennet, Dick Durbin, and Ron Wyden have introduced the Working Families Relief Act, which would expand these critical programs.

Specifically, the bill would:

• Increase the EITC for families with children by roughly 25 percent
• Substantially increase the EITC for workers not raising children and lower the eligibility age to 19
• Make the full $2,000 CTC available to all low- and moderate-income families;
• Create a new Young Child Tax Credit that would provide families with children under 6 years old an extra $1,000 per child (for a total of $3,000 per child)
• Make the CTC equally accessible to families in Puerto Rico while also expanding Puerto Rico’s EITC

Nationwide, these improvements to the EITC and CTC would boost the financial security of 46 million households and 114 million people, including 8 million Black families, 9 million Latinx families, and 2 million Asian American families, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The bill would also cut child poverty nationally by 28 percent, lifting 3.1 million children out of poverty and making another 7.7 million children less poor.

The Working Families Tax Relief Act would help moms in every state, including an estimated 361,000 mothers in Colorado. That translates to more than 780,000 Colorado kids.

This Mother’s Day, lets reflect on how important mothers are in our lives. Every mother deserves the support they need to care for their families and put their children on a path to success. So right after you call your mom (you have already called your mom, right? We’ll wait…) contact your members of Congress and tell them to pass the Working Families Tax Relief Act.