Colorado Capitol Report

Contribute to Campaign to Defeat Amendment 69, the $25 billion, Single-Payer, Health-Care Plan

This Capitol Report is brought to you by:

  • community-banks-of-colorado

State Policy News

Contribute to Campaign to Defeat Amendment 69, the $25 billion, Single-Payer, Health-Care Plan

A public-private coalition is working to defeat Amendment 69, the November ballot initiative that would create a quasi-public, single-payer health-care plan that would impose a $25 billion tax on employers, workers, and taxpayers.

Called “Coloradans for Coloradans,” the campaign organization’s co-chairs include Colorado State Treasurer Walker Stapleton and former Democratic Governor Bill Ritter.  The organization is backed by a coalition of business organizations, public officials, and community and civic leaders.

In November, the CACI Board of Directors voted to oppose Amendment 69 just days after Secretary of State Wayne Williams qualified the ballot initiative for the November ballot.

CACI urges its members to contribute to Coloradans for Coloradans. Contributions can be mailed to:

Coloradans for Coloradans
1660 Lincoln Street
Suite 1800
Denver CO 80624

Contribution can also be wired electronically to Coloradans for Coloradans.

CACI members who have questions about contributing to Coloradans for Coloradans may email Katie Behnke or call her at 303.807.4583.

Coloradans for Coloradans is an issue committee, #20165030100, registered with the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office.  An issue committee may receive unlimited contributions.

Federal Policy News

NLRB Overtime Timeline Moves Up: Here’s Why

The Department of Labor (DOL) is set to change the way employees and employers must account for work hours, while speeding up the overtime rule’s approval process by as much as eight weeks.  Previously, anyone who made $23,660/year (or less) automatically qualified to receive overtime pay after working 40 hours in one week.  At that time, there were exceptions for “executive, administrative and professional” roles for salaried employees, but that distinction will be virtually eliminated with implementation of the new standard, set to begin sometime mid-July, 2016.

Why the timeline has changed:  Rather than the typical two- to three-month vetting process by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) post-public comment period, this process was expedited and pushed through in just a matter of weeks.  OMB’s action now means Congress has 60 legislative*  days to review the rule issued, before it is to take effect.  (*Legislative days can have multiple calendar days…)

The politics of timing:  If Congress dislikes the rule and chooses to act, they have the option to pass a Resolution of Disapproval (requiring 60 votes – also making the vote bipartisan).  Thus, if the 60 legislative day clock for Congress extends past the incoming president’s inauguration, President Obama risks someone from a different party allowing the resolution of disapproval to stand.  Having this resolution stand effectively strikes down the overtime rule and President Obama’s Presidential Memorandum on overtime.

However, by issuing the OMB’s blessing earlier than previously-scheduled, and to ensure Congress is forced to address the overtime rule in a timely manner, the rule must be received by Congress mid-May.  This will have allowed Obama to veto any potential resolution of disapproval prior to leaving office.

Background on overtime rule: Under the newly-proposed rules, ANY worker making below $50,440 would now receive overtime – in many cases nullifying salaried payment for previously salaried positions, as well as salaried benefits, while forcing businesses to go back to clocking workers in and out.  The proposed rule also effectively eliminates previous “duty test” exemptions.

The overtime rule as proposed by DOL:

  • The new rule would more than double the previous overtime threshold (from $23,660 to $50,055)
  • Removes employer ability to define certain workers as salaried vs. hourly;
  • Creates more liabilities for businesses by setting up different, new treatment for certain employees, and having to account for employee hours
  • Removes worker freedoms (i.e. flexibility for doctor appointments, retirement and incentive programs, vacation days, etc.)
  • Businesses must now consider whether to allow employees to telecommute, work outside the office, and even brings into question issuing work computers.  Both parties will have to report time spent using the computer – raising questions of whether answering a call or email from home on an evening constitutes overtime
  • May limit opportunities for workers if businesses cannot afford to pay overtime, as well as potentially incentivizing less productivity among workers where overtime is allowed.
  • CACI opposed similar language in HB 1331 during the 2015 state legislative session