Dedicated to helping citizens of all generations understand how tax and spending policies affect them.

Issue Brief


The Spending Proposed by Colorado’s Congressional Delegation



How much are the members of Colorado’s Congressional delegation trying to spend – or cut – when they are in Washington? National Taxpayers Union Foundation’s (NTUF)  latest BillTally study, which  tracks all significant fiscal legislation in Congress, can provide some answers.

The table below shows the latest BillTally findings on the Colorado delegation from NTUF’s  analysis of the 112th Congress. The report provides a comprehensive overview of the net cost of all of the spending and savings bills sponsored or cosponsored by each Member of Congress. We cross-index our database of cost estimates with each bill supported by each Member to calculate their net spending agenda (excluding overlapping/duplicate measures). 

Net Cost of Legislation Sponsored and Cosponsored by Colorado’s Congressional Delegation
in the 112th Congress (Dollar Figures in Millions) 
Name Party Increases Decreases Net Spending Agenda # of Increases # of Decreases
Bennet, Michael D $16,824 ($3,347) $13,477 39 6
Udall, Mark D $2,011 ($3,366) ($1,355) 32 4
             
Coffman, Mike R $8,437 ($230,046) ($221,609) 28 33
DeGette, Diana D $61,034 ($1,703) $59,331 70 5
Gardner, Cory R $1,054 ($44,558) ($43,504) 10 13
Lamborn, Doug R $25,272 ($624,226) ($598,954) 22 47
Perlmutter, Ed D $52,117 ($3,344) $48,773 36 2
Polis, Jared D $76,150 ($60,044) $16,106 97 8
Tipton, Scott R $324 ($189,570) ($189,246) 20 14
Note: The links in the names will open a detailed report of that Member’s sponsored bills that had cost estimates.

 Colorado highlights include:

  • Among the states and territories, Colorado’s House delegation had the 11th largest average net spending reduction agenda: $133 billion.
  • Each House Democratic Representative from Colorado backed legislation that, overall, would lead to net spending increases.
  • If all of the legislation that Representative DeGette either sponsored or cosponsored during the 112th Congress were passed into law, spending would increase by nearly $59 billion – the most new spending supported by any Member.
  • Each of the Republicans from Colorado were “net cutters”: if the legislation they each had sponsored were enacted into law, spending would decrease. Their net budget cutting agendas ranged from $44 billion to over $599 billion (Rep. Doug Lamborn).
  • Only one other Member of the House of Representatives sponsored more net spending reductions than Rep. Lamborn.
  • Among all House Members, Representative Tipton’s agenda included the fewest amount of spending increases ($324 million), more than offset by nearly $190 million in cuts.
  • Senator. Mark Udall supported legislation that would, in net, reduce spending by $1.4 billion, and was one of the six Democrats in the Senate who were net cutters. Sen. Michael Bennett’s legislative agenda would increase outlays by $13 billion.  The average Democratic Senator sought nearly $40 billion in increased spending.

The full report contains lots of other data points, including the cost of all bills introduced in each Chamber and a look at fiscally-related member caucuses such as the Tea Party Caucus.

Links:

 

National Taxpayers Union Foundation
108 North Alfred Street, Alexandria, VA 22314
703-683-5700, fax: 703-683-5722, e-mail: ntuf@ntu.org
www.ntu.org/ntuf
This report should not be construed as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress or as reflecting on a Member’s fitness to serve.