Proposition JJ is the latest ballot measure where Colorado wants to keep a bit more of your money—specifically from sports betting taxes. Here’s the rundown on what it is, why it’s on the ballot, and why everyone from environmentalists to gaming operators has an opinion.
What Is Proposition JJ?
Proposition JJ proposes to lift the current $29 million cap on sports betting tax revenue in Colorado. When voters legalized sports betting in 2019 with Proposition DD, they agreed to a 10% tax rate but set a cap on the total revenue the state could collect annually. Well, it turns out Coloradans love to bet—surprise, surprise. Sports betting revenues are now projected to exceed that cap. So, instead of refunding the excess money to sports betting operators, Proposition JJ would allow the state to keep those extra funds and funnel them into water conservation projects.
If you’re curious about the exact legal language, here it is
Without raising taxes, may the state keep and spend all sports betting tax revenue above voter-approved limits to fund water conservation and protection projects instead of refunding revenue to casinos?
What’s the Point of Proposition JJ?
In short, Colorado needs water. A lot of it. The state’s water supply is under increasing strain due to population growth, drought, and climate issues. The Colorado Water Plan outlines billions of dollars in necessary projects over the next few decades, including water storage, conservation efforts, and infrastructure improvements. Supporters argue that by allowing the state to keep all sports betting tax revenue, Proposition JJ provides much-needed funding for these projects without raising new taxes (Reason Foundation) (Colorado Public Radio).
The Pros
- More Money for Water Projects: Supporters, including environmental groups and the Colorado Water Congress, say this is a win-win. All the extra revenue goes directly to water projects, helping the state tackle its water issues without creating new taxes or fees (Reason Foundation) (The Colorado Sun).
- Maintains Existing Tax Rates: Since the state isn’t increasing the tax rate on sports betting, proponents argue that this isn’t a tax hike. It’s simply reallocating money that’s already being collected beyond the original cap (Colorado Public Radio).
- Broad Bipartisan Support: The measure has received backing from both sides of the aisle and sailed through the state legislature. Water management is a priority issue for Colorado, and lawmakers believe this is a straightforward way to address it (The Colorado Sun).
The Cons
- Effectively a Tax Increase?: Critics argue that keeping revenue beyond the voter-approved cap is, in essence, an indirect tax increase. They believe any extra revenue should be refunded to the casinos as originally promised, and that expanding government programs without voter approval undermines taxpayer rights (The Colorado Sun) (Colorado General Assembly).
- Reliance on “Sin Taxes”: Opponents, including some lawmakers, argue that tying critical funding like water management to gambling taxes is risky. They warn that if sports betting revenues dip in the future, it could leave vital water projects underfunded (Colorado Public Radio).
- No Organized Opposition… Yet: While there isn’t a significant campaign against Proposition JJ, some opponents have voiced concerns about the state’s reliance on volatile revenue sources. They argue that essential projects should have stable, guaranteed funding instead of being tied to a booming but unpredictable industry (Colorado Public Radio) (Colorado General Assembly).
What the Blue Book Says
A “YES” vote on Proposition JJ allows the state to keep and spend more money for water projects when sports betting tax revenue is collected above the amount previously approved by voters.
A “NO” vote on Proposition JJ means the state will pay refunds to casinos and sports betting operators when sports betting tax revenue is greater than the amount previously approved by voters.
The Bottom Line
Proposition JJ asks voters if the state should be allowed to keep and use all sports betting tax revenue for water conservation projects, rather than refunding any amount that exceeds the $29 million cap. If you think this is a sensible way to address Colorado’s growing water crisis without raising new taxes, a “yes” vote makes sense. But if you’re skeptical of expanding government control over tax revenue or think this sets a dangerous precedent for tying essential services to gambling, a “no” vote might be your call.
There’s our objectivity. Here’s our opinion.
We’re voting no. TABOR is TABOR and it is the only thing saving our once great state. But politicians will always find a way to work around TABOR, almost always under the auspice of “it feels good.” Propistion JJ feels good – ah, water projects. Right?! Do you trust the government with extra dimes or the private sector with extra dimes? The government is big, bloated, and bureaucratic enough. No more money. No on Prop JJ.
