Politics news and discussion on TalkFuse.
Industry Groups Touted Gas as a “Constitutional Right.” These Voters Weren’t Having It.
Colorado voters rejected Amendment 82 by more than seven percentage points, turning down a proposal to establish a constitutional right to buy and sell natural gas. The result blocks a potential legal tool for gas companies to challenge state and local policies aimed at cutting fossil fuel use, as Colorado pursues net-zero emissions by mid-century.
The measure was backed by Advance Colorado, a conservative advocacy group that does not have to disclose its funders, and framed as protecting consumer choice. Natural gas already heats about 70 per cent of Colorado’s buildings; however, it is largely methane, a potent heat-trapping gas, and household appliances can release pollutants linked to health risks. The campaign came as industry groups were also challenging a state law requiring warning labels on gas stoves.
In short
- Colorado rejected a proposed constitutional right to natural gas.
- The amendment lost by more than seven percentage points.
- Gas firms would have gained a tool to challenge climate policies.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters could argue that people should retain the freedom to choose affordable, familiar gas appliances, especially where gas already heats most homes and alternatives may be costly or impractical. Enshrining that choice in the constitution could also protect consumers and businesses from policies that phase out gas before reliable, accessible replacements are available.
The case against
Opponents could argue that a constitutional right to sell and buy gas would make it harder for elected governments to reduce emissions and address the health risks associated with methane and gas appliances. They may see climate and public health policy as matters for ordinary democratic decision-making, rather than a permanent legal shield for one energy source.