Senate Republican leadership on Tuesday described an effort to reform TABOR as “interesting,” though leaders say it is not representative of the majority of the caucus’ priorities.

Senate President Kevin Grantham of Cañon City responded when asked about the proposal, which has sponsorship from two Republican lawmakers, Rep. Dan Thurlow of Grand Junction and Sen. Larry Crowder of Alamosa.

The lawmakers are proposing that the state’s spending cap under TABOR – the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in the state constitution – be tied to personal income rather than the current formula: inflation plus population change. The idea is that government would be allowed to grow when economic times are good.

“It’s an interesting concept,” Grantham said. “We have to look at what’s the end result of what this bill will do. The end result will be more money out of taxpayer’s pockets. They like to call that state revenue. When I hear that, I hear money out of taxpayer’s pockets.

“We have to look at the net effect of what this bill is intended to do and what it actually will do.”

Over time, the proposal would likely result in less rebates offered to taxpayers. The new formula in some years would raise the TABOR cap to a higher level, which would result in less rebates, though that would not be the case every year. At the same time, government would not grow faster than people’s incomes.

The idea is to take a five-year look at the rolling average of the change in personal income from year-to-year, which would take the volatility out because an average would be used, rather than calculating based on spikes and plummets from year-to-year.

Crowder bucked his caucus last legislative session by expressing support for a proposal to restructure the Hospital Provider Fee as an enterprise fund, or government-owned business. The fee is assessed on hospitals to force a match of larger federal health care dollars.

The plan – which never made it to the floor for debate in the Senate and died over GOP objections – would have exempted the hospital fee from TABOR, taking the revenue out of the TABOR calculation and lowering taxpayer rebates set aside in the general fund, thereby freeing money for spending.

“Some people saw that as divisive,” Senate Republican Leader Chris Holbert of Parker said of the provider fee effort. “But I really saw it as strengthening for our caucus. I appreciate in our caucus that we can respect a difference of opinion and the outcome of such bills.”

As for the TABOR proposal this year, Holbert added, “Maybe (there’s been a discussion) with some members. We certainly respect the senator’s right to sponsor the bill.”

House Bill 1187 would have to be referred to voters. The effort would only take a simple majority vote in both chambers to refer the issue. Republicans hold only a one-seat majority in the Senate.

The legislation would amend Referendum C rather than TABOR. Referendum C, backed by voters in 2005, offered a five-year TABOR timeout, allowing the state to retain and spend money above the TABOR limit, essentially eliminating the ratchet-down effect.

Because Referendum C was statutory, it would only take a simple majority vote in both chambers to ask voters to amend it, as opposed to a two-thirds majority vote for amending constitutional provisions.

The proposal comes as state budget writers have had to trim as much as $600 million.