Colorado lawmakers pulled back plans to counter a proposed constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right of consumers to use natural gas.

The bill’s backers said the legislation would not have significantly affected the initiative’s impact, even as debate intensifies among environmental groups, the oil and gas industry and policymakers.

The bill — initially planned by House Speaker Julie McCluskie, D‑Dillon, Majority Leader Jennifer Bacon, D‑Denver, and Sen. Lisa Cutter, D‑Evergreen — would have addressed how the ballot measure might affect the state’s air quality.

Bacon said the initiative’s wording is overly broad and could create unintended consequences.

The proposed constitutional amendment, introduced by the advocacy organization Advance Colorado, seeks to establish a right for consumers to purchase natural gas and for distributors and utilities to sell it to homes and businesses.

As of Tuesday, it has about two-thirds of the required number of signatures to get on the ballot.

Climate activists and the oil and gas industry have been at odds for years about the future of Colorado’s energy portfolio. In 2024, they seemed to have reached a truce of sorts, in which environmental groups and oil and gas producers promised not to bring forward any ballot initiatives until 2027.

Advance Colorado told Axios News it was not part of that agreement.

In March, the group Conservation Colorado introduced its own response to Initiative No. 177 with four ballot measures establishing liability for oil and gas companies for damage to the state’s environment and communities, prohibiting them from requiring customers to pay for pipeline extensions or decommissioning costs, and requiring them to pay for repairs to aquifers damaged by wastewater generated from drilling operations.

At the state Capitol, House Republicans said their efforts to filibuster the bill’s introduction by having several bills read at length during floor debate on Monday ultimately succeeded in halting the proposal.

“I’m pleased to report that strong opposition from House Republicans successfully prevented the introduction of last-minute legislation that would have undermined the proposed ‘right to natural gas’ ballot measure and circumvented the proper legislative process,” said Rep. Dan Woog, R-Erie, who sits on the House Energy and Environment Committee.

Woog said the bill’s sponsors planned to refer it directly to the House Judiciary Committee, rather than to House Energy and Environment.

“This policy was directly within our committee’s scope and expertise, and yet, we would have been bypassed,” Woog said. “I’m grateful that with guidance from our leadership, our caucus held the line and made clear that we would not stand for such a blatant disregard of the legislative process.”

The Republican added: “Legislation of this magnitude deserves a transparent and deliberative process, not backroom maneuvering in the eleventh hour with limited public input.”

McCluskie released the following statement when asked for comment:

“Energy policy is complicated and impacts every Coloradan, which is why lawmakers supported the 2024 agreement between environmental groups and oil and gas companies to craft smart policy that reduces costs and protects our environment from harmful emissions. Voters tell us time and again they want more action on climate and air quality, not less. We are on the right track, but dark money special interests are bringing ballot measures to derail our progress.”

McCluskie said Initiative No. 177 is “overly broad, lacks clarity, and could upend years of work to craft durable policy that advances our goals of better air quality, more affordable transit and cleaner energy.”

However, after discussions with stakeholders, McCluskie said she and her cosponsors determined their proposal would not “meaningfully change” the impacts of Initiative No. 177.

“The only rational way forward for the good of our state is for Advance Colorado to pull down their measures so that compromise and common sense can prevail,” she said, “Short of that, I call on local governments, utilities, labor and community organizations to work in opposition to the measure.”