Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Arbitration Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel grills arbitration reform; committee advances HB12‑36 as amended
Summary
After hours of divided testimony from builders, banks, business groups, consumer advocates and arbitration practitioners, the committee adopted amendments and voted 4–3 to send HB12‑36 — which limits unconscionable arbitration fees, allows reformed disqualification standards and doubles damages after 120 days — to the Committee of the Whole.
Senators Ball and Henriksen presented House Bill 12‑36 as a bid to protect workers and consumers from costly arbitration terms while preserving arbitration as an efficient dispute‑resolution path. Sponsors described changes including importing an "unconscionability" standard to cap arbitration costs, increasing the enforcement window to 120 days with double damages (rather than treble), and adding a disqualification standard for arbitrators whose rules or practices effectively bar claimants.
Opponents from the Colorado Association of Home Builders, the Bankers Association, the NFIB and several defense groups warned the committee that the bill is overly broad, could be preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and would inject uncertainty into arbitration practice. Supporters — consumer advocates, workers’ rights lawyers and reform groups — argued the bill protects vulnerable parties from unfair barriers to justice and prevents arbitration rules from being rigged to deter claims.
Committee amendments (L11 and L12) narrowed timing and damages language and clarified appointment processes; sponsors moved the bill as amended to the Committee of the Whole. Roll call recorded a 4–3 vote to advance the measure.
The record shows a fractured stakeholder landscape; sponsors and opponents each urged further refinements. The committee adopted targeted technical changes before forwarding the bill for further floor consideration.
