Vote no on Proposition 103

I'm a no-vote on Prop 103, and so should you be. The ballot issue raising Colorado's income tax rate and sales tax rate for the next five years (ostensibly to fund education, but with no guarantee of doing so), is but the latest effort by the spending lobby to avoid hard choices about reining in the growth of government and disciplining the education "blob" toward greater productivity from its already-lavish resources. Barry Poulson and Penn Pfiffner lay out the economic and fiscal case against Prop 103 very ably at the Independence Institute website, www.i2i.org.

The Too Taxing for Colorado folks and former state Rep. Victor Mitchell add their facts and logic at these sites.

http://savecoloradojobs.org/

http://www.tootaxing.org/

To see what the other side is saying, look here http://voteyeson103.com/

Finally, painting with a very broad brush and not looking at the specific alleged case for 103 as a school-supporting measure, I had this exchange with the ever-liberal Susan Barnes-Gelt on Colorado Public Televsion last month, part of our regular "Head On" debate feature.

Susan: DU’s Center for Colorado’s Economic Future predicts that structural flaws in the state government combined with two recessions, mean the long-term fiscal stability of state government’s at stake. I know you think government ought to drown in a bathtub – but a bi-partisan group of leaders disagree.

John: Governments at every level are in danger of drowning themselves in debt. Colorado is no exception, and just like the federal government in Washington, our state has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Raising taxes right now would hurt job creation and postpone needed reforms. Vote no on Proposition 103!

Susan: We’re drowning alright – in our own excesses – waging two wars while we cut taxes, failing to keep up with China in infrastructure and educational investments, coddling Wall Street while we ignore Main Street. The deficit is mounting – leadership, vision, courage and vision.

John: As a free and open society with Judeo-Christian roots, I like our chances against communistic China, decadent Europe, or barbaric Islam. But we do have a responsibility deficit, and the result could be fiscal collapse. Feeding the beast with more taxes is not the answer. Vote no on 103!

Billion reasons to distrust Colo. Dems

Four years ago, Colorado voters decided to trust Democrats with complete control of state government - the governor's mansion and large majorities in the legislature. As voters consider their choices for 2010, they might be surprised by how little governing Democrats have trusted voters in those four years.

Since 2007, Gov. Bill Ritter and the Democrat legislature have increased property taxes by more than $160 million a year, raised vehicle license "fees" by $250 million, instituted new hospital patient "fees" that will cost $600 million, and imposed some $180 million in new sales and use taxes.

All told, Ritter and the legislature have managed to increase the cost of taxes and fees by $1.19 billion and, miraculously, not once triggered Colorado's constitutional requirement that taxes can be raised only by a vote of the people.

In 2007, Democrats changed the school finance act to force most school districts to collect more property tax revenues, thereby reducing what the state spends on K-12 education. Previously, even many Democrats acknowledged that such a change must be presented to the voters.

This time, however, Democrats commandeered the political will to pass such a law and constructed a legal argument which, although rejected by a lower court, ultimately prevailed in the Colorado Supreme Court. As a result, Coloradans will pay an extra $160 million for property taxes this year alone - and more than $1 billion over six years.

Thus emboldened, the 2009 legislature smashed another of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights' (TABOR) prohibitions by eliminating the general fund spending limit without a public vote. Although Colorado Revised Statutes specifically referred to this provision as a "limitation" on the general fund, Democrats and their attorneys argued that it was instead an "allocation strategy" and, therefore, not subject to TABOR's prohibition against weakening spending limits without a public vote.

In its ruling on the 2007 property tax hike, the supreme court also signaled lawmakers that other taxes could be raised, under the guise of eliminating tax exemptions, so long as they didn't exceed TABOR revenue limit. To Democrats, suddenly everything that wasn't already taxed was merely "exempted" and a target to be taxed. So in the middle of a recession, they raised taxes on Colorado families and businesses by $180 million over two years.

However, the greatest deception is the onslaught of taxes masquerading as fees. Generally, taxes - which, according to the constitution, can't be raised without voter approval - are collected broadly and can be spent for any purpose. Fees, however, were generally understood to cover the cost of a regulatory function or of administration (e.g., licensing or registration) for which the fee is assessed.

Democrats made no pretense that the largest of their fee increases merely cover administrative expenses. Ritter suggested that the primary criterion necessary for a tax to be considered a fee is a "direct relationship" between the payer of the fee and a government activity funded by the fee.

Under this construction, it seems obvious that a new "fee" on gasoline could be imposed without a public vote so long as revenues are dedicated exclusively to highway construction or repair.

The most egregious fee - a $600 million tax on hospital services - is assessed on "outpatient and inpatient services" and ultimately paid by patients or their insurers, who receive no direct benefit in return. Ironically, Democrats dubbed this legislation, the "Health Care Affordability Act."

Together these two fees when fully implemented are projected to raise a combined $850 million a year. With fees of this magnitude, voters may never again be asked to approve a genuine tax.

Democrat candidate for governor John Hickenlooper recently said, "I think if you put issues before the public, they'll decide if it's a worthwhile investment."

That's not the way Democrats have governed for the past four years. So why should Colorado voters trust Democrats when Democrats clearly don't trust voters?

If Dems prevail, no more voting on taxes

After imposing more than $1 billion a year in tax and fee increases - without once seeking voter approval - liberal Democrats in the Colorado legislature now want voters to permit them to raise taxes without limitation and without ever asking voters again. Can you say, "Oblivious to irony"?

Colorado's constitutional stipulates that taxes cannot be increased without asking the voters. But voters have an annoying habit of saying "no" to big-spending politicians who think their priorities are more important than those of the voters, so in just the past four years Democrats have:

· Increased vehicle licensing taxes by $40-$50 per vehicle per year, plus substantial penalties, and called them "fees" just so they didn't need to ask for voters' permission.

· Increased assorted taxes on Colorado families and businesses by $50 million last year and another $130 million this year, again without ever seeking voters' permission.

· Increased your property taxes by some $150 million this year alone, again without voter approval, calling that scheme the "Colorado Children's Amendment."

Apparently, liberals are betting that voters have a very short memory because, as you may recall, the 2007 Children's Amendment was touted as a "commitment to pre-school programs, full-day kindergarten and local school districts" and as a plan to prevent the State Education Fund from becoming insolvent, according to a press release from Gov. Bill Ritter.

Now, we're told, schools are on the brink of financial catastrophe and, oh by the way, the State Education Fund is broke anyway.

House Concurrent Resolution 1002 asks voters to exempt K-12 education and higher education - which account for 60 percent of state general fund spending - from all constitutional spending limits and from the requirement that tax increases must be approved by the voters.

Because money is fungible, it would eviscerate the last meaningful taxpayer protection in the state constitution.

To be sure, local school districts have had a couple tough budget years. But so has the State of Colorado and so have taxpaying families and businesses.

Despite numerous attempts to shield education from economic reality, the legislature's bag of tricks finally ran out this year along with taxpayers' money. Since voters adopted Amendment 23 ten years ago, in yet another plan to give schools all the money they need, schools have been exempted from the cuts that confronted the rest of the state budget.

Ten years ago, the state spent an average of $5,168 per pupil. In the recently-approved 2010-11 budget, the average is $7,279 - a cumulative increase of 40 percent.

Last year, even after the legislature rescinded $148 per student, schools still received an average increase of more than $200 per student over the previous year.

Despite two recessions in the last decade, per pupil spending has increased each and every year. That doesn't mean that schools haven't experienced increasing costs for health care, for energy and for funding retirement pensions or that the legislature hasn't cut back in other areas. However, these are conditions that businesses and families must manage as well - and they must do so without the power to tax.

Because it seeks to amend the state constitution, HCR 1002 needs a two-thirds majority in both the Colorado House and Senate. It will almost certainly fall short of that goal. However, proponents could put their proposal on the ballot via petition.

Selling it to voters will be an uphill climb, as proponents of Amendment 59 learned in 2008. That proposal, which sought to repeal parts of TABOR and Amendment 23, was far more even-handed, backed by more than $2 million and opposed by less than $50,000. Nonetheless, voters rejected it 54 to 45 percent.

The prospect that voters, whose trust of government is near an alltime low, would reward the tax hikers with even more power to tax is a longshot.

That liberal Democrats are so tone deaf that they are forging ahead anyway demonstrates their abject isolation from the financial hardships facing ordinary Coloradans.

Freedom rings at Tea Party

By Peg Brady (April 15) As I reached the already vast gathering at the Colorado State Capitol this morning, a speaker proclaimed, “Let freedom ring!” The crowd echoed his joyous words, [photopress:tparty_0415210a.JPG,thumb,pp_image]and the call for freedom did indeed ring across the thronged parkland. Sporting my “I Love TABOR” t-shirt (from Backbone Radio), I added my alto to their cheers.

Unnumbered bright yellow “Don’t Tread on Me” banners waved. Hand-painted posters declared people’s outrage and hope. § Read Hayak’s “Road to Serfdom” § Who is John Galt? § God only asks 10% § Capitalism creates jobs Socialism destroys them § No VAT § Give me liberty, not debt § November is coming

People from the Independence Institute circulated petitions in support of excluding Colorado from Obamacare. Matt Arnold fervently urged voters to “Clear the Bench” by unseating the four state supreme court justices seeking re-election, all liberals who believe themselves entitled to modify our Constitution through judicial rulings. Veterans and moms asked that we each take action.

By definition, we conservatives tend to be independent individuals, not much inclined to joining. That’s part of our personal strength, but it’s also a political weakness. At last, though, the tyranny and excessive taxation, the pointless spending frenzy, the attacks on liberty, the economy, reason and ethics have exceeded our quiet tolerance. We are on the move.

And I thanked God that we live in a blessed country where thousands of us can gather and declare our intent to defend our freedoms and regain our honor.

RTD tax hike? Clapp no, Sharpe maybe

Nancy Sharpe and Lauri Clapp both bring a fiscally conservative resume to the GOP primary for Arapahoe County commissioner, District 2. But when asked about RTD's upcoming tax-increase proposal at the Republican breakfast club on April 7, Greenwood Village Mayor Sharpe answered vaguely and left the door open, whereas former State Rep. Clapp answered in one word: "No." Sharpe's answer, expressing sympathy with her colleagues among the metro mayors who are counting on FasTracks being built as promised, even it takes higher taxes, reflected a government person's viewpoint. Clapp's reflected a taxpayer viewpoint and could give her an edge in the upcoming summer of fiscal fear and loathing, leading up to the Aug. 10 primary.

These aren't ordinary times. Freedom is near the tipping point. At every level of government, even a frontline service-delivery level such as this big suburban county, we need not just routine competency but fierce determination to force the tax-and-spend-and-borrowing beast back into its cage. As I said in my nominating speech for Lauri Clapp at the county assembly yesterday:

These are dark times for the form of self-government we cherish. We need our best team on the field. That's why I urge your support for my friend, my trusted legislative ally, and my fellow fighting conservative, Lauri Clapp, as our nominee for county commissioner. At this testing time, we need proven conservative leaders who can head off fiscal disaster and defeat progressive socialism. It all starts with local government. This is ground zero. We need a commissioner with the toughness, the principle, and the backbone of Lauri Clapp. She will guard the gate for taxpayers, jobs, and quality of life in this county.

Will Nancy Sharpe guard that gate? I don't know. She might or might not. But I am sure Lauri Clapp will.