View Full Version : Colorado Sends TABOR To The Boneyard For Now
Bronco_Beerslug
11-02-2005, 02:47 PM
Republican Gov. Bill Owens crossed over to the democrats to suspend TABOR (Taxpayer's Bill of Rights). I think everyone is running out of money and this was probably the right thing to do.
----------------------------------------------------
Nov 2, 8:57 AM EST
Colo. voters suspend taxpayer rights bill
By STEVEN K. PAULSON
Associated Press Writer
DENVER (AP) -- Colorado residents have voted to suspend their Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, the strictest government spending limit in the nation, and give up more than $3 billion in tax refunds to help the state bounce back from a recession.
Fiscal conservatives were dismayed at the outcome Tuesday night and worried about its impact on other states considering similar spending limits.
But supporters said Colorado couldn't afford to vote no, not with higher education, health care and transportation already suffering from millions of dollars in budget cuts.
"It means we can join 49 other states recovering from the recession, we can make up some of the cuts," said Republican Gov. Bill Owens, who stunned his own party by joining Democrats in crafting the ballot measure.
Douglas Bruce, an anti-tax crusader who wrote the 1992 Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, said Colorado voters caved in to government pressure.
Tuesday's vote makes it harder now for other states to cap spending, he said. California, Kansas, Ohio, Maine, Nevada, Oklahoma and Arizona all are considering new limits.
"The establishment is going to say we had 13 years of experience with spending limits and we changed our minds. I'm sorry for their sake and I'm sorry for our sake," Bruce said.
With 99 percent of the expected vote counted statewide, 575,352 voters, or 52 percent, had approved the plan, compared with 531,791, or 48 percent, who voted against it.
(CONTINUED)
http://tinyurl.com/77sw7
Republican Gov. Bill Owens crossed over to the democrats to suspend TABOR (Taxpayer's Bill of Rights). I think everyone is running out of money and this was probably the right thing to do.
TABOR isn't suspended, really. It's still in the Colorado Constitution.
However, Referendum C eviscerated it for the next five years. One of the biggest mistakes on the part of voters in recent memory.
When Ref C expires (yeah, right) we'll be hit up for more of our hard-earned cash, guaranteed. For some reason, the Colorado state government thinks it needs more and more taxpayer money each year - above what TABOR allows (inflation + population growth).
The state of Colorado isn't "running out of money" - not by a long shot. Those who voted "Yes" on this tax increase will regret it - I also guarantee than in five years, nothing that this tax increase will supposedly fix will be fixed in any way, shape, or form. We got conned by the politicos and the Statists. It's an embarrassment.
alkemical
11-02-2005, 03:23 PM
W*GS - in PA there is a group trying to get TABoR - and it's really moving steam since our PA leg. won't repeal their payraise after a nice petition drive and the local media is hammering them.
Bronco_Beerslug
11-02-2005, 03:48 PM
TABOR isn't suspended, really. It's still in the Colorado Constitution.
However, Referendum C eviscerated it for the next five years. One of the biggest mistakes on the part of voters in recent memory.
When Ref C expires (yeah, right) we'll be hit up for more of our hard-earned cash, guaranteed. For some reason, the Colorado state government thinks it needs more and more taxpayer money each year - above what TABOR allows (inflation + population growth).
The state of Colorado isn't "running out of money" - not by a long shot. Those who voted "Yes" on this tax increase will regret it - I also guarantee than in five years, nothing that this tax increase will supposedly fix will be fixed in any way, shape, or form. We got conned by the politicos and the Statists. It's an embarrassment.
Damn! That's what I said last Nov.
Rascal
11-02-2005, 04:00 PM
From what I've read the TABOR was BS plan to begin with.
Just like the water usage program, they based their numbers when they were at the highest instead of the norm. Well guess what, when you go back to normal times and especially a recession you run out of water/money.
Owens gets an A+ on this one IMO.
Billy Clyde Puckett
11-02-2005, 07:01 PM
I don't have a problem if the state needs more money but I get pissed off that the guys we pay to represent us refuse to come up with a real solution and just pass the problem off to the next administration.
I don't have a problem if the state needs more money but I get pissed off that the guys we pay to represent us refuse to come up with a real solution and just pass the problem off to the next administration.
Bingo.
The State doesn't need more taxpayer money. Period.
From what I've read the TABOR was BS plan to begin with.
Wrong. TABOR allowed state revenue to grow at population growth + inflation as a maximum.
Just like the water usage program, they based their numbers when they were at the highest instead of the norm. Well guess what, when you go back to normal times and especially a recession you run out of water/money.
The Colorado state government ran out of nothing, except the thirst of politicians to spend our money. That truly never runs out.
Owens gets an A+ on this one IMO.
He already had an "F" in my book - his unprincipled support of C and D just reinforced my estimation that he's been a total failure. But, he is a politician, and that's to be expected. At least his chances to go any higher in the Republican hierarchy have been badly damaged, so it's unlikely he'll be inflicted on anyone else.
Rohirrim
11-03-2005, 10:57 AM
Gee, you mean ideological purity won't build a road? Or a schoolhouse? Who'd a thunk it?
Gee, you mean ideological purity won't build a road? Or a schoolhouse? Who'd a thunk it?
There's no shortage of Colorado state government funds for either roads or schoolhouses. I see you've bought into the myths always advanced by politicians and government bureaucrats - without (nearly) unrestrained funding growth, we're rushing headlong into the Dark Ages.
Rohirrim
11-03-2005, 03:21 PM
There's no shortage of Colorado state government funds for either roads or schoolhouses. I see you've bought into the myths always advanced by politicians and government bureaucrats - without (nearly) unrestrained funding growth, we're rushing headlong into the Dark Ages.
Seems to me that the voters passed C (with its built-in five year limit) and defeated D, which means they have no intention of allowing "unrestrained" funding growth. Of course, to the ideologues like Bruce, Norquist and obviously, you, all spending is bad spending, all politicians are crooks, and all bureaucracies are evil and if only we would drown government in a bathtub all our ills would be healed and bliss would descend upon us all. Perhaps we're finally coming through the crucible of fanatics, and as a society, we can make the kinds of decisions we feel are prudent, while ignoring completely the nattering of the fringes.
Seems to me that the voters passed C (with its built-in five year limit) and defeated D, which means they have no intention of allowing "unrestrained" funding growth.
To folks like you, TABOR is anathema.
Of course, to the ideologues like Bruce, Norquist and obviously, you, all spending is bad spending, all politicians are crooks, and all bureaucracies are evil and if only we would drown government in a bathtub all our ills would be healed and bliss would descend upon us all.
Can I make a strawman too? Let's see:
Of course, to ideologues like you, all spending is good spending, all politicians are honest, all bureaucracies are full of diligent hard-working public servants, and if we would only turn over what's left of our rights to government all our ills would be healed and bliss would descend upon us all.
Did I do good?
When are liberals such as yourself gonna get the hint that ever-expanding government (what even TABOR allows) never works? That the cries of "crumbling roads, disintegrating schools, no cops" is a form of blackmail?
Do you send in more money than you're legally obligated to pay in taxes? If not, why not?
Perhaps we're finally coming through the crucible of fanatics, and as a society, we can make the kinds of decisions we feel are prudent, while ignoring completely the nattering of the fringes.
Ahh yes - what LABF calls "controversializing the accuser". Thanks for sinking to his level.
You're getting the government you deserve - good and hard. Don't come crying to me about how it's not working like you expected, next month, or next year, or in five years, when C "expires" and we still have lousy schools, potholed roads, and the politicians have managed to waste billions and gotten nothing that they promised, delivered. That's the kind of "I told you so" that I don't enjoy giving.
Rohirrim
11-03-2005, 08:17 PM
In even clearer language: The majority of Americans, politically, are in the middle. The moderates. They know that there are problems in government, economics, the environment, education, health care, etc. etc. etc. What they don't believe in is the "End All" ideology that will fix it all in one fell swoop. They know that no such solution exists in the real world. So, they are willing to hammer away piece by piece. This is the hard work in the trenches that, over time, changes the world. They're willing to vote for C and give it a shot. If their representatives screw it up, they're willing to toss them out, freeze the tax, and try something else.
Unfortunately, they also have to contend with the wide-eyed zealots like Dubya who truly believe that their ideology will bring about some kind of utopia if they could just overturn the whole existing order and replace it with their brilliant vision of how life should be; the Marx's of the world. The tell, or the revealing characteristic of the zealot, is his complete lack of pragmatism.
It's easy to attack what exists while hyping a vision of what does not exist. The reality of existing conditions is concrete and vulnerable to criticism, while the utopian's dream world is crystalline, immutable, and unassailable. And if at some point that vision is implemented, and fails miserably, then it's the fault of the implementers, not the vision. Never the vision. Thus does the neocon stay energized. And the Libertarian. Their Emerald Cities are impervious to decay, existing as they do, in the imagination only.
We've been fortunate to have this democracy that has lasted more than 200 years. It works reasonably well, but there are kinks. There always have been. If we stay true to the founders' original vision, we may be able to work out the kinks along the way and, who knows, perfect this democracy. Calls to drown it now are a little premature, regardless of the crystalline vision that spawn them.
What I wonder about the sort of "pragmatism" you describe is why it continues to advocate failed ideas. Is there some aspect of throwing more of our money at government this time that will work, compared to all the past instances in which it didn't work?