How about learning more on a subject that saves you money and stops the explosive growth of government spending?
You’ve heard of TABOR (The Taxpayers Bill Of Rights), haven’t you?
It’s been in the news quite a bit lately.
Why not use the TABOR Speakers Bureau for your next meeting?
We take the time to explain “what” TABOR is along with what it does—or doesn’t do, “how” it works, “why” it’s so important to Colorado, “when” Coloradans get TABOR refunds, and “how” it impacts you. Continue reading
June 22, 2017 9:58 AM· By Brian Vande Krol
Little ole Colorado, you’ve done well for yourself. You were a collection of cow towns when I first moved here in 1988. It was said that yogurt was the only culture in Colorado, and cowboys don’t eat yogurt.
Colorado is wealthy. Not DC wealthy, but quite a step up from the late 80’s. We rank 11th for median household income, have the 10th lowest unemployment rate, and the 14th lowest poverty rate. We have the Denver Performing Arts Center, and a growing system of subsidized trains. Colorado is also healthy, ranking 10th.
One reason we have done well is our restrained state government. With our balanced budget requirement and the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), government has a tough time taking more of our money. That means greater economic growth.
But 70% of our state’s roads and bridges are in poor or mediocre condition, and getting worse. And, despite all that wealth and health, 1 in 4 Coloradans depend on the government for healthcare (Medicaid). The legislature wants more of your money, and is willing to close down hospitals to keep it.
The most cynical move of all
The legislature argued for several years about the Hospital Provider Fee, an $800 million program, claiming it is solely responsible for exceeding TABOR revenue limits, a situation that would require refunds to taxpayers. (Yes, it’s actually a tax. They just call it a fee so they don’t have to ask permission to take the money.) But every revenue source is equally to blame for exceeding the limit. To appease their insatiable appetite for more revenue, the legislature moved the program out of the general fund so it is not subject to the revenue limits. This is a crafty, deceptive scheme to avoid asking permission from voters to take more money, and to avoid refunding excess collections. They threatened to close rural hospitals if they didn’t get their way.
TABOR requires a change to the revenue limit if a program’s costs are moved off the books. It also requires TABOR to be interpreted to “reasonably restrain most the growth of government.” Instead of lowering the limit by $800 million, it was lowered only $200 million, resulting in a permanent $600 million per year tax increase. (The $800 million will still be spent, but outside of the budget, leaving more room in the budget, and more taxpayer dollars to be taken and spent.) Senate President Kevin Grantham (R, Canon City) believes that as long as there is a change, he has met the constitutional requirement. Continue reading
“But the biggest agreement of the day came on SB 267, a bill that attempts to meet several of the most crucial needs in Colorado — increased road funding, stabilized funding for rural hospitals, a boost in funding for rural schools — as it also allows for more spending room in future budgets.
Several House Republicans blasted the bill, which largely was crafted by Republican Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg of Sterling. They said it violated the Taxpayer’s Bills of Rights by not reducing the TABOR spending cap by as much as the cost of the roughly $800 million hospital provider fee program that it took out from under the cap and made into an enterprise.
Rep. Tim Leonard, R-Evergreen, said it also violated the legislative requirement to limit all bills to a single subject, even as it seemed to try to fill the needs of many sectors to grow their government funding.
“We work for the people,” Leonard told House members. “We do not work for the recipients of government money waiting for the trough to fill up with taxpayer money.”
But a number of other Republicans, who largely represent rural areas or are considered more moderate members of their caucus, said they backed the measure because the spending recipients needed the boost. They echoed arguments from the Colorado Hospital Association that between six and 12 rural hospitals could close if they lost the money originally projected to be taken from them in order to balance the budget next year.
And several blasted conservative organizations who have criticized them for going along with the plan, saying they are out of touch with constituents’ needs and are making the Legislature a place that is run by fear.
“I know by the time I get back to my desk, the Facebook posts will start. We’ve heard them already: ‘Squish, RINO,’” said Rep. Lois Landgraf, R-Fountain, referring to the acronym some groups give to elected officials they consider to be Republican In Name Only.
“What’s not OK is that by the time I walk out of here, I will have earned myself a primary. But I am happy to be a ‘yes’ vote.”“
Over the course of a turbulent 13-hour final day of the 2017 session Wednesday, the Colorado Legislature passed one the most wide-ranging omnibus spending bills in recent memory and then killed off the vast majority of functions of the Colorado Energy Office.
The 120th day of the first session of the 71st General Assembly began with broad bipartisan support over Senate Bill 267, a measure that saves Colorado hospitals from $528 million in funding cuts, dedicates $1.88 billion to highway projects, pares Medicaid spending and offers a personal property tax credit to businesses for their first $18,000 worth of business equipment.
– LEGISLATURE’S LAST DAY: Click above for Kathleen Lavine’s look at the session’s conclusion.
Despite protests from some Republicans that some of its spending maneuvers were unconstitutional, nearly half of the caucus joined with House Democrats in passing the bill by a 49-16 margin and sending it onto Gov. John Hickenlooper.
But that was about the only kumbaya moment of a day that descended into endless negotiations and then finger-pointing over two issues key to businesses in rural Colorado.
By the time the state House of Representatives adjourned at 9:39 p.m., the Legislature had rolled back a bill to increase funding for rural broadband.
No gas for Energy Office
They also had failed to pass a reauthorization bill for the Colorado Energy Office, meaning that the majority of the office’s functions and its 24-person staff will disappear July 1. Continue reading
Yesterday, a district court judge dismissed a lawsuit brought forward by Democratic state Sen. Andy Kerr, who is running to replace fellow Democrat Ed Perlmutter. The ruling was a huge victory for taxpayers and the lawsuit was the height of hubris by Kerr and Company. Here’s what we wrote about the lawsuit last month, when Kerr announced his run for Governor:
“The case has not been resolved and is still working its way through the court system, but the crux of the case is that Andy Kerr, represented by liberal U.S. Rep. Diana Degette’s husband Lino Lipinsky, believes that TABOR, or the taxpayer bill of rights, violates a representative government. Has Kerr been a passionate advocate for representative government in the past? No. In essence, he’s searching for any reason to undermine TABOR. Here’s what the Denver Post‘s then-editorial page editor, Vincent Carroll, wrote in 2013 about the case:
“They wish to be the sole authority in Colorado on ‘all questions [my emphasis] of timing, method, nature, purpose, extent, and priority with respect to the imposition of taxes or the appropriation of funds.’
“They say this in a legal brief filed recently in support of a lawsuit urging federal courts to strike down the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights as an unconstitutional infringement on legislative power.”
This is just disgusting. Given his obvious attempt at a power grab, Kerr should be rejected by any voter that does not consider him or herself a radical leftist. Here’s what Senate President Kevin Grantham had to say about the ruling:
“Senate Republicans applaud the district court’s decision to dismiss this case, which clearly was aimed at end-running and undermining, through sly legal maneuvers, the will of voters who wrote TABOR into the State Constitution. If TABOR foes are sure Coloradans no longer support the taxpayer protections and fiscal discipline TABOR provides, they should stop waging these guerilla wars and put a repeal measure on the ballot. They don’t do so because they know Coloradans continue to support the spirit and letter of this law.”
Grantham is right. Leftists don’t have the votes to pass this ill-advised potential ballot initiative, and Coloradans love the idea that TABOR represents. This blatant cash grab should be enough to disqualify Kerr from higher office.
DENVER (AP) — A federal judge has dismissed a long-running lawsuit challenging Colorado’s strict tax and spending limits as unconstitutional but more appeals are possible.
U.S. District Judge Raymond Moore ruled Thursday that none of the former or current elected officials, educators or citizens challenging the 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill or Rights or TABOR have proved they were harmed by it. As a result, he said they don’t have the right to challenge the voter-approved measure in court.
TABOR also requires tax increases to be approved by voters. Challengers say that violates the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees a republican form of government in each state where elected officials make decisions.
The lawsuit was filed in 2011. Along the way, part of it was considered by the U.S. Supreme Court, which sent the case back to court in Denver.
DENVER – The six-year fight over whether Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) violates state and federal laws came close to a possible end Thursday, when a U.S. District Court of Colorado judge dismissed the latest appeal and ordered the case be closed entirely.
The latest court actions from the federal district court came after the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the district court’s earlier decision that the plaintiffs in the case – which included numerous former and current state legislators, teachers and various city and county jurisdictions and departments – had standing in the case. The 10th Circuit sent the decision back to district court last June.
But the 10th Circuit’s decision came after the U.S. Supreme Court had sent the circuit court’s decision back to it in 2015, following a ruling in a similar case out of Arizona. Continue reading
What you need to know about the bill Colorado lawmakers are “screaming” about behind closed doors
The latest proposal includes a larger co-pay for Medicaid patients, $1.8 billion for state road repairs
The final stretch of the Colorado legislative session is becoming a must-watch political theater — with huge stakes.
Republican and Democratic leaders are negotiating behind closed doors on a far-reaching spending overhaul designed to erase a half-billion-dollar financial hit to hospitals
Senate President Pro Tem Jerry Sonnenberg, a Republican, unveiled early Monday what he believed was an agreement on the legislationonly to receive a note moments later from Democrats calling off the deal.
Colorado Senate Republican leaders said Monday they are close to agreeing to a deal that would save more than half-a-billion dollars in proposed funding cuts for statewide hospitals.
The deal would also offer up a $37 million business personal-property tax cut and clear space in future budgets for transportation and education funding hikes.
The deal on Senate Bill 267 was so close, in fact, that co-sponsoring Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, had passed out a bullet-point sheet describing the details of the deal and had begun to inform a media briefing about the plan Monday morning when he received a note from co-sponsoring Senate Minority Leader Lucia Guzman telling him that the Denver Democrat was pulling back from what he’d described as a “handshake agreement.”
Surprised, Sonnenberg said he would sit down again with Guzman and with the bipartisan House sponsors of SB 67 and hoped to come up with a deal in the next week.
The biggest sticking point between Republicans and Democrats remains Republicans’ insistence on including efforts to slow the growth of Medicaid costs that include an increase on co-pays by Medicaid recipients.
The issue first surfaced when House Republicans tried to increase co-pays during the budget debate and put the savings for the state to transportation funding — an effort blocked by Democrats who insisted the budget would not be balanced on the backs of the poorest and sickest state residents.
The bill, put forth as a way to forgo a proposed $528 million in funding cuts via the hospital-provider fee, has always been a complex piece of legislation that also seeks to increase funding for rural roads and schools and to cut state funding across the board in order to help for that re-prioritizing.
But it took on an even greater diversity of topics over the past week, when Sonnenberg added a long-sought business personal property tax cut to offset what he called his concessions on lowering the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights cap in order to offset the money being taken out for the hospital provider fee. Continue reading