And what about TABOR?
The U.S. Supreme Court sent back to the Tenth Circuit Federal Court of Appeal the task of deciding Kerr v. Hickenlooper, a lawsuit calling into question TABOR’s constitutionality. The eventual decision is likely to reverberate throughout the nation, because it will answer a simple question: Who is in charge of the American republic?
In 1992 Coloradans voted to amend their state constitution in order to impose restraints on their government’s power to tax and spend. The Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) has since given citizens the final say on new or increased taxes and spending.
Opponents of TABOR, however, believe it makes it more difficult for government to pursue costly new programs, or to increase funding for existing programs, an argument they lost in the Colorado Supreme Court.
Safe to say, this will be the biggest decision any court will rule on this year relating to a state issue.
Colorado Springs City Council votes to put sales tax, TABOR measures on ballot
The bet was made during a protracted council meeting Tuesday, where citizens testified for hours on two resolutions, both of which won council approval on 8-1 votes.Colorado Springs City Council votes to put sales tax, TABOR measures on ballot
Councilwoman Helen Collins opposed the resolutions, which will place two items on the November ballot:Colorado Springs City Council votes to put sales tax, TABOR measures on ballot
– A request to keep $2.1 million in revenue that exceeded the limit under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). If the money is refunded, each household would get about $11. If the city keeps it, the money will go to parks and trails, both of which were hit hard by this year’s record rainfall.
The sales tax proposal won support from many, including council members known for anti-tax attitudes.
“It’s going to fail,” Bruce told the council. “Three months from now you’ll be looking at defeat because you don’t even understand the voters.”
He challenged the nine council members to “put your money where your mouth is,” betting them $100 each that the ballot issue will fail. Only Murray took the bet.
“I don’t like tax increases,” Councilman Andres Pico said. But three-fourths of the general fund goes to public safety, he said, and he’s not willing to cut that.
Senate is considering Taxpayer Bill of Rights rejected by 30 other states
Bill would lock in recession-era education cuts
Only Colorado has tried TABOR, with bad results
By Rob Christensen
It was only a matter of time before the libertarian wing of the Republican Party rolled out its latest weapon to, in the immortal words of Grover Norquist, shrink government “to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bath tub.”
That is the pleasantly sounding Taxpayer Protection Act that is making its way through the state Senate this week. The bill would put before voters a constitutional amendment that would cap the personal income tax at 5 percent, tie spending increases in the state to population growth and inflation, and create an emergency fund that would be spent only with a two-thirds vote in the legislature.
This legislation is designed to lock in what U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis called “the conservative revolution’’ in Raleigh by tying the hands of future legislatures to improve schools, universities and roads.
This type of legislation, most often called TABOR for Taxpayers Bill of Rights, has been championed in some 30 states across the country by conservative groups. The most notable is Americans for Prosperity and the American Legislative Exchange Council or ALEC.
But only one state, Colorado, has adopted a TABOR-type constitutional amendment, which it did in 1992, although it later suspended it for five years in response to a rapid decline in public services.
Senate Appropriations Committee co-chairs Brent Jackson of Sampson County and Bob Rucho of Mecklenburg County issued a joint statement defending TABOR-type legislation last week.
“The real danger to our state’s finances and reputation are irresponsible politicians who tax and spend beyond our means and who rack up too much debt,” they said. “Allowing North Carolinians to vote to keep politicians from going on wild spending sprees will clearly protect our state’s financial health.”
Jackson and Rucho seem confused. They must think they live in Illinois or California. Continue reading
Hickenlooper begins new state tour to sell TABOR fix
Continues push to exempt Colorado’s hospital provider fee
Posted: 07/31/2015 06:05:35 PM MDT
(Associated Press file)
LEADVILLE — On the first day of a new statewide tour, Gov. John Hickenlooper found an appropriate venue in this high mountain town for his push to revamp how the state spends money.
The Democrat stood on stage at the historic Tabor Opera House in Leadville and made a lengthy pitch for an overhaul to TABOR — the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.
Hickenlooper wants to exempt the hospital provider fee from state revenue collections under TABOR because it pushes Colorado over the constitutional cap, prompting taxpayer refunds next year even as the state struggles to adequately fund priority areas.
To read the rest of this article, click the following link:
Join Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Penn Pfiffner, former State Representative and TABOR Foundation Chairman, for an evening of informative discussion on our Colorado Economy and the Taxpayer Bill of Rights.
A light dinner and beverages will be served.
Pfiffner was a a proponent of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) served on TABOR Committee and taught Economics at college, graduate, and undergraduate levels for 13 years.
TABOR is an incredibly successful and commonsense approach to limiting government growth. Because of TABOR’s provisions, more than $3 billion has been refunded to Colorado taxpayers since its enactment in 1992.
Americans for Prosperity Foundation – Colorado
Wednesday, July 29, 2015 from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM (MDT)
South Metro Fire Rescue Authority
9195 E Mineral Ave
Centennial, CO 80112
(downstairs meeting room)
The town’s board of trustees in May passed an ordinance imposing a 10-cent charge on paper and plastic disposable bags used to carry purchases at point of sale at “any public commercial business engaged in the sale of personal consumer goods, household items, or groceries to customers who use or consume such items.”
Proponents call this bag charge a fee. But with even a little scrutiny, the ordinance is obviously a tax rather than a fee. The difference between the two is hugely significant. Fees can be passed by elected representatives, while under Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), new taxes must be approved by voters through the ballot.
Here’s what the Clorado Supreme Court had to say about the difference between a fee and a tax in the 2008 case Barber v. Ritter:
If the language discloses that the primary purpose for the charge is to finance a particular service utilized by those who must pay the charge, then the charge is a “fee.” On the other hand, if the language states that a primary purpose for the charge is to raise revenues for general governmental spending, then it is a tax.
The drafters of the ordinance were careful to include that “No disposable bag fees collected in accordance with this chapter shall be used only for general municipal or governmental purposes or spending.”
This apparently is Nederland’s clumsy justification, based on at least one part of the Supreme Court’s definition, that the bag charge isn’t a tax.
July 10, 2015 9:00 PM· By Peter Blake
Photo and copyright: Tony’s Takes
The courts keep knocking down TABOR-based lawsuits, but the tax law’s defenders keep coming back for more punishment.
Maybe they’ll win one someday. Hope can be found in a recent ruling in the TABOR Foundation’s lawsuit filed against the Colorado Bridge Enterprise in 2012, even though the foundation lost.
The CBE was established in 2009 by the General Assembly’s so-called “FASTER” Act as a “government-owned business” within the Colorado Department of Transportation. The additional bridge repairs were to be funded by increases averaging $41 in auto registration fees and much higher penalties for late payment.
The TABOR Foundation claimed they weren’t fees but taxes that voters weren’t given the opportunity to approve. What’s more, it said that the CBE didn’t qualify as a TABOR-exempt enterprise because it received more than 10 percent of its revenue from state grants.
The plaintiffs lost at the trial court, lost at the Colorado Court of Appeals and, the other day, the Colorado Supreme Court decided it wouldn’t even deign to review the case. Continue reading
Democrats want to get rid of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.
How does TABOR protect your personal and business interests?
Is there a legal difference between a “tax” and a “fee”?
What difference does it make to your bottom line?
William Perry Pendley is president of Mountain States Legal Foundation (MSLF), which defends constitutional liberties and the rule of law. His book, Sagebrush Rebel, Reagan’s Battle with Environmental Extremists and Why It Matters Today continues to draw rave reviews.
MSLF filed four lawsuits in defense of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). One was rejected by the Colorado Supreme Court, but two remain alive, and another was filed just days ago. Two of the cases ask the Supreme Court of Colorado to rule on whether the words “tax” and “fee” have legal meanings, or can they be used interchangeably to collect revenue without the consent of voters?
You need not be a member to attend. Lunch is $25 for non-members, $20 for members and $10 for students. A portion of the lunch fee goes toward the CRBC Small Donor Committee or the CRBC Political Committee to support Republican candidates in the 2016 elections.
RSVP@smallbizgop.com (not required, but appreciated).
Colorado Republican Business Coalition Monthly Luncheon
Friday, July 17 from 11:30am – 1pm
Brooklyn’s at the Pepsi Center
941 Auraria Parkway, Denver
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent order in the case against Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) is a devastating blow to those seeking to overturn that part of the state constitution. The Supreme Court’s order amounts to a polite directive to the lower court to dismiss the suit.
Colorado voters approved TABOR in 1992. It offers several protections for Colorado’s financial health. It allows voter review when legislative bodies pass increases in taxes or debt, or adopt unusually high increases in spending. Under TABOR, the state legislature and local councils continue to initiate all financial measures, but the people are allowed to review some of them.
Four years ago, 34 plaintiffs, including a handful of state lawmakers, sued in federal court to have TABOR declared void. They argued that allowing the people to` check the legislature’s financial powers violated the Guarantee Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That’s the section that says that “the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.”
To read the rest of this article, click the following link: