Dec 29

The national impact of a Colorado court case

Who is in charge of the American republic?

 A case out of the federal district court of Colorado could answer that question, if the Supreme Court takes the matter up next spring.

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’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) has since given citizens the final say on new or increased taxes and spending.

That right, however, is now under threat from Kerr v. Hickenlooper , a lawsuit calling into question TABOR’s constitutionality. A federal appellate decision allowing this lawsuit to proceed is likely to reverberate in shockwaves throughout the nation.

Controversial from its inception, opponents of TABOR were concerned the law would make it more difficult for government to pursue costly new programs or to increase funding for existing programs. But the people spoke definitively when they adopted TABOR, both because it’s their tax dollars at stake and because they believed that government exists to serve their interests.

Not surprisingly — having lost in the court of public opinion — TABOR’s opponents have turned to lawsuits. They first brought suit in state court, arguing that TABOR’s fiscal limitations were somehow in conflict with the Colorado Constitution’s requirement that the state must provide adequate funding for public schools.

Never mind that TABOR allows schools to receive continued funding at existing levels, with annual adjustments for inflation and population growth. TABOR even allows for new or increased taxes when the citizens of the community approve the measure in a vote.

Continue reading

Nov 22

Kerr vs. Hickenlooper motion asking the Supreme Court to take up the appeal

Friends of TABOR,
Please recall that the US 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the “Fenster” lawsuit (“Kerr vs. Hickenlooper”) to declare TABOR unconstitutional under the US Constitution could move to the trial phase.  Attorney General John Suthers asked the US Supreme Court to review that case, arguing that such an issue is NOT for the courts to decide, but instead is a political issue.
 
Your TABOR Foundation (sister organization to the TABOR Committee) joined the national office of NFIB to file a friend-of-the-court brief (an amicus)  on the motion asking the Supreme Court to take up the appeal.  The arguments presented in this brief just nail the issue, and I am proud to be associated with this effort – I want to stop people in the street and show them what a great read this is (scroll down to page 17 to start).
 
If you have questions about the process or the content of what we are trying to accomplish, please know that you may contact me by email or by phone.
 
Penn Pfiffner
Chairman

Amicus for Petition US Supreme Ct