Colorado

GOP shapes 'Contract for Colorado'

State Republican leaders are said to be near agreement on a center-right campaign agenda for turning Colorado around in 2010. According to a Mike Rosen column yesterday and a Denver Post story today, the "Contract for Colorado" would include: • A commitment to limit taxes and state spending.

• Rescinding the Ritter executive order unionizing state employees.

• Requiring employers to participate in the federal e-verify program for new hires.

• Establishment of a state "rainy day" fund.

• Responsible development of renewable energy and Colorado's abundant oil and natural gas resources as well as nuclear energy.

• Appointing conservative judges to balance the court and reign in judicial activism.

• Expanding school choice through additional charter schools and education vouchers.

• Reversing property tax and auto registration taxes.

. Banning taxpayer funding for abortion agencies like Planned Parenthood, in pursuance of general statement of principle defending the sanctity of human life.

How strongly will Scott McInnis speak out for these goals in the campaign and fight for them if elected? What will his erstwhile rivals, Josh Penry and Tom Tancredo, do to McInnis to the contract? Will a broad alliance of GOP candidates for state House and Senate line up with the contract as well?

Important questions, all of them, and impossible to answer at this early date. But this is a step in the right direction. Stay tuned.

Ritter's 'freeze' more of a slushie

Walk into a typical third grade classroom, and most students can explain what means to "freeze" something. They can explain that when water freezes it becomes ice and is solid. "Little Billie" Ritter may have missed those lessons because, as governor, he regularly demonstrates a poor grasp of elementary science.

Remember in 2007, when Gov. Ritter and Democrats in the state legislature voted to "freeze" property taxes? Now, as most anyone who owns property can tell you, taxes haven't been frozen at all.

Instead, Ritter froze the mill levy portion of your tax bill which had formerly been allowed to decline so that property taxes didn't escalate as rapidly as property values.

And of course Ritter and his Democrat allies did this without even the "courtesy" of a public vote, despite a state constitutional requirement than any tax policy change that increases revenue must be submitted to voters.

The state supreme court's balderdash that collecting more taxes really isn't the same as a tax increase doesn't make the $150 million cost to taxpayers any easier to swallow.

Ritter's recent encounter with linguistic frostbite started last fall when, after months of denying that the state's budget was speeding toward a cliff, he announced a "budget contingency plan" that included, quoting his own press release, "implementing a hiring freeze for the Executive Branch effective Oct. 1."

Now it turns out, this freeze was more of a "slushie."

In January, Denver Post's Jessica Fender reported that despite Ritter's claims that the hiring freeze had saved $12 million, "a review of hundreds of applications for exemptions shows that in three months, Ritter's office approved 326 new hires and promotions - out of 371 requests - that could cost the state more than $12 million."

Now, more than a year after the freeze was proclaimed, KMGH 7News's Arthur Kane and John Ferrugia report that a state personnel database shows 2,300 new state employees hired.

Ritter's chief of staff, Jim Carpenter, says the actual number is 1,454 but concedes, when questioned by Ferrugia, that "during the freeze, the number of employees actually went up."

Analysis of the "database shows that in the three months before the (freeze), the state hired about 1,300 people and in the last three months of the freeze the state hired about 1,100 employees," KMGH reports.

Maybe the governor can blame global warming for turning his hiring slushie into, at most, a cool breeze.

Sen. Al White, a Republican member of the Joint Budget Committee who is quite measured in second-guessing the governor, said that had Ritter's office managed its hiring practices more effectively, "we may not have had to make some of the more dire cuts" necessary to balance the state's budget.

Unfortunately, Ritter and his administration have never been adept at managing the state's money, and no evidence suggests that they have learned from their mistakes.

Ritter has signed three state budgets, each adding at least 1,450 new state employees, despite budget woes. By comparison, Gov. Bill Owens, who also endured some tough budget years, signed two budgets that actually reduced the number of state employees below the previous year's level.

As late as December 2008, Ritter's budget office grossly underestimated the looming budget shortfall, and even now, his administration somehow imagines $783 million more in tax revenues over the next three years, compared to more conservative projections by the legislature's economists.

Ritter refused to throw his political clout behind proposals to build a state budget reserve fund when revenues were strong. But when revenues were already declining, he called for creation of an "unprecedented" new budget reserve.

Given his poor understanding of things physic and fiscal, perhaps the governor's next move will be to institute a spending "freeze." If so, expect spending to instead accelerate even faster.

The Case for TABOR

By Bill Moloney States with constitutional and/or statutory restraints on taxing and spending have strong financial foundations because those restraints greatly militate toward the positive business climate and robust economy that invariably generate increased revenues across the board. Colorado, which has had such restraints since 1992, is a prime example of their great benefits. California -- today having the nation’s most disastrous state economy -- once had such restraints but cast them aside some years ago and consequently has become the poster child for what happens to states that fall into the trap of unrestrained taxing and spending. Editor: Last week, contributor Bill Moloney took the TABOR success story on a speaking tour of Maine, where taxpayer advocates are fighting for passage of a similar amendment on Nov. 3. Here is the rest of his message from that trip:

Prior to my decade as Colorado’s Education Commissioner I served as a senior school administrator in five other states-Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland- and in all of them had extensive experience regarding the interplay of taxation and spending and how they impacted the financial health of my district, and the state as a whole. These experiences over thirty years in rural, suburban, and urban settings led me to the firm convictions stated above.

In a nation wracked by recession, ballooning budget deficits and soaring public debt the issue of fiscal restraint has an urgency greater than at any time in our history.

Attempts to promote fiscal restraint through constitutional or statutory means however have been a guarantee of bitter political conflict in every state they have occurred.

An ordinary citizen might ask: “Who would be against fiscal restraint, particularly in these perilous economic times?”

The answer is: All special interests that profit greatly from unchecked taxing and spending, most prominently giant labor unions like the National Education Association (NEA), and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

The main tactics of these special interests opposing efforts at fiscal restraint are always the same i.e. Predict devastating hardship if voters or legislators irresponsibly support mechanisms of fiscal restraint, and flood the state with money from their national organizations to be spent on saturation media advertising, direct mail etc. aimed at scaring people about the dire consequences of any legal barriers to unchecked taxing and spending.

The dire consequences are skillfully invented and invariably include impoverished schools (“This will hurt the little children”) and the disappearance of critical public services like Meals on Wheels (“This will hurt the poor senior citizens”).

These tactics are the equivalent of resisting restraints on a local school budget by threatening the abolition of the band and the football team. Amazingly when citizens restrain the budget anyways the band and the football team somehow survive thus exposing the scare tactics as just that.

In 1992 when Colorado voters were presented with a constitutional amendment- Taxpayers Bill of Rights(TABOR)- to limit the growth of state revenue and spending to the sum of inflation plus population growth they were bombarded with special interest media advertisements predicting a doom and gloom economic future if TABOR passed.

When the voters went ahead and passed TABOR not only did the “dire consequences” fail to occur but instead Colorado entered a period of economic growth and prosperity unequalled in its history.

Since 1992 Colorado has gone from a boom-and- bust-prone economy overly dependent on the energy industry to one that is much more stable, balanced, and diversified. This rapid transformation derived from the state’s growing reputation as a low tax business and investment friendly environment that was generating economic opportunity for companies and citizens alike. A particular success story was the burgeoning high tech industry that ironically owed much of its rapid growth to companies fleeing Silicon Valley owing to California’s steady undermining of those very same fiscal restraints that had been a model for Colorado’s TABOR law.

Among the principal beneficiaries of this new prosperity were the schools of Colorado which had known wide spread hardship during the energy industry bust of the nineteen eighties. After 1992 school district revenues surged owing to the growth and job creation fueling local and state prosperity in the wake of TABOR.

Today following the national economic meltdown of 2008 Colorado is facing the same kind of severe challenges as every other state. However, absolutely none of those challenges are traceable to TABOR.

On the contrary because of the enduring benefits of TABOR Colorado’s economic challenges are markedly less than most other states, and disproportionally less than those states-like California- which have ignored the clear track record and economic wisdom of fiscal restraint.

William Moloney was Colorado Education Commissioner,1997-2007, and is now an international education consultant as well as a Centennial Institute Fellow. His columns have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, Baltimore Sun, Rocky Mountain News and the Denver Post. His e-mail address is moloneyvision@aol.com

Maes: Institution meets revolution

Editor: The most provocative comment on current politics that I've seen from any GOP 2010 candidate is this one from Dan Maes, the Evergreen businessman and darkhorse rival for the gubernatorial nomination against heavyweights Scott McInnis and Josh Penry. Unhampered by playing the percentages as the "favorites" for Governor and Senator have to do (or think they have to), Maes in this mass email of mid-September thinks aloud about the meaning of 2009 grassroots upheavals for Republican-politics-as-usual. Congratulations on your candor and realism here, Dan. The race could get a lot more interesting before our nominees are chosen. Who Can Unify the Institution and the Revolution? By Dan Maes (dan@danmaes.com)

The harvest is ready and the workers are few. Who can get the job done?

The Democrats, liberals, progressives or whatever name they go by these days, have awakened the sleeping giant of the silent majority and a conservative revolution is upon us. In my now over 30,000 miles of campaign travel I have seen this revolution in the form of Tea Parties, new grass roots organizations like 9.12, I Caucus, ROAR America, Liberty on the Rocks, R Block Party, and others all around the state by names unique to their own region.

A clear message has been articulated and that is "Enough is Enough" of the recent and not so recent sins of our fathers in both parties. Generally speaking members of these groups want to be republicans but the sour taste of the sins is still wearing off. They want new and fresh faces in their candidates and anyone that has any similarity to a lawyer or "career politician" may as well pack their bags and go home if these folks have anything to say about it. They want common sense candidates and leadership that truly represents them and not party or special interests.

Now, enter the Republican party activists to the harvest field. Their mission is admirable and one that struggles with history that is hard to avoid. Candidates that have "carried the water" seem to get the nod whether they are really the best qualified or not. I can state first hand that state party chairman Dick Wadhams has, and continues to, made every effort to keep the candidate field open and fair. But can we as traditionalists, and a broken party of the past, break with it and move forward? We can and must!

Can we actually look to a candidate that meets the needs of both the party insitution and the conservative revolution? It will take some give and take on both sides but if it can be done it will lead to an overwhelming victory in 2010 at the state and national levels. If not, are we in for a long and ugly future of more taxes and fees, new energy job loss, and liberal agendas politically and socially?

So the question now becomes the challenge....which candidate(s) can beat Bill Ritter and all the other state and federal democrats by honoring and unifying the institution and the revolution? I am one of them.

Dan Maes Republican Candidate for Governor www.danmaes.com 303-670-2010

Grand Jct. reacts to Obama - 2

Editor: More first-person color from a participant in Saturday's presidential visit to Grand Junction. The author is Kathleen Baker of Denver. Hat tipto cyber-activists Ron Michel and Fred Holden for passing it along. ==========================

Many of you asked for details of yesterday's protest in Grand Junction, so here is my personal account.

For those of you that don't know Grand Junction, it is the largest town in western Colorado with a population of 48,000. It sits about halfway between Denver and Salt Lake City, both of which are about a four-hour drive. Between Grand Junction and SLC, there is basically nothing. Between Denver and GJ, there are small mountain and resort communities about every twenty to thirty minutes.In other words, there is not a huge population base from which to draw protestors.

From 10 am to 11:30 yesterday, the Grand Junction citizens held a well organized rally at a park a couple miles from the high school where the townhall was held.They asked everyone to sign a registration card so they could have an accurate count of attendance. There were more than 4,000. (That's huge for a town with 48,000 residents.) This is hearsay, but I later heard that out of those 4,000, only three "won" tickets to the townhall.

I spent the majority of my time manning a petition table for a man I met there. The petitions were for amendments to be on the Colorado ballot to limit taxation. Local leaders, I would recommend helping to get signatures: wwww.cotaxreform.com, www.limitpropertytax.com, www.limitCOdebt.com.

I did not see any reporters from the national or Denver news organizations. There appeared to be a reporter from the GJ station. There were also newspaper reporters, one of which I know was from SLC. However, the big players did not appear to be there.

After the rally, there was a break until 3:00. I went to lunch with several representatives of 912 groups from the Front Range area. Then a member of the local group that sponsored the protest invited us to her home until the protest began. On the way to the protest, we saw Air Force One land. It was a strange feeling to see this American icon while detesting the occupant inside.

Now for the protest and all the baloney that goes with this administration. They told everyone the motorcade would be following a certain route. MoveOn or ACORN or whatever group organized the other side reserved the space and set up their protest there. We lined up the other side of the street. (it reminded me of the Revolutionary War where the Patriots and Red Coats faced each other in battle. :-) We way outnumbered them. They were bussed in from Denver. The bus was in plain site, and I passed it while I was driving home. There were also the usual professionally printed signs. It was a typical counter protest of both sides chanting back and forth. The woman on our side with the bullhorn was pretty funny.

It was pretty obvious to me the way it was set up that the motorcade wasn't going to drive down a road lined with counter protestors. The thing that made me angry was they told the Central High School Band they were going to play for it. The kids sat there in the hot sun waiting, and he sneak in another entrance. Those kids were incredibly dejected. It's one thing to sneak past demonstrators but to lie to those kids like that shows what type of character he has.

I don't know how many protestors were there as the rally people split up to different parts of town to protest the motorcade. I do know there were several people there from Denver that missed the earlier rally. There were lots of people filming it, but once again, I didn't see any major players from the media.

So this is where it got funny. Since the ACORN people were bussed in from Denver, they didn't know the high school. Our side had the real protestors who had graduated from there, so they figured out which entrance he used. We all wanted to move to that entrance so when he left, he would see us. However, we didn't want ACORN to follow us. So over a 45-minute period we slowly trickled over there. The front line of our group would keep chanting while the others left. (It was a bit like the Sound of Music.) They had no idea. We were trying to make it look like people were slowly going home. A GJ couple from our side who hadn't been informed of the plan said all of a sudden no one on our side was there. (They were smart and realized we had all moved to another location, so they went looking for us. The ACORNers were too dumb to realize what we had done.)

Anyway, after our little covert operation we had restaged ourselves with only a few socialist demonstrators at the entrance. We were pretty proud of ourselves. :-) This made it perfect for when he came out in his motorcade. We shouted over and over "No you can't!" which turned into the most loud, emotional boo I've ever heard. It was great. It was such a wonderful feeling to be so close to him and to know that he could hear us booing him.

Another thing I wanted to note was a rather strange experience between the police and us. After we had restaged ourselves, the local police guarding the parking lot all of a sudden lined up in a row, riot style (legs spread apart, arms behind the back). It was odd, and the entire angry mob became silent and turned their bodies to look at them. The thing was we intimidated them by our reaction. They all looked at each other and you could see they realized they were us. We were not the enemy. We were their friends and neighbors. Then they quickly retreated and went into a little circle.

Finally, I would like to give some hints to others who may protest BO in the future. They set us up by stating which entrance he was coming in and planting his supporters and the marching band there. They aren't going to drive a presidential motorcade down a street lined with protestors. They are going to bring him in an entrance where the entire block (including sidewalks) is blocked off. Before a protest, have organizers scout the location and see what areas are COMPLETELY blocked off from pedestrians and where there is a substantial higher amount of police. One woman I met when we restaged who had been at the entrance the entire time said they had done that and that's how they figured out which entrance he was using. Be in charge of the situation. We were laughing after restaging because we know (there and across the country) we are always one step ahead of them.

It was a great day, and I met a lot of wonderful people. It made me proud to be an American.