Amplify’d from www.denverpost.com

Armageddon on Colorado ballots

Voters should soundly reject Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 and 61, cynical measures that would cause fiscal devastation.

Three measures on this fall's Colorado ballot are designed to tap into populist anger over government spending and our mushrooming federal debt. Yet they're really a cynical ploy meant to trick Coloradans into adopting a fiscal future that would devastate both public and private bank accounts. Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101 — which opponents have labeled "The Bad Three" and "The Ugly Three" — would cut property taxes, income taxes and other fees in Colorado. Their proponents claim the measures will provide "tax relief now," but that easy-to-like slogan hides the poisonous intent of the measures. One of the most important things Colorado voters can do this year to protect their schools, their jobs, their businesses and their safety is to defeat Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101. As former Gov. Bill Owens, a strong fiscal conservative who was not shy about cutting taxes, wrote recently: "(T)here is a difference between demanding greater fiscal responsibility from our elected officials and literally setting back our state's progress by decades." Put more simply, Colorado's conservative attorney general, John Suthers, said the measures would result in "pure anarchy." • Amendment 60 would cut property and income taxes to the point where Colorado would have almost no general fund money left after it paid its obligation to K-12 schools. The result wouldn't merely be a leaner government — but a gutted one. If the effects of Proposition 101 are added in, about 92 percent of the state's general fund eventually would have to go to schools. The leftover money — about $38 million in today's dollars — would be divided among colleges, health care, public safety, prisons and agriculture. Yes, $38 million. The general fund today is around $7 billion. • Amendment 61 prevents the state government from going into debt. Sounds good, right? Well, economically speaking, not all debt is bad — and Colorado law already forbids state and local governments from following the federal government's practice of spending money it doesn't have and running deficits. Colorado governments are required to balance their budgets every year. But they are allowed, within guidelines, to borrow money based on dedicated revenue streams or collateral to buy bonds and other instruments that help them build roads and schools and courts and prisons. Much like home loans that allow families to enjoy property while they pay it off, borrowing allows governments to build roads, schools, courts and prisons cheaper and faster. Government actually saves money this way. Backers of the measure will say, should we leave such debt to our children? In a word, yes. No school district, for example, can pay cash for a school, yet that building will be used for years — some school buildings are nearly 100 years old — so why shouldn't the debt be spread out to bring down costs? Amendment 61 also would greatly curtail local governments from borrowing, and require them to ask voters for permission. • Proposition 101 would destroy the revenue stream that builds and maintains Colorado's roads by cutting vehicle registration fees to 1919 levels — before the widespread use of cars. All of these cuts are extreme and go way too far. They threaten the quality of life we have come to enjoy and expect in Colorado and they will keep businesses from relocating or expanding here and may cause others to leave. The economy already has reduced the size of government, and more cuts are coming. State and local governments have not run up trillion-dollar deficits, and shouldn't be punished for what Congress and two presidents have wrought. Vote "no" on all three measures. Read more at www.denverpost.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/boxt