States eyeing Colorado spending limits

The Washington Times ^ | October 9, 2005 | Valerie Richardson

[neverdem]

DENVER -- Whether Oklahoma voters approve a spending-limits proposal known as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights next year could hinge on what happens next month in Colorado.

Colorado voters will decide Nov. 1 whether to suspend the state's landmark cap on state and local spending, known by the acronym TABOR, and the result is expected to resonate in at least a dozen states now considering similar legislation and ballot initiatives.

In some states, the Colorado vote already is being used to sway voters. The fact that Colorado is even considering Referendum C, which would overturn TABOR for five years, shows that the state's 1992 spending-cap law is a bad idea, said David Blatt, public-policy director for the Community Action Project in Tulsa, Okla.

Oklahomans in Action, a citizens group, has filed a petition to place its own TABOR on the 2006 ballot, and the state Legislature is expected to consider a similar proposal when it convenes next year.

"Oklahoma shouldn't follow Colorado into a budget crisis," Mr. Blatt said.

That kind of rhetoric worries Pete Sepp, spokesman for the National Taxpayers Union, one of several national groups aiding state organizers with the TABOR effort. Having Colorado voters overturn TABOR undoubtedly would be a hit to the movement, although not a fatal one, he said.

"It certainly wouldn't help these efforts," Mr. Sepp said. "At the same time, many of these TABORs have taken on a life of their own because of the unique fiscal problems facing their states. Even without the Colorado TABOR, there would be a high level of citizen activism in places like Maine and Wisconsin, where there's been a big blowup over taxes."

In Maine, Mary Adams, head of the state's TABOR movement, said her campaign continues to extol the Colorado example, despite Referendum C...

[Gondring]

Ping

[goldstategop]

Bill Owens and the Democrats put Referendum C on the ballot to permit out of control spending - just like in Washington. Colorado voters should nix the entire scheme - or they'll be paying for the massive spending binge for decades to come.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[sourcery]

What are the opinion polls saying about Referendum C?

[EGPWS]

In some states, the Colorado vote already is being used to sway voters.

Everything has to be based on political gain doesn't it.

[Nephi]

I'm with you, brother. The people don't want to overturn TABOR, the special interests and the Bush clone, Gov. Owens do. They're pouring a lot of money into the campaign for Ref. C&D.

[neverdem]

If Owens did that, he can forget 2008.

[neverdem]

I don't know. I don't live there.

[neverdem]

It seems that way at times.

[Don_Ret_USAF]

Hear that state tax refunds will be used by the state and none returned to tax payers for five years. Just like the reduction in propriety tax for seniors was voted in for one year. Then stopped (so far two years) until no one knows because the state was losing to much money for pork spending..

[ModelBreaker]

In some states, the Colorado vote already is being used to sway voters. The fact that Colorado is even considering Referendum C, which would overturn TABOR for five years, shows that the state's 1992 spending-cap law is a bad idea, said David Blatt, public-policy director for the Community Action Project in Tulsa, Okla.

Actually, Tabor is not the problem being addressed--it is not a problem. The problem is that post-Tabor, the left passed a school funding consitutional amendment that dictates an ever increasing proportion of the state budget go to the teacher's union (I mean, for the education of the children). This puts a squeeze on the general fund.

The whole purpose of the consitutional amendment passed by the Left was to make Tabor impossible to sustain (and to pay off the teacher's union) and they are close to succeeding. I spoke to the fellow who is managing a big chunk of the No on C campaign in the state and his call is that it is very, very close. Support for C is at 47% and they only have to pull about 1 out of every 5 undecided to win.

Bill Owens collapse as a Republican in his second term has not helped things either. He is the ultimate lame duck--he is term limited and can never run for any other office again as a Republican for reasons unimportant here. So he is doing exactly as he pleases and just blowing off the folks who elected him. His support of C is the only reason it may win.

Bob Beauprez isn't helping things either by not clearly standing against it (he's the front-runner for the R nomination for the Governor's seat in 2006).

[jan in Colorado]

Vote NO!!!!!!!! The Republicans who are supporting this are claiming it is NOT a tax increase! That's a lie.

Vote NO! (I know you can't vote on this...but since you pinged me to it, I have to YELL at someone!) ;o)