Posted on 11/03/2006 1:00:36 PM PST by BulletBobCo
With fully 14 statewide proposals on your Colorado ballot this election, it's no wonder I've been showered with requests to offer my recommendations. I'm flattered that conservatives are looking for guidance from a trusted source. Liberals, I suspect, want to know my choices so they can vote the opposite way. First, a disclosure: I've grown increasingly disaffected with the ballot initiative process in our state. It's better in theory than in practice. The presumption is that it enables well-informed voters to circumvent unresponsive legislators and take direct democratic action. Although there have been a handful of worthy ballot initiatives, the reality is that few voters invest the time to become intelligently informed. Hence, too many nice- sounding (but destructive), demagogic and downright nutty issues can be bought to the ballot by well-funded special interests. They succeed or fail based largely on the impressions created by simplistic and misleading 30-second TV and radio ads.
This is democracy at it worst, which is why our Founding Fathers took care to create a constitutional republic instead.
Representative government is far from perfect, but it's still preferable to the excesses and rashness of direct democracy. Our Colorado Constitution is being overwhelmed with too much minutiae better dealt with as statute.
And that's why I'm voting No on Amendment 38: Petitions, which would take us further down this road.
Yes on Amendment 39: School District Spending Requirements. But just barely, and mostly for symbolic reasons. Its intent is to force local school districts to devote at least 65 percent of their budgets to classroom instruction. It won't hurt, but the problems with public education go much deeper than budgets. If it passes, educrats will likely figure out a way to get around it. See Referendum J below.
Yes on Amendment 40: Term Limits for Judges. I favor an independent judiciary, but not judges who want to be independent of the Constitution. We'll lose some good judges to term limits, but the good they do is exceeded by the harm done by bad judges. We'll still get bad judges, but they'll pass through the system before their arrogance grows with seniority.
No on Amendment 41: Standards of Conduct in Government. This is feel-good moralizing. More bureaucracy, meddling and impractical micromanagement in a futile effort to dictate "ethics."
No on Amendment 42: Colorado Minimum Wage. This is bad law, bad economics and has no business in the state constitution. See my column of Sept. 29.
Yes on Amendment 43: Marriage. Marriage is the union of one man and one woman only. Other gender and mathematical arrangements should be called other things. (See Referendum I below.)
Yes on Amendment 44: Marijuana Possession. It's time to decriminalize petty drug offenses. It's a lost cause anyway. Even Clinton smoked the stuff (and I bet he did inhale).
Yes on Referendum E: Property Tax Deduction for Disabled Vets. Only applies to 100 percent disabled veterans. The revenue loss is negligible. It's an appropriate token of our appreciation.
Yes on Referendum F: Recall Deadlines. No big deal. Provides more flexibility in regulating recall elections of state officials.
Yes) on Referendum G: Obsolete Constitutional Provisions. Just a formality. This is periodic, technical housecleaning of obsolete constitutional language.
Yes on Referendum H: Limiting a State Business Income Tax Deduction. Raises the after-tax cost to businesses that employ illegal aliens. Won't do much to stop illegal immigration, but it's a marginal discouragement.
Undecided on Referendum I: Domestic Partnerships. I have no objection, in principle, to a domestic partnership statute that grants official recognition to same-sex unions and provides for things like joint property ownership, debt sharing, inheritance, medical stewardship and hospital visitation. Such a bill was offered in the state legislature and was defeated by Democrats. This referendum goes beyond that to impose requirements on employers and health insurers to award benefits to same sex-couples that may not be extended to opposite-sex, unmarried couples. Some companies voluntarily offer such benefits. I'd prefer a revised version of the proposal eliminating these mandates.
No on Referendum J: School District Spending Requirements. This is a transparent ploy by educrats and teachers' unions to distort the definition of what constitutes "classroom instruction" in order to sabotage Amendment 39 above.
No on Referendum K: Immigration Lawsuit Against Federal Government. This would direct the Colorado attorney general to sue the federal government for enforcement of immigration law, a lame gesture by Democrats to sound tough during the recent special legislative session on immigration reform. Such a hopeless lawsuit would be a waste of time and taxpayer money.
Mike Rosen's radio show airs daily from 9 a.m. to noon on 850 KOA. He can be reached by e-mail at mikerosen@850koa.com.
About Mike Rosen Mike Rosen hosts Denver's most popular local radio talk show on 850 KOA. He holds an MBA degree from the University of Denver, was a corporate finance executive at Samsonite and Beatrice Foods, served as Special Assistant for Financial Management to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy at the Pentagon and is a veteran of the U.S. Army. He's traveled extensively in Europe, the Far East, Latin America, southern Africa and the former Soviet Union. Mike grew up in New York and has lived in Colorado for over 30 years.
Pot plan going up in smoke
The pot measure, Amendment 44, is getting crushed — losing eight points of support since early September.
Only 34 percent of respondents support the proposal, which would legalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for those over 21.
Sixty-one percent oppose the amendment — up from 53 percent last month.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/elections/article/0,2808,DRMN_24736_5112350,00.html
A little truth in humor. Enjoy.
While walking down the street one day a US senator is tragically hit by a
truck and dies.
His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance.
"Welcome to heaven," says St. Peter. "Before you settle in, it seems there
is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so
we're not sure what to do with you."
"No problem, just let me in," says the man
"Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have
you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to
spend eternity."
"Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven," says the senator.
"I'm sorry, but we have our rules."
And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down,
down to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green
golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are
all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him.
Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake
his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at
the expense of the people.
They play a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and
champagne.
Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who has a good
time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before
he realizes it, it is time to go.
Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises...
The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St. Peter
is waiting for him.
"Now it's time to visit heaven."
So, 24 hours pass with the senator joining a group of contented souls moving
from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time
and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns.
"Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose
your eternity."
The senator reflects for a minute, then he answers: "Well, I would never
have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would
be better off in hell."
So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to
hell.
Now the doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land
covered with waste and garbage.
He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting
it in black bags as more trash falls from above.
The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulder. "I don't
understand," stammers the senator. "Yesterday I was here and there was a
golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne,
and danced and had a great time. Now there's just a wasteland full of
garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?"
The devil looks at him, smiles and says, "Yesterday we were
campaigning...... Today you voted."
Amendment 41
ban public employees and elected officials and their immediate family members from accepting gifts of more than $50 from lobbyists and just about everyone else.
The poll shows that 60 percent of voters back the measure and that 30 percent oppose it.
"The problem we face is that voters are chomping at the bit to punish politicians because of what's going on in D.C.," said Katy Atkinson, spokeswoman for No on 41.
"The sad reality is that politicians will find a way to get around the measure. It will only punish the innocent people . . . the average Joe,"
Support for Ref I declines
Domestic partnership initiative dips under 50 percent in poll
Forty-seven percent of respondents said they approve of Ref I, while 49 percent disapprove, according to the Rocky Mountain News/CBS 4 poll by Public Opinion Strategies.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/elections/article/0,2808,DRMN_24736_5112366,00.html
Views on Amendment 43 remained stable.
Fifty-three percent of respondents said they would vote yes and 43 percent said no. Those numbers are virtually the same as in the September poll.
Weigel noted that support for both measures is close to the 50 percent mark, adding that turnout "is obviously really critical."
"You could see a world where Ref I barely passes and 43 loses and the opposite as well," she said.
Amendment 43 would define marriage in the state constitution as a union only between a man and a woman. Ref I would allow gay couples to register as domestic partners and obtain many legal rights and responsibilities given to married couples.
53 percent of recent respondents said they'd vote for Amendment 42, which would raise the minimum wage to $6.85 and then increase it annually by inflation, as measured by the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index.
A sharp drop in support for the minimum-wage ballot issue has put the measure in the "danger zone" of not passing.
The "yes" vote is down from 74 percent support in a mid-September poll,
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/money/article/0,2777,DRMN_23908_5112164,00.html
Good grief! I had no idea it was even that popular. The intelligence level of this state has gone down dramatically since we moved here 38 years ago. ;o(
Denver, Boulder, Pueblo...are immigrant free zones.
The illegal Mexicans love it
" and then increase it annually by inflation, as measured by the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index..."
He's undecided on domestic partnerships? Is this guy supposed to be a conservative?
Rosen, as he frequently states during his broadcast, is only a fiscal conservate. He's rather liberal on social issues.
Thanks for the ping. I have been working at the Boulder County Clerk's office since early voting started and the turnout in Boulder is VERY high. I am hoping the more 'conservative' counties have high turnouts as well!
I am hoping the more 'conservative' counties have high turnouts as well!
I had consulted Rosen's analysis when filling out my ballot. I disagree with Rosen on social issues like pot smoking, abortion, etc. He's pretty smart when it comes to the money side of it.
Yeah, symbolic gestures make for great law. Did Rosen even give thought to what this could mean for smaller districts with one-time large expenses? Statewide requirements for local spending are a bad, bad idea.
I wonder if the fiscal conservative in him knows of the potential for cynical mooching under Ref. I.
Can either one of you guys tell me how MARILYN MUSGRAVE is doing? I'd love to know; I sent her some money a few months back!
Musgrave (R): 44 percent
Paccione (D): 43 percent
Eidsness (RP): 11 percent
Undecided : 2 percent
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=124e8e31-5334-4cbc-83ed-18be8604bb9d&q=30196
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.