CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 10, 2009 06:49 PM UTC

"Josh Penry First...All The Lemmings Will Follow"

  • 72 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Yesterday’s unprecedented move by (outgoing) Senate President Peter Groff to reject and send the budget back to the Joint Budget Committee, in hopes of finding alternatives to nasty proposed cuts…didn’t work out the way he planned, as Politics West reports:

Several JBC members…said they believed they were being made scapegoats for this year’s budget.

Sen. Moe Keller, D-Wheat Ridge and the chairwoman of the panel, said the committee had to work on two budget years at the same time, the budget year that ends in June and the other that begins in July. There have been multiple revisions to revenue forecasts in the last six months, and the JBC had re-opened the current year’s budget twice to balance to ever-lower revenue figures.

Keller said it was “extremely frustrating and exasperating” for JBC members to hear senators from both parties say the committee hadn’t looked hard enough at the budget.

Rep. Don Marostica, R-Loveland, went further.

“Nuts to them,” an angry Marostica said. “Tell them to go jump in a lake. Josh Penry first, and then all the lemmings will follow.

“We did look hard enough.”

And in the end, attempts by a distracted Sen. Groff at the behest of Minority Leader Josh Penry to punt the budget back to the JBC failed. Like it or not, the budget will be balanced by a transfer of “excess” reserves from the state’s chartered workman’s comp insurance entity, or calamitously–from the Colorado Springs Gazette:

Legislative leaders from both parties said it was unacceptable to pass a budget with a $300 million hole in funding for the state’s public colleges and universities, which could only have been repaired by closing schools or freeing them to charge market rates for tuition.

By taking the $300 million from a surplus held by the insurance fund, the Senate made campus closures less likely, and it voted to prevent tuition increases from exceeding 9 percent on average.

But the Senate action was preceded by a scorching debate over whether the move is legal, and even its supporters acknowledged that it could be struck down in court…

“It is a state asset. It is a state agency,” said Sen. Al White, R-Hayden, who, as a member of the Joint Budget Committee, incurred the wrath of Republican leaders by incorporating the Pinnacol raid into the budget package.

Republican attacks on the Pinnacol asset transfer seem to be losing traction–evidence of this was all over their debate speeches yesterday, insistently referring to Pinnacol as a “profitable company” about to be “plundered” Hugo Chavez socialista-style. However you feel about this proposed transfer, you have to admit that comparing a state-chartered entity with a board appointed by the Governor, sitting on its “excess” hundreds of millions, to Chavez nationalizing Chevron’s oil rigs is more than a little over the top. We keep warning about substituting hyperbolic bombast for facts, but some people just don’t listen. That’s a pity, because people stop listening to them, too.

Either way there’s reason to be hopeful for resolution that will avoid massive cuts to higher ed, since consensus is growing with people we talk to that the Pinnacol “raid” is in fact perfectly legal; which is in turn motivating Pinnacol to approach key Senators about things they might be willing to make happen “voluntarily.” It’s a fluid situation, we’ll update as things get confirmed to our satisfaction–that didn’t happen for most of yesterday.

Tweet
Share

Comments

72 thoughts on ““Josh Penry First…All The Lemmings Will Follow””

    2. The Dems are for the working person, or not?

      By raiding the workers comp fund at a time when claims are soaring as they always do during recessions, Dems are showing their anti-worker biases.

      These are not new biases. I mean, they want to deny workers secret ballots in unionizing elections. They want to deny workers choices of health insurance plans by nationalizing health insurance and socializing medicine. They want to deny them access to health care by driving doctors out of medicine with new regs and lower payments, and they want to increase taxes on workers and their customers.

      Dems have been hiding their anti-worker biases for generations.

      Now the truth comes out. Dems are for union leaders, who need to meet in Boca Raton, and for tenured professors who need to pay off there Lexuses.

      Go Dems! Screw the little guy.  

      1. was waiting for your post praising Obama for bringing the DJIA back up.  ha ha ha ha.

        Just kidding, I don’t think it works that way, but since you were posting daily as stocks were going down that it was all Obama’s fault I was wondering if you might be consistent and show your integrity…nah, not really.  I don’t think you have any of the latter, and the former is just the same old Gooper talking points.  

        1. This one kinda caught me off guard.

          Simply put, prices got so cheap that the markets are doing what they always do when things look cheap, they’re rallying.

          At the beginning, I think, most of the buying was short covering. Now, it appears that speculators are jumping on the band wagon because they don’t want to be left behind.

          Several developments helped spark the rally. Citi came out with the claim that it made money in Jan. and Feb. Barney Frank forced the FASB to weaken its mark to market accounting rules for banks. Some economic indicators didn’t look so bad for a change, but they’re still down sharply from a year ago and two years ago.

          At the moment the market’s ignoring the bad news. I think analysts have low-balled earnings estimates for the first quarter. They hope enough companies will beat the estimates and that stocks will rally even though most earnings still will be sharply lower than they’ve been in the last two years.

          Analysts and economists working for organizations that own securities or need a rally to make money are touting the rally. Analysts who have fewer conflicts of interests seem to be more bearish, but some of the bears are short or have other conflicts, too.

          My conflicts tend to balance out because I’m both long and short, but, on balance, I’d love to see stocks rally back to Oct. 07 highs, and they will-in 10 or 15 years.

      2. By raiding the workers comp fund … when claims are soaring as they always do during recessions

        Do you think injuries go up during recessions? Perhaps unemployment claims rise, but I doubt that injuries do. And how about those Pinnacol bosses getting huge bonuses and $600,000 salaries while denying injury claims.  What about the fact their charter requires them to refund excess premiums which they obviously didn’t do because they have a grotesque excess surplus way beyond requirements.  And did you notice Pinnocol has been freeloading off the citizens of Colorado because they don’t pay taxes like the rest of us?

        deny workers choices of health insurance plans

        The only time I get to choose my own health plan is if I’m the real-boss choosing for my employees.  Individual choice? Hah! Once I sold my business and tried to buy individual insurance it became obvious that insurance companies choose, and more often deny, my wife and I rather than the other way around.

        deny workers secret ballots in unionizing elections.

        Uh, no.  EFCA does not dely workers the right to a secret ballot. Just like the current law the workers can demand a secret ballot with a 30% “card-check” request.  It’s the real bosses — the anti-union company executives that lose the right to call an election.  Today the real-bosses can call an election even if 90% of the workers sign cards for a union.

        nationalizing health insurance and socializing medicine.

        Yeah, that would be really horrible wouldn’t it?  We have the lowest life expectancy and highest infant mortality in the entire First World and pay 30% more. And don’t talk to me about Canada while ignoring France and all of Scandinavia.

        Dems have been hiding their anti-worker biases for generations.

        By the way, have you ever heard of the concept of Projection?  The idea is only about 150 years old so it’s way to modern for your way of thinking.  But at the more understandable 5th grade level it’s a simple concept:  “What you say is what you are.”

      3. I haven’t seen any statistics, but off the top of my head with a lot less workers because of the recession I find it hard to believe “claims are soaring”  Additionally, the construction industry accounts for a large percentage of claims, and that industry is WAY down in employment (I know cause I’m in that business).  

        1. Read any insurer’s annual report or conference call transcript and you’ll see that’s what they’re experiencing.

          When people lose their jobs or fear losing their jobs, they make more claims than they would if they were worried about keeping their jobs.

          That’s the history, and history appears to be repeating itself.

          You can research the topic on the web.

          2. On Feb 3 I asked you for information to back up your comment that single payer health care systems had failed in every country they have been tried in. I asked you to specifically list those countries and the dates they failed.

            I received no response.

            This is a forum where both opinion and factual information is posted. As such, we all have a responsibility to differentiate between the two and to provide documentation for statements made as fact.  

      5.    Unemployment claims soar during a recession, not workers’ comp.  (Laid-off people rarely are injured at the work site.)

          Do you even know the difference between the two?

          1. But you can research it on the web.

            I don’t make such statements unless I’ve seen them documented a few times by reliable sources.

            1. we’re not going to trust your definition of “reliable.”

              I remember you were asked for a source once, and after some argument back and forth you finally posted one, which turned out to be…you on another site, posting a comment to someone else’s blog.

              I mean, come on, I know I’m right about everything, but even I wouldn’t just claim myself as a source for controversial information.

        1. The unions will not be filing lawsuits because the unions don’t purchase insurance policies from Pinnacol, employers do, and those policies are considered contracts. Unions therefore have no legal standing to sue, but employers (policy hiolders) who have valid contracts with Pinnacol will sue because they are due that money per statue.

          The legislature can do anything it wants with Pinnacol – it can abolish it by legislation if it wants. But the legislature lacks authority to retroactively void valid contracts.  

    3. I believe it was Penry who said they had drawn straws to replace White; the person who got the short straw immediately burned it thereafter and denied ever having it 🙂

      Legislators realize what an absolutely thankless job being on JBC entails. It’s not for the faint of heart. Or the stupid.

  2. of Republicans in putting a self-absorbed idiot like Josh Penry in a leadership position?  I’m sure they don’t like being the long-time minority party but when you realize that people like Penry may guarantee your close to permanent minority status, it has to be frustrating and embarrassing.

      1. I believe a wise man addressed your tantrums a while back.

        “The degree of one’s emotions varies inversely with one’s knowledge of the facts.” -Bertrand Russell

      4. Ritter is missing in action.  While the lefties on this blog rant about Josh Penry standing on common sense principle against seizing government property and against massive higher ed cuts, where the heck is the guy who is supposed to be leading the state?

        1. The Kid writes:

          “…Josh Penry standing on common sense principle against seizing government property…”

          Hmmm, I guess mortgaging “government property” doesn’t qualify as “seizing” (whatever that means) in your mind, eh? Of course you wouldn’t want to point out Penry’s borrow and spend tactics.  From the opening day of the current session:

          “By leveraging a small portion of the billions in equity Colorado has in its State buildings,

          and dedicating a fraction of the State’s General Fund and severance tax collections, the State of Colorado can quickly and conservatively put more than a half a billion dollars and thousands of Coloradans to work fixing unsafe bridges.” -Josh Penry

          2. . . . is so out there I don’t understand it.  Nothing Penry has proposed involves seizing private property.  The current JBC proposal should be something every one on this blog is concerned about.  Retroactively changing the rules of the game so you can seize assets is a very, very dangerous game.  The near-term consequence of its approval will mean higher workers’ comp rates for thousands of businesses in Colorado.  The long-term consequence is even more alarming.  First Pinnacol.  Who’s next?

            1. You went from first saying it was “government property” to now saying it is “private property”. Where did I say anything about “private property”?  If you don’t know what you are talking about, how will anyone else?  And I’m not surprised that it went over your head.

    2.    I’m certainly no fan of Josh Penry but look at what makes up most of his caucus.  Standing amongst Renfroe, Schultheis, Cadman, Brophy, Kopp and Lundberg, Penry looks pretty presentable.

    3. And a bunch want him to run for governor.

      Far as I can tell, the left fears him so much that they’re putting him down every chance they get.

      Don’t be so fearful. Worry about Scotty.

  4. First, you beat up on Penry for not being bipartisan.  Now, he’s standing arm in arm with the Democrat President of the Senate in working to find a way to avoid shuttering institutions like Adams State College — and you’re pouncing on him.  Do you guys have some sort of marketing agreement with Marostica?  He opens his big mouth and you guys have content all of a sudden.  

        1. in your choice of perjoratives.  Frankly, it sounds like more of a compliment than an insult.  

          Democrat: n. – An advocate of democratic principles. An advocate of democracy. One who believes in social equality or discounts distinctions in rank.  

    3. Or they may not allow you to answer phones next time around.

      The first rule of The Republican Fight Club is….”You don’t talk about the Republican Fight Club”.  I believe it is the second and thrid and fourth and…..

  5. Is it going to be a Joint Announcement?

    Peter Groff announces his departure & Andrew Romanoff announces he is running for the United States Senate at a joint press conference.

  6. Either way there’s reason to be hopeful for resolution that will avoid massive cuts to higher ed, since consensus is growing with people we talk to that the Pinnacol “raid” is in fact perfectly legal; which is in turn motivating Pinnacol to approach key Senators about things they might be willing to make happen “voluntarily.” It’s a fluid situation, we’ll update as things get confirmed to our satisfaction–that didn’t happen for most of yesterday.

    It may very well come down to if its legal or not. If you read 8-45-103(5) of SB 09-273 what was expressly stated before (that no Pinnacol funds are to be transferred to the General Fund) is deleted and replaced with language that its now allowed. Has Legislative Council or AG given any opinion on this? I’m no attorney, but unless what is done in 8-45-103(5) is not in violation of the state constitution, its probably legal from a constitutiuonal view.

    That notwithstanding, I could see a law suit challenging the transfer on the grounds the money belongs to the policy holders and therefore the state simply can’t just “take” it without due compensation.

    SB 09-281 carefully strikes 8-45-112 that essentially requires Pinnacol to refund to policy holders all payments in excess of operating expenses, claims, and reserve requirements. Certainly can’t have that in there if the money is being transferred. Again, I’m no legal scholar, but a policy would be considered a contract between Pinnacol and the policy holder, and if the law required refunds, is this an attempt to retroactively void contracts? Even our allegedly “biased” State Supreme Court might have a problem with that.

    On the other hand, Pinnacol does not appear to be in compliance with 8-45-112 (which is still the law as I speak) since it reportedly has $700 million in its coffers that should have been distributed to policy holders.

    Other references in the bills attempt to clarify that Pinnacol is not a mutual insurance company and the clarification that Pinnacol is and always was a political subdivision of the State of Colorado. Appears an attempt on the part of the drafters to insert legal opinions into the bills. Nothing wrong with that I guess, but its obviously done to shore up the legal end of it if challenged (and it probably will be).

    I can see this putting a lot of attorneys to work.  

    1. Legislative Legal Services issued a preliminary opinion this week (Tuesday or Wednesday) that seizing the Pinnacol reserve was legal – in Weissmann’s words: “we created them, we can do what we want with them.”

      1. Weissmann is the House sponsor of SB 09-281 so that makes sense. As I said, its probably legal from a constitutional aspect, but  there’s little doubt in my mind there is legal standing by policy holders to claim breach of contract on their policies because the law specifically states excess money is to be returned to the policy holders.

        Weissman’s statement that the state can do what it wants to do with Pinnacol is legally valid – the legislature could abolish Pinnacol tomorrow by legislation. The problem here is the legislature doesn’t have the authority to retroactively void valid contracts at whim.

        There will be litigation over this if it passes.

         

  7. They should look at the department of revenue and tell them to get rid of the special regulation on software that grants an exemption for business software from sales tax.  They are refunding millions of dollars to business as we speak.  The reg was created during the Owens administration out of thin air.  There is no statutory exemption for software.  Seeing that only the legislature can create tax policy reversing this regulation would only be the legislative branch telling the executive branch to get it right.  Even Penry couldn’t complain.

      1. People here are so eager to destroy jobs by increasing taxes on businesses that they want to double tax software.

        Amazing ignorance out there.

        1. … I want to tell you that I’m glad to see you’re around. I saw a comment from Steve Harvey that someone tried to out you and I thought maybe you were staying away because of that (something that’s complete bullshit if true).

        3. This software that the business uses not software that they resell.  Software they resell is exempt by statute.  So sorry no double taxation here.

      2. Look at Special Regulation 7 on the SoS site under Revenue for sales and tax regulations.  You might be able to save your company a “few” bucks.  I’d link, but too much of novice to do that.

  8. …is because of TABOR it requires a reduction elsewhere. So it remains a zero-sum game.

    Question – with the recent ruling on the mill-levy issue, would ending the severance tax holiday be considered a TABOR increase? Or can the legislature just undo it and keep the extra revenues?

  9. Mike Bennett good.

    I’m starting to catch onto this whole “blogging” thing.

    There’s what’s right and there’s what’s right, and never the twain shall meet – H.I. McDonough

      1. That’s right. You guys have it all figured out. I guess we’re the bullies here. On behalf of progressives and liberals on this site, my most heartfelt apologies for damaging your obviously delicate sensitivities.  

        1. You’re exactly right CD! I’ve always been completely amazed how the right can dish ouot vituperative and vitriole and then cry foul, when someone calls them on their fallacies.

          The right wing meme is powerful…..Take no responsibility and never acknowledge a wrong.

  10. So Penry magically has the votes to refer the budget back to the JBC?  Since when did Penry become majority leader?

    Sounds like the Dems don’t have their own caucus together on this one.  What does that say?

    Props to pols for trying to make this look like the Republican’s fault-but I don’t think that people are going to forget that Democrats are in charge here.  🙂

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

238 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!