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*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%

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
February 21, 2010 11:35 PM UTC

A Flurry of Junk

  • 39 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Durango Herald very astutely reports:

Don’t raise taxes. Cut spending instead. Start with the payroll.

That has been the Colorado Republican mantra during this year’s debate over tax increases.

Democrats have mocked the plan, with Sen. John Morse, D-Colorado Springs, offering to give Republicans a math book during debate this month. He even threw in the Cliff’s Notes.

Republicans counter that by cutting the payroll, Colorado could avoid 10 tax increases for candy, Internet sales, agriculture and more. Also, Republicans say, the state could afford to restore a tax break for senior citizen homeowners…

However, balancing the budget by cutting the state work force could succeed only by shutting down large parts of the government.

Here’s why.

One of Penry’s bills – Senate Bill 168 – calls for a $17.8 million cut to the state payroll from now through July. Next year, he would cut $307 million, first by cutting the payroll and next by ending “nonessential” programs.

Almost all state government spending goes to education, health care, prisons and courts, and very little of the education and health-care budgets are spent on state employees…

When all the subtraction is done, the May 2009 payroll that came from the general fund in the governor’s departments was only $590 million.

That means Penry’s $17.8 million cut would cause a pay cut of nearly 10 percent if it took effect March 1. Next year, he’s looking for a $306 million cut – a number he admits can’t be found through pay cuts alone…

“If you cut personnel … you’ve got to shut something down. If you’re going to lay off prison guards, you’ve got to close a prison,” said Sen. Moe Keller, D-Wheat Ridge, vice chairwoman of the Joint Budget Committee. “It isn’t like we have employees just hanging out doing nothing.”

“Cutting payroll” is a slogan the GOP has seized on because it doesn’t convey the actual pain of what they are proposing: just like Sen. Keller says, these employees are doing jobs that won’t be done done once they are cut. “Cutting payroll” may sound a little better than “closing a prison,” but it’s basically the same thing. What’s more, in many cases the jobs in question are funded by fees or federal funds, making the “savings” from cutting them illusory. That, combined with the much larger GOP budget-cutting proposal for next year that mostly doesn’t specify where the cuts are to be made, and this just isn’t a serious plan, folks. Not that it was intended to be–the only purpose of any of this is posturing for the elections, where sound bites trump reason.

Tweet
Share

Comments

39 thoughts on “A Flurry of Junk”

  1. That would help us move forward – a lot. And what’s so stupid about the GOP’s bullshit numbers is that there are specifics where they can point to savings. As Harry Doby pointed out, just having competent leadership in OIT could save hundreds of millions.

    But instead of doing the hard work of coming up with specifics, they throw this BS around.

  2. … asking what specific proposals she had to counter Democratic proposals for a balanced budget.

    Response? Crickets

    The Republicans have NOTHING. Except mirrors, and smoke from burning tea.

  3. “Almost all state government spending goes to education, health care, prisons and courts” – who do you think pays those salaries, the tooth fairy?

    I’m glad to see the Dems have come to the table with the same “innovative” solutions they always offer: maintain or expand the public sector at the expense of the private sector. After all, the more you can shut down the private sector (jobs, small businesses) you can justify a larger public sector (welfare, food stamps etc). Gotta love liberal math!

    2. We’re all waiting to hear it.

      What SPECIFIC programs do you want to cut?

      PS: “Maintain or expand the public sector” is a total misstatement of the Democratic solutions to the state budget crisis. You’re just intentionally ignoring all the significant cuts the Democrats have already proposed.

    3. …public education, police, fire, lands management, much health care, most prisons still, protections of the environment and in the workplace, the list is huge.

      Most of them have no equivalent in the private sector.  

      You, sir, are an ideologue.  You don’t care about what works, just appearances.  

  4. Cutting payrolls, closing prisons – none of these options are palatable, and they will hurt. At the same time, asking the private sector to feel the pain of an ecomomic downturn while raising taxes to maintain the current level of government is even more unacceptable. If your tax base has shrunk, say, 10%, it’s because the citizens of CO no longer have the disposible income they had when times were good. Many are down to what they consider the essentials. If you throw a dozen new taxes on them which they MUST pay, it makes sense that they will reduce their economic participation even further – they simply don’t have the money. It creates a spiralling effect. The people of Colorado are already reducing their spending from “nice to have” to “gotta have” – why shouldn’t the state match their pain, dollar for dollar?

    Start with our state constitution – there are services mandated, voted upon by the people of Colorado as being those most essential services. Make those the priority, but realize you may need to trim off the top. Does it impact the health or safety of the people of Colorado? If not, it’s on the table. Next are the statutes. Any new bill with a fiscal note should be DOA. In addition, any statute created over the past 3 years that increases spending should require new hearings within the JBC to justify a less than 30% budget cut. Finally, the state should grow some cajones and tell the federal government we will not implement any unfunded mandates, and we will not enforce any unfunded mandates dumped on our state in the past 5 years. It’s time some state needs to take the abuses of the Constitution’s Commerce clause to the Supreme Court.

    Finally, we need to pull together as a state to help define our economic destiny. Western Slope doesn’t talk to Denver, Denver doesn’t communicate with Colorado Springs, the Springs doesnt chat with Boulder, and Boulder is out of touch with the Eastern plains. There is no one – NO ONE – pulling these diverse communities together. This really doesnt need to be about Reps vs Dems, or conservatives versus liberals. It needs to be about what is good for the people of Colorado, and it needs to be more than lip service.

    1. You mean throwing people out of jobs.

      I’m fine with that if that’s what you want to do.  Just call a spade a “fucking shovel” and quit trying to hide your true intent in flowery language.

      1. In a perfect world no one would ever lose their job. However, we don’t have a perfect world; in the case of an economic downturn you can’t expect a private sector employee to give up his/her position so a public sector position can survive. Is my position more important than yours? Probably not, as long as they both feed our families. Now Im no politician   I dont have the gift of “flowery language”. Just another Joe citizen with an opinion.

                1. If you want to cut pay across the board, I would propose cutting pay at a progressive rate.  Those at or below a living wage would receive no cut while people at the top of the pay scale receive more than a 10% cut.  The mechanism problem is are you making a temporary pay cut that will be reinstated or a permanent one?  If tax receipts miraculously jumped back up, would the cuts be reduced or eliminated?  Or, is this a permanent pay cut from which people would have to work their way back up.  In that case, it’s a move that can have other, unintended, consequences.

                  1. First off I agree making it progressive – that’s what we did at my company. Key is that total dollars drop 10%.

                    Second it is temporary and it is undone before anyone gets any raise and it’s undone equally or sooner for the people paid less. Again that’s what we did at my company where now only 2 people (me and the CEO) still have a partial reduction.

    2. What alternate Colorado have you been living in? No one – no Democrats – are talking about maintaining the current levels of government. There have already been all kinds of cuts proposed by Democrats.

      I would rather see some taxes on candy, soft drinks and bull semen than letting prisoners out on the street, as the Republicans seem to favor.

      1. If they are proposing all kinds of cuts, then why aren’t they passing the cuts with the same zeal they are passing the tax increases? I have a real problem when a Dem justifies a tax increase by saying “I know we will lose private sector jobs with this tax increase, but the alternative is to cut teachers”. I will tell you that when it comes to putting food on the table, a teacher’s job doesn’t become more important than mine, or the shop owner, or the store clerk, or (I suspect) even yourself.

        And with respects to your comment that Republicans seem to favor letting prisoners out on the street – well – you got the wrong party. See http://www.denverpost.com/ci_1…  

        1. Democrats cut hundreds of millions from the budget last week, estimates I’ve seen in the press range from $375 million to almost $500 million.

          Compared to less than $120 of the budget gap closed by repealing tax loopholes.

          You’re just spouting nonsense, do you even realize that?

          1. Put down the Koolaid and back away slowly. Last week Ritter PROPOSED cutting $340M from the budget. Most of that will be federal dollars. Can you provide the names or numbers of ANY bills passed last week that cut $375M to $500M?  

            1. Pueblo Chieftain:

              http://www.chieftain.com/artic…

              The House on Thursday cut $474 million from the state budget for the current fiscal year and passed the hatchet to the Senate, where the same cuts will be debated and face a vote early next week.

              GJ Sentinel:

              http://www.gjsentinel.com/news…

              On Thursday, legislators approved a slew of bills reducing about $377 million in spending from all state agencies…

              From your comments I was operating on the assumption that you are connected in some way to the GOP minority in the legislature, either a rep. or a staffer, but I think if you were you would have the barest idea what you’re talking about. Scratch that.

              1. Not only are they not coming up with a plan of their own while saying the Dems are just looking to raise taxes, but they aren’t even acknowledging the budget cuts that have already been made.

                War is freedom, peace is slavery, tax cuts increase revenue, and budget cuts aren’t really cuts at all. Interesting modus operandi.

            2. Last week the House passed these negative supplementals reducing the executive agency budgets by over $300 million.  The state Senate will pass these bills this week and the cuts will be final. The General Assembly cut $150 million out of the budget the first week of January and over the past two years has cut the budget by about $1.5 billion.

              These aren’t “PROPOSED.”  By the end of this week each will be a fact.

                1. Not hardly. I’m in the private sector – therefore I have to work for a living. No connection at all with the legislature, Rep or Dem.

                  All bills are “proposed” until signed into law.

                  And minor point but the General Assembly convened on Wed Jan 13, at 10 AM. I don’t think they were doing much cutting “the first week of January”.

                  Besides – you guys really don’t have too much fun when you’re just sitting here agreeing with each other do you? 🙂

                  1. It’s fun to explain to wingnut new arrivals that they are completely full of crap, which you are. You said there were no bills, all caps style, and there are in fact bills. It’s either ignorance or denial. 🙂

                    I don’t know what the hell the smiley face was for either, but if it makes you feel better, ok.

                    1. My mouth is full from all those words you just put in there. Where did I ever say “there were no bills”? And wow – I get under your skin for a smiley face? I can tell you are gonna be lots of fun 🙂

                  2. Are you denying the legislature cut the budget by $150 million the first week of the session?

                    Are you denying the Governor and the General Assembly have cut the state budget by $1.5 billion over the past two years?

                    Are you asserting the cuts passed by the House last week won’t be passed by the Senate this week?

                    1. I dont recall ever denying point one. I just said your dates were incorrect.

                      With regards to point 2: It’s a shell game. You can’t say with any credibility that you made cuts of $1.5B when you raise new taxes to almost the same amount.

                      Point 3: The socialists are running the henhouse, so I have no reason to believe that the Senate won’t get their way. My point was this: until it’s signed into law, it’s just a piece of paper (or maybe a stack of paper). At any rate, it will have to wait for the henhouse rooster to return from D.C.  

                    2. The legislature did away with tax exemptions totaling $118 million and passed the FASTER bill last year which will raise $250 million.  Please tell us where you come up with the other $1.13 billion in new taxes?

                      Point 3: Your personal attacks agaisnt Governor Ritter aside, do you believe the budget cutting bills that passed the House last week won’t be passed by the Senate?

                    3. My bad. I forgot the Colorado Supreme Court decided that sometimes taxes can be called “fees”. Therefore, to avoid confusion I should have said “Taxes and fees”.

                      And what personal attacks? Henhouse rooster has a kind of studly connotation doesn’t it? Besides, I think the Gov is a fine individual. It’s his politics I dont agree with.  

                    4. Where did the other $1.13 billion in fees and taxes come from in your statement?

                      Do you really believe the negative supplementals passed by the House last week and before the Senate this week won’t pass? If they do, do you believe Gov. Ritter will veto them?

                    5. Do you really want the whole list? Let’s start with the sales tax on tobacco, which is in addition to the excise tax. Add in FASTER (and the really dumb late fee). There is also the road safety fee and the bridge safety fee. There also new fees for marriage and divorces. And don’t forget stealing the tire disposal fee and sticking it into the general fund. You keep adding and soon it starts to look like real money.

                      As I pointed out above, I have no reason to believe the cuts won’t pass. It’s actually pretty good politics to illegally raise over 11 new taxes, but then claim that you are cutting government. Gov Ritter will sign them – what’s he got to lose? The voters can’t hold him accountable.  

                    6. More questions for you to answer:

                      Do the tax exemption repeals and fee increases restore the hundreds of millions cut by the budget bills?

                      Didn’t the CO Supreme Court already rule that repealing the exemptions was not illegal?

                      How much do the fees you note add up to?

    3. Start with our state constitution – there are services mandated, voted upon by the people of Colorado as being those most essential services. Make those the priority, but realize you may need to trim off the top. Does it impact the health or safety of the people of Colorado? If not, it’s on the table.

      One of those Constitutional mandates is funding K-12. And guess what? They are cutting that $250 million next year. And we are long past the point of “trimming off the top”.

      As mentioned in other posts, the biggest expenses of the state are K-12, Corrections, Higher Ed and Medicaid. Again, K-12 is mandated by the voters. Cutting Corrections would force prison closures at a time when we should probably be building new ones. Higher Ed is being back-filled by Stimulus funds and will likely see a HUGE cut in FY2011-12. And lastly, Medicaid is mandated by the Federal Government.

      You can challenge the Feds on the Constitutionality of Medicaid, but the fact is the majority of Coloradans voted Democrats into office who believe Medicaid significantly “impacts the health” of the people of Colorado. So I hardly think it would be in the best interest of the People. Additionally, any such challenge would take many years to play out and would not have ANY impact on the current crisis at hand.

      This issue is way more complex than simply cutting payroll. Why don’t private companies implement across the board payroll cuts before laying off employees? Perhaps because having low wages will drive away existing quality employees. The same would happen in the state government. It’s just simple-minded and bad management.

      1. It was progressive as the people at the top got a bit more than 10% and the ones at the bottom less. But it was across the board.

        They’ve been totally restored (except for me and the CEO who are still down a bit) – and no one left. Everyone was very supportive of the whole approach.

        1. That’s great that your company did that. I certainly admire the employees of your company for making the small sacrifice to prevent layoffs. I’m not sure how big your company is but I suspect that when doing that with a company the size of the State Government it becomes a little more difficult.

          It is hard enough to convince people to work in the public sector. Reducing their already low salaries makes public service even less attractive.  

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

79 readers online now

Newsletter

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