April 20, 2010 09:08 PM UTC

Jane Norton Should Love This

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

One of the stickier points of disagreement between various Republican candidates for office this year is the effect of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) on the economy and public sector of Colorado. Of course, the biggest reason there is disagreement, as opposed to the wall of dogmatic support for TABOR casual observers would expect, is the need for Senate candidate Jane Norton to defend her support for 2005’s Referendum C. Referendum C was a statewide vote to suspend TABOR refunds for five years, which Norton says is ‘perfectly in keeping’ with the TABOR’s ideals–out of her immediate vicinity, it’s tough to find Republicans who agree.

But if Norton believes what she says about Referendum C, here’s another opportunity to defend those ideals. The Durango Herald’s Joe Hanel reports:

The vote to cut $260 million from public schools last month brought several Democratic legislators to tears and motivated others to apologize.

But school advocates who showed up at the state Capitol on Monday were interested in money, not tears.

“The ability to apologize but avoid doing anything about schooling in Colorado is no longer acceptable,” said Carol Boigon, chairwoman of Great Education Colorado.

Her group is a prime backer of House Concurrent Resolution 1002, which asks voters to give the Legislature the authority to raise taxes for education. The idea would effectively end the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights for schools and colleges, the largest part of the state’s budget.

The House Education Committee passed the measure 8-4 Monday – no surprise, given that all eight Democrats on the panel are co-sponsors of HCR 1002. Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Cortez, voted no.

However, because the resolution needs a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, it will not survive the House floor unless several Republicans turn against TABOR.

For which the odds, as you can imagine, lie somewhere between unlikely and rich full-throated laughter. A lot of people we know who are sympathetic to the goals of this referendum still don’t think it would stand a very good chance of passage in present political climate–but if you agree with Norton that putting tax hikes to a vote respects the taxpayers, all those anticipated “no” votes from House Republicans express something other than respect. Isn’t a vote of the people what they claim to want, even if it’s a vote against?

We realize highlighting this as a choice that pertains to Norton could be considered unfair, but we’re not the ones trying to have the history of TABOR both ways.