U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 02, 2007 04:40 PM UTC
35 Comments
Today’s Pueblo Chieftain quotes Sen. Steve Johnson, one of the Republicans called out in this article for having supported the mill-levy plan McElhaney claims Johnson “didn’t understand” —
http://pueblochiefta…
“Senator Romer, the inconvenient truth is not the fact that we need quality schools,” countered Sen. Steve Johnson, R-Fort Collins. “The inconvenient truth for you is that we have an amendment in our Constitution called TABOR. The ends doesn’t justify the means down here. Even if you like the goal that we’re trying to go here, you cannot violate the Constitution.”
Sen. Johnson posts here at Pols all the time, he’s one of the only legislators who does so using his own name. Surely he has an explanation as to how this plan was okay when Republicans were in power, but not now?
Will he concede what McElhaney says, that he “didn’t understand” what he was voting for previously? If that’s true, what does that say about Sen. Johnson as a legislator?
I’m hopeful he responds here on this thread. If he doesn’t, I’d say that also answers the question.
Why do the republicans think it’s ok to throw their arms and proclaim “I didn’t understand it at the time,” “It wasn’t my idea”, and “I can’t remember.”
Are voters really going to buy this childlike behavior of no accountability? This is disgraceful and every single member in the House and Senate GOP who voted against the School Finance Act and gave a long winded (BS) speech to point fingers instead of doing their responsibility should be voted out. They have abandoned their values for politicization of the process to try and dupe voters. I’m more concerned about the voters than the GOP, but what a grim day for that party.
because I’m sure when the Republicans introduced a similar bill two years ago, they had to face the same questions they asked yesterday.
For example, I’m sure in 2006 the Dems questioned the legality of a tax increase under TABOR. I’m pretty sure the Republicans had answers in ’06 when the Dems asked about revenue increases and how TABOR affected that.
The Dems in ’06 surely asked why this bill was introduced in the Legislature and not submitted to the voters for approval.
Although, I doubt there were as many questions about tacking the most controversial part onto the bill after the Senate had passed the introduced version – leaving the Senate only the option of either a conference committee or approving the bill. The Republicans didn’t do that with their bill in 2006, but I’m sure they would have had answers for that if they did.
So, all those disgraceful and shameful Republican speeches we heard on the Senate floor yesterday must have been the echoes of the Dems’ speeches in ’06. Interesting that the Dems didn’t have better answers to the questions. I heard, “Let’s do it for the kids”, and “we have three different legal opinions about this”, and “if we don’t do this now, we’re facing a crisis”.
Maybe the Dems should have taken better notes on the Republicans’ answers in ’06. Doesn’t matter, they got their bill through and Ritter will sign it.
I’m really beginning to wish the Republicans would get control of one of the Houses again. Balance is a good thing.
If you can prove that idea, I would be impressed, since many Democrats were impressed with Norma Anderson and Keith Kings leadership in making a tough decision to help our schools.
If I remember correctly, one of the few times the D’s pulled the Unconstitutional Card out was when the R’s began their gerrymandering shenanigans (out of the DeLay playbook).
First, reading over my post, the year should have said ’04 rather than ’06. Don’t think the Dem’s would have been arguing with themselves about this in ’06.
That mistake aside, researching the ’04 bills I found two that resembled what the Denver Post article referred to. HB04-1461 (King, Andrews), and HCR 1001 (Romanoff, Anderson). These two bills are the only ones that refer to property taxes and excess revenue under TABOR in regards to school finance.
This year, the Republicans complained that Ritter’s property tax proposal was unconstitutional because it should be sent to the voters under TABOR requirements. Romer and other Dems chided the Republicans for flip-flopping on this issue (see the Post article).
Here’s the rub…Both of the ’04 bills I mentioned above were asking the voters for approval to retain and spend the excess revenue. The Republican one and the Democratic one.
The Dems snuck this in legislation at the last minute, in the second house, without debate in the Senate, where it could have lost. All is fair in love and politics, however, the Dem administration and Legislature slipped this proposal through under the voters’ noses. Now there will most likely be a court challenge from some tax group and the funding will be held up.
The Dems should have respected the law in the first place.
GoBlue: “Are voters really going to buy this childlike behavior of no accountability? This is disgraceful and every single member in the House and Senate GOP who voted against the School Finance Act and gave a long winded (BS) speech to point fingers instead of doing their responsibility should be voted out. They have abandoned their values for politicization of the process to try and dupe voters. I’m more concerned about the voters than the GOP, but what a grim day for that party.”
Remember the PATRIOT Act? Who voted that monstrosity in? Who cast the deciding vote for reauthorization? None other than Three-Term-Tom Tancredo!
The voters will buy pretty much anyone with enough money will sell them — even if it is water laced with fatal levels of arsenic.
Perhaps it’s not too late to reconsider an edition of At Least It’s Not Your Legislator (Or Maybe It Is…) for the good Senator.
Not only are GOP officials having a hard time remembering, now they’re having a hard time understanding. Perhaps its best if we keep them away from the majority slot until they regain their comprehension and memorization skills.
Anybody know who might be running for his seat – Dem or Repub?
Look to either Bentley Rayburn or a confirmed moderate (to counter Lamborn)
My income tax rate is frozen. If I earn more salary I pay more in taxes. Is that a tax increase which should be voted on because of TABOR?
My sales tax rate is frozen. If I spend more money this year than last my sales tax is higher. Is that a tax increase that should be voted on because of TABOR?
My school property tax rate is frozen. If the value of my house goes up I pay more in taxes. Is that a tax increase that should be voted on because of TABOR?
Of course, if my salary goes down, I spend less than last year or the assessed value of my house decreases my taxes go down but that doesn’t have to be voted on because of TABOR.
I know I must be missing something simple in all this, other than politics, but I don’t know what it is.
They have difficulty with the literal meaning of English words. “Tax increase” generally translates as “we have no rational arguments with which to oppose this issue or bill.”
It’s a shame, because of course we all prefer lower tax rates. But when the GOP is willing to muddy the waters so dishonestly, it has the intended effect of paralyzing and polarizing, not improving fiscal policy.
good for the goose? So the best argument you lefties can come up with for violating the Constitution of Colorado is that the Republicans did it first? You all would have better luck dragging a bunch of kids to a photo op and telling the press that to disagree means you hate children. It would be just as “honest” but more effective at quelling rational debate. Besides, wasn’t Ref C supposed to save the children…er, I mean the schools from fiscal crises.
I suppose it doesn’t matter, so long as the human tsunami of Third World birth rates continues to inundate our public schools, the cost of public education will require ever-increasing “its not a tax increase” tax increases.
Well, I’m off to go burn in hell. Smell ya later:)
Have you stopped beating your wife?
Republicans two years ago agreed with today’s legal opinions: this is not related to TABOR. Everyone over the age of eight seems to understand the difference today, except for AG Suthers and yourself.
New GOP Chair Dick Wadhams has decided that locking most school districts’ property tax rates at current levels is what your Republican candidates are going to run on next year.
But the hypocrisy is too recent, and the “tax increase” label is preposterous unless you’re unaware of the details. In the end, this will be more effective as a wedge between the few reality-based Republicans left in the legislature, and the rest of them. And then the hagiography of Wadhams will end.
…with a taxpayer advocate friend of mine (he has a timeshare). Funny, there aren’t any leftists down there. We must not be pious enough.
First of all, I don’t care if the leftist puts an “R” or a “D” after their name. I cannot even feign surprise of the news that a politician may be an unprincipled hypocrite
Secondly, the way I understand it is that non-bureaucrats who’d have more money in pocket will now not see that actualized. Those that will have these funds are not brave bank robbers, but cowardly bureaucrats who hide behind ballots, politicians, a friendly media, and lawyers with the ability to mire any issue in minutae. You certainly understand the minutae better than I will, or want to.
Finally, so what can we call it? A temporary rate adjustment perhaps? Gosh, anything to avoid TABOR. And especially, anything to avoid discussing the devastation reaped on the schools because of mass Third World immigration.
PS: Is pig feces good for lawns? A flock just flew over my house.
It’s sounds like it’s where you want to be. No leftists, your friends can visit you anytime, and pigs are flying all the time. Have fun, and don’t write.
If you need a map, just google “Crawford Texas.”
Two questions:
You’re not allowed to vote are you?
Do you foam at the mouth when you type?
so funny I definitely forgot to laugh. Dur.
You are a leftist (probably), and as such you have no sense of humor. That said, the questions weren’t supposed to be funny.
Liberalism is a mental disorder. Belief in a leftist ideology requires one to take leave of reason. I don’t think mental defectives should be allowed to vote.
Also with the case of mental defectives, many of them are mouth breathers, hence the foaming of the mouth question.
Are you a mouth breather Druid?
That’s why there won’t be a legislative Roast this year in Colorado: profound lack of humor.
I know the way to hell, the path is lined with good intentions.
if the path to hell is lined with good intentions, is the path to heaven lined with bad intentions?
Bunch of angles up above looking down on hell sayin’, “Suckers!!!”.
It is paved in gold.
Then it is definately paved with bad intentions.
With things continuing in this direction we will soon be asking if Politician feces are good for lawns.
Good thing is that there are at least people concerned about the future and are ready to stand up for all of us.
P.S. Your Taxpayer advocate should go talk to one of those Timeshare Exit Solution companies, because that timeshare is like cancer growing on his throat.
Andy isn’t all that smart and I’m not sure how he managed to rise to the top (the Peter Principle?) However, I have a lot of respect for Steve Johnson and I doubt the facile explanation (that he didn’t understand it) is correct. While it’s entertaining to make fun of the GOP it’s not always fair and I don’t think it’s right to ridicule the one guy who is non-partisan enough that he risked his politican career to support C & D.
If it were anyone else I would say, “Wait a minute, they’re State Legislators, they can’t be THAT stupid can they?” Andy McElhany saying he’s TOO STUPID to Understand, YEP. That is way true. The Bugs Bunny Maroon of the Day Award to Andy.
When I used that line once, someone actually wrote in and accused me of being too stupid to spell “moron” correctly. I kid you not.
I love that line!
I admit that I have no clue who voted for what in 2004 or why. But, the legal debate in this matter seems to be whether freezing property tax mil levies violates TABOR because rising property values MAY increase tax REVENUES. Maybe this is naive, but I read Art X, Section 20.
The Constitutional provision that constitutes TABOR is pretty muddy.
Section (1) says “Revenue collected, kept or spent illegally … shall be refunded …”
Section (7) talks about SPENDING limits and Section (8) talks about REVENUE limits, but is mucked up with language that seems to refer to tax rates.
The Office of Planning and Budgeting (one of the Governor’s Officers) has a TABOR 101 PowerPoint (posted in the Spring 2006) that describes TABOR as a limit on REVENUE growth, not tax rates. So, is that presentation just flat wrong but the one put together by the Legislative Legal Service right?
Courts will probably be asked to sort it out, ’cause it ain’t obvious to me reading the amendment, and it does not appear that all the state bureaucrats have the same opinion, either.
He seems to understand babble.
Or Jared Polis, for that matter – to be even-handed.