U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(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) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
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%
October 19, 2005 08:00 AM UTC
104 Comments
Colorado tuition hike the biggest in the nation
http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/education/article/0,1299,DRMN_957_4169108,00.html
Of course the John Andrews’ of the world don’t see this as any reason for concern because, afterall, public universities are still affordable to the wealthy.
The economic consequences of the collapse of our public university system will be dire, our economy is dependent on an educated work force.
I wonder how many who are planning on voting against Ref C & D attended public universities? Why do you want to deny that experience to others?
I read this morning that Colorado’s tuition increases this year for higher ed are the highest in the nation (17%). If C passes, does that mean that the universities will lower their tuition fees?
Just for the record, I’m a yes vote on C & D.
That would be up to the legislature, Quimby, in setting the amount they put into the student vouchers. The sad reality is that C’s passage is necessary to forestall even greater increases. CU will probably rise from $4,000 to 8-10 a year if C fails. I’d love to see a rollback, though, but with an estimated $369 million shortfall in the general fund and the need to start putting money back into highways, I’m afraid it’s a case of mostly stopping things from getting even worse. P.S. Drop that phony Kennedy accent, Quimby!
I’ve come around to supported Ref C myself due to extensive research that I did on the outcome of a failure to higher education.
Colorado is 48th out of the 50 states in funding per capita for higher education. That is WITHOUT the further cuts that would occur if Ref C fails. If Ref. C fails, we likely drop to dead last in state funding for higher ed within a couple years. DEAD LAST. No way to spin this folks. Those are the facts that everyone agrees with.
Do we really want our state to have the worst support for higher education in the entire country?!?
Interesting how all the talk is of PERCENTAGE increases. The main reason the PERCENTAGE increase is so high is that tuition in Colorado has been artificially low for years. Now that we are 48th in the nation for funding higher ed, increases are inevitable.
Hey, why settle for 48th? Vote no on C and we can be 50th!
By the way, the recent tuition increases are nothing compared to those that will come if C fails. Our colleges and universities would have to increase tuition as much as SEVENTY percent in order to recoup the cuts that are expected with a Ref C failure.
Now of course colleges universities won’t ask for a one-year, seventy percent increase. But we can certainly expect several 20-30% increases over the next few years. There really is no choice but to do this, if C fails. Colleges and universities are already running a very tight ship because of the 30% cuts since 2001, so there really isn’t any significant fat left to trim. Moreover, the costs of higher ed are not coming down, and those have to be covered somehow. If the funds don’t come from state tax revenue, then it will have to come from the pockets of students and their families. There’s just no alternative.
The state will never let CU or CSU go private. But before long, without state support, those two universities might as well be private, because the tuition costs will be on par with private institutions. Private institutions are so expensive because they do not receive state funding. What you see at private institutions is a tuition rate that actually reflects the costs incurred to deliver a higher education when there’s not help from tax revenue. So if our state doesn’t fund higher ed, will we see the tuition costs of our state institutions approach those of private institutions. There is no alternative. Again, the costs aren’t going away, and if the funds to cover those costs don’t come from the state, they’ll have to come from tuition.
By the way, the recent tuition increases are nothing compared to those that will come if C fails. Our colleges and universities would have to increase tuition as much as SEVENTY percent in order to recoup the cuts that are expected with a Ref C failure.
Now of course colleges universities won’t ask for a one-year, seventy percent increase. But we can certainly expect several 20-30% increases over the next few years. There really is no choice but to do this, if C fails. Colleges and universities are already running a very tight ship because of the 30% cuts since 2001, so there really isn’t any significant fat left to trim. Moreover, the costs of higher ed are not coming down, and those have to be covered somehow. If the funds don’t come from state tax revenue, then it will have to come from the pockets of students and their families. There’s just no alternative.
The state will never let CU or CSU go private. But before long, without state support, those two universities might as well be private, because the tuition costs will be on par with private institutions. Private institutions are so expensive because they do not receive state funding. What you see at private institutions is a tuition rate that actually reflects the costs incurred to deliver a higher education when there’s not help from tax revenue. So if our state doesn’t fund higher ed, will we see the tuition costs of our state institutions approach those of private institutions. There is no alternative. Again, the costs aren’t going away, and if the funds to cover those costs don’t come from the state, they’ll have to come from tuition.
What is wrong with students paying a larger share of their tuition? It is an investment–likely one of the best investments that most of them will ever make.
Commonsense:
Apparently you have none. Students don’t have money to “invest” that’s why they need help. It’s a fact that students will go where they can get the best education for as little money as possible, or many simply will NOT go to school at all.
If other states are offering cheap tuition, their kids will go to college. Ours won’t or they will go out of state and stay out of state.
Meanwhile, Colorado will become an uneducated backroads. Since people won’t have high incomes to tax– guess what, we’ll have to increase taxes.
I’m amazed how many people don’t get what a great investment higher ed is.
Common Sense:
We already have students finishing college and carrying college loans of $40K. They are already starting their working lives in the hole. Increasing tuition will not require them to ‘invest’ in their future it will add even more to their financial burden (of course then when they need to take bankruptcy, that will be an even more pleasant experience, now).
You guys are trying to argue logically, this is how it works.
Jon Caldara gets the opportunity to attend CU because the previous generation invested in things like public higher education so Jon could learn the skills to be successful. Jon has now taken these skills to take away public higher education from the next generation. Jon wouldn’t be where he is today without public higher education and now he wants to take that opportunity away from others. You can draw your own conclusions on what type of person Jon is.
This is how the anti-Colorado Economic Recovery Act crowd thinks. They have got theirs, the hell with everyone else.
dd,
I find it ironic that you criticize someone for having no common sense. Please tell me where in the Constitution does it state that citizens have a right to a college degree? Where does it say that taxpayers must pay for others to get a college education? I must have missed it.
As for Colorado becoming an educational backroads, what proof do you have to offer that this is becoming the case?
I understand that a college degree is a good investment, but I do not think that the founding fathers ever considered it so important that taxpayers should cover a good chunk of the tuition costs.
RogerD,
I have no wealth. Why do you think that I should help other people to pay off their college debt when I worked my way through college and paid for everything?
I would like some “chowda” for lunch 😉
Here here, Jonathan. Higher education makes a lot of sense and helping kids get there is supremely good public policy for a great many reasons, but it is most certainly not a right, and the help must be fair to taxpayers.
RogerD, why are you using a private school debt figure of $40,000 to make your point? Regardless, my college debt was about that much and I had a job to cover everything else. And guess what? I used my degree to go out and get a better job and paid off the debt. And it was the incremental subsidy of the interest rate on my loan by the federal government that helped me help myself, not taxpayer-funded tuition.
Jonathan:
What was the cost of a college education when you attended? How does that compare to costs now?
The point is, that college is increasingly out of the financial range of most middle class families, regardless of how much they ‘work their way through’. Many of the students graduating with high student loan debt, did work their way through college. They worked their way through, but still need loans to pay for their education.
Keeping higher education affordable and accessible is equally as desirable for our economic health as providing K-12 education.
This is not about a right, it is about enlightened self-interest. Society and our economy as a whole benefit from a first-class, accessible education system.
Alright, I know how important higher education, however, I am beginning to wonder why college tuition HAS to go up? I was an adjunct faculty at one of the states institution and let’s just say tuition was not going up because I was making a lot of money. With colleges having upwards of 70% of faculty as adjunct (CCD for example) why is it that tuition has to increase?
Adjuncts are paid per class, and now not just per class but it depends on the number of students in your class as to how much you earn. No benefits are bestowed on these people, but just they are teaching the next generation.
Just wondering….
What’s wrong with $40K in debt and a college degree in your back pocket?
If you make just $15,000 per year more than the person without the college degree, the future value of that cash flow at 7% interest at the end of 30 years is over $1.4 MM.
Sounds like a good deal to me.
N=30
I/YR=7
PV=0
PMT=15,000
FV=1.41 MM
Costs will continue to go up because they can. C will enable even more inefficiency and waste. Where does it end? It never does for government and those at the trough of govt. Save for your own education and invest in yourself. If you’re not a worthwhile investment to yourself, why should we invest in you?
Roger D,
The cost of college now is just as high, accounting for inflation, as when I went. And while I agree tht college is out of range for some people, those who really want to go can find a way through loans, scholarships, or getting a job.
The amount of money that a person can make wit a college far outweighs the amount of debt that they have if they take out loans.
I think that your arguement that keeping higher education affordable and accessible is desireable for our economic health is a red herring. Look at history, up until the 1040’s and social programs there were no government programs to send students to college, yet our economy has historically been on of the strongest in the world.
And if your read the Constitution some time you will not see the words “enlightened self-interest” anywhere. Our society benefits from the personal responsibilities and achievements of millions of Americans.
Jonathan:
Where did I ever say that it was in the constitution that a college education is a right? The constitution does not guarantee good roads either, but even anyone knows they are essential to a successful economy.
How is Colorado an educational backroads? How about the fact that only 39% of our high school students go to college, one of the lowest rates in the country.
You all seem to assume that there is enough student loan money out there for students who want it. WRONG. Good old W has cut these programs meaning many kids cannot get loans or funds and we will all pay for their diminished income and education in the long run.
If the anti-Colorado Economic Recovery Act crowd is so self sufficient then it is time that anyone that is voting No on C & D that went to a higher education institute to pay up. We helped them get the opportunity to go to college and now they want to take that opportunity away from the next generation.
Luckily Republicans are looking at cutting federal support for student loans to pay for their tax cuts for the Rich. So us poor folk won’t have to worry about that way to help pay to attend college. Looks like if you aren’t a trust fund baby you can kiss your chance at the American Dream goodbye. Just the way the Republicans want it.
The American Dream is on life support and Republicans have just pulled the plug.
Jonathan, the constitution doesn’t say “Jonathan is an idiot” either. But that doesn’t mean its not the case.
dd,
Please read my post. Please point out where I stated that you said “that a college education is a right”. I was just trying to educate you to the fact that the Constitution does say that a college education is a right.
As for building roads, Please read Article 1, section 8, clause 7. There is also the fact that the federal government is supposed to “provide for the common defence” which is easier to do with roads than without. All of that said I do think that the federal government spends too much money on roads, it would be better if the federal government reduced taxes and allowed the states to decide how to build roads. But I digress.
Again, if you read my post you will see that I never mentioned that there were enough loans to go around. People can also work their way through school or work hard in High School and get a scholarship.
And exactly how is it that “we will all pay for their diminished income and education in the long run.”?
Marshall, your comment about cutting loans to pay for tax cuts for the rich is ignorant. I din’t understand what you mean by stating “if you aren’t a trust fund baby you can kiss your chance at the American Dream goodbye.”
My dad is a blue collar worker and I went to college by paying for it myself. And why on earth would you say that the Republicans want people to fail? That is really ignorant.
One thing I absolutely cannot stand is this fucking entitlement mentality you crybaby Democrats have. I’m not rich, nor are my parents. I’m working two jobs to pay off my bills and loans, so is my sister. Just because you are used to getting help from the federal government doesn’t mean you have a fundamental right to it. You do, however, should you choose to do so, have the right to get off your ass, work as many jobs as it takes, and put yourself through school. Hey marshall, the American Dream is building something from nothing because you have the freedom to do it. Not “we give poor whiny ass clowns handouts because his parents never showed him how to live on his own without help.”
PoliceSquad,
“Jonathan, the constitution doesn’t say “Jonathan is an idiot” either. But that doesn’t mean its not the case.”
That is what I expect from ignorant people that have nothing valid to add to the arguement.
You’re wrong, Police Squad. Article 9, section 14 of the constitution DOES say “Jonathan is an idiot.”
I guess it is time for the 64,000 dollar questions…where did you go to college Jonathan?
The point was that some people need public higher education and it seems like some Republicans (not all I commend our governer and other Republicans working hard on this commen sense approach) want to make college as unafforable as possible. Republicans are looking at cutting student loans which is going to take the opportunity of higher education away from millions of Americans.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aqT__dR.tqBo&refer=us
Getting a higher education has been my route to the American Dream and I am sure yours also. I would hate to see others have that opportunity taken away.
With good management, no tuition increases are needed.
But academic management is an oxymoron, for obvious reasons.
I’d like to know what the people who think college is out of reach feel that students should be paying for school?
Someone said in here that “college costs the same as it did 30 years ago” if you adjust for inflation.
Well, that might be true.
But wages are not the same as they once were. Real wages and earnings have consistently fallen for the middle class and working poor since about the 1960s. The rich are getting richer, the poor and getting poorer.
My point being, that tuition being the “same price” is meaningless, since Americans don’t get paid nearly as much as they used to.
And a college education IS part of the American dream, if not outlined in the Constitution. Public education is the foundation of this great country. Look at the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 that mandated monies for public schools, and the history of land grant colleges.
Also, China is NOT skipping out on making sure it?s citizens get college degrees. Seems the anti-C&D crowd has no problem letting our country fall behind China.
And Donald Johnson–WTF makes you think you’re qualified to make such a statement? Ever been a university professor, employee, or administrator?
And college should be FREE! Instead of a war based on lies costing $200 Billion to seize the 2nd largest oil reserve in the world (which somehow ended up doubling my gas prices), we could have sent every kid in the USA to college.
Priorities, I guess.
I am sensing a minor inconsistency amongst the dems on this point.
If preserving taxpayer funded education with state dollars is vital to the middle class, yet the existing tax system unfairly burdens the middle class, aren’t you basically just arguing that the middle class’s tax burden should go up in order to help the middle class? How is that different than forcing middle class families to obtain loans?
While you’re at it, pacified, take five minutes and bring world peace.
Utopian dreams aside, Hank Brown is right that our generation was able to work through college because tuition, while not free, was affordable. I worked 40 hours a week through both my undergraduate and graduate degrees. But if C fails, only the rich can afford college in Colorado. This is one Republican who doesn’t want that to happen.
JJ, the whole purpose of college is to take dirt poor kids like me and turn them into middle-class taxpayers. In the process, they turn born-poor Democrats into tax-paying middle-class Republicans. That’s what George Bush wants to do, that’s what Bill Owens wants to do, that’s what Referenda C and D will do. It’s a clever plan for Republican hegemony and I couldn’t be prouder of it!
Marshall,
I went to DePauw University, thanks for asking.
Now, Why should I answer any more of your questions unless you are willing to answer mine?
When you answer this then I will continue; “why on earth would you say that the Republicans want people to fail?”
Pacified,
if you read my post, you will see that I never said that “college costs the same as it did 30 years ago”. I said it costs the same as when I went. Get your facts straight.
As for a college education being part of the American Dream, it may be, but please tell me wher you have a right to your dream coming true? For example, my American Dream is that I would have $10 million dollars and a home in Aspen. Now, should the government give me what I want or should I have to earn it?
K-12 education is a great part of our country and I am glad that taxpayers provide that opportunity and as I said, I have no problem with the state spending money on building colleges, but if people want more education they should pay for it.
You just fall apart by the end of your post, pacified. Your China arguement is just silly. your math is fuzzy (with 15.5 million students in college it would cost $310 billion per year with a 20k tuition base).
A few semi-random comments on higher ed:
1. If Colorado funding is 48th in the nation, aren’t we getting great bang for our buck? Four nobel winners coming out of CU-Boulder in five years!
2. Fewer people should be going to college to begin with, though I don’t like that this result is driven by economic considerations. If primary and secondary schools were actually educational institutions instead of baby-sitting centers for cultural homogenization, the university system wouldn’t have turned into yet another vocational ed. program where the government pays for education so business won’t have to.
3. Even to the extent that universities don’t function as vocational ed, and focus on forming a moderately wise citizenry, their defining ethos is almost entirely that of the Unitarian seminary: tolerance, diversity, moral and religious indifferentism, and a keen worship of one’s ego. This is not surprising, considering their model is Harvard–a school taken over by the Unitarians back in the 1800s. I, for one, don’t like funding the only form of prosyletizing that this ethos practices.
4. If public universities in Colorado suddenly magically received a ridiculously huge endowment, how much would tuition actually decline? If somebody can cite a university system that actually cut tuition rates recently, I’d like to see it.
Some sort of personal life-confession seems de rigeur on this forum, so I’ll just say that I’m a recent CU grad, with a useless major, who actually considered heading to CU-Boulder for law school.
The overall quality of your arguments convinces me of one thing…you really do have a useless major.
But whose fault was that?
As scintilating as this erudite and learned discussion of the value of higher education and its relation to C+D is, I thought I might drop a little political gossip, which is what I think most readers of this blog actually value:
At lunch today at Racines, lo and behold, there was First Lady Frances Owens having, what appeared to be, a delightful lunch with Democrat Auditor, Dennis Gallagher.
Would love to have been a fly on the wall (or at least the table top) to eaves drop on that conversation. Gallagher seemed to be showing her some calligraphy.
Curiouser and Curiouser.
Why the hell are we using the percentage of per capita income that goes towards higher ed as the scale?
For example: if the average per capita income in CO is $50,000, and the per capita spending on higher ed is %7, then the average per capita investment into higher ed is $3,500
Wheras, the average per capita income in MO is $30,000, and the per capita spending is %10 the average investment would be $3,000.
So while the average Colorado taxpayer would be spending more money towards Higher Ed, we would stilll be behind MO on this scale….
If you want to make an argument that higher ed is underfunded this is not figure that makes that point, all this points out is that other states pay a bigger chunk of their lower incomes, how backward is that….
Them Thar Roger D uses him big words.
I’ve lived in many different states over the years including states on both coasts. And without exception, every state I have ever lived in has claimed that they were either 48th or 49th in school funding.
I would hope that it is not me, and my presence, that has caused this phenomenon to occur, but I find it very interesting that there seems to be a competition among states to get themselves placed at the bottom of the proverbial money-spent list.
I have to wonder, why 48 and 49? Why not shoot for 50th and really get the tears and cash flowing.
I support public education and feel it is one of the most important things we can do as a civilized society. I am, however skeptical of how current money is being spent. We have doubled the amount of money that we have spent on education (K-12) in the last 3 decades, yet test scores remain the same and have even dropped in math and science.
If the people who manage your 401K doubled the amount that they charge to manage your retirement, yet provided no improved benefit, wouldn’t you want to question why or look to another provider? Or would you just send them more money.
I think the frustration that many Republicans feel, is that we know that there is almost no way to reform public education. It is simply too entrenched with folks who prefer the status quo. If you question the current educational practices, or propose a new way of doing business your instantly branded as a nazi, a teacher-hater, or anti-child. I applaud those who are willing to be villified as a result of asking the important questions or demanding accountability.
So in the end, I’m still voting yes on C&D knowing fair well that it will benefit Ward Churchill and all the other loonies that have made higher ed their respective homes. I’m willing to overlook the efficiencies in the hope of a greater good for the students and to get us to at least 47th on someones list.
You’re a good man, Quimby. Never forget CU produced Ed Rozek and John Nelson too…and both did more for Colorado on a single lunch break than a churchill in his whole miserable career.
Nelson, sadly, has now passed away. I understand there is a wake for him Sunday at Mackey.
But if C fails, only the rich can afford college in Colorado. This is one Republican who doesn’t want that to happen.
My grandpa was an auto mechanic in Longmont his whole life, and his modest paycheck was enough for my grandmother and him to buy a house and send four of their five children to college (CU and UNC), and two of them to graduate school out-of-state. I’m sure they had financial stresses, but basically they lived the American Dream on a single tradesman’s pay, and ended with a comfortable amount for retirement. They were very glad in their golden years that they had helped their children learn and get ahead by attending college. It made them feel worthwhile.
My wife and I live not far from grandpa’s old place on Pratt St. We’re both professionals who’ve worked in our careers for over ten years and we are paid well. We are planning and saving, and we will still have a hard time paying for college when my son is ready.
I would blame it on higher ed itself–obviously those costs are rising too quickly–but the same pattern holds true everywhere, from financing a house to just paying the bills.
The middle class is being squeezed out of existence.
Roger D., is it possible to have a delightful lunch with Dennis G., particularly if he pulls out his latest calligraphic efforts?
Not if he also does his churchill imitations, Brio.
Here’s some info from today’s Denver Post about Colorado leading the nation in tuition increases.
2005-2006 percentage increases and tuition rates
Colorado 17% $4260
Kentucky 13.8% $4880
Michigan 11.6% $7100
South Carolina 11.1% $6910
Tennessee 10.2% $4650
National Average 7.1% $5491
If we increase tuition 25% for 2006-2007, we’ll still end up below the national average.
Alcohol and travel budgets just were reviewed and revised this year and they say no more fat is to be found?
Why do Republicans hate America?
What happened to all the media hecklers? You know the ones. The ones slamming the Democrats for “irresponsibly” refusing to negotiate with Bush unless he took privatization off the table. That was, supposedy, irresponsible because of the looming crisis. Well, if it ever existed it’s got to still be looming. So isn’t it irresponsible of the administration to have suddenly dropped the topic?
I challenge you “righties”, to visit this site and argue with us there.
Go ahead. Take the plunge. It will do us all good.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/
Voyageur-
A body like Dionysius, tall and bald
the mighty intellect and a tongue that scalds
Insight into everthing thats is bought and sold
butwhen he looks inside he finds no soul
Poor wretch!
Beaupreznit-Thank you for your Heart, your Soul, your Honesty and Humanity….we’ll win this battle against all who esposue their selfish, short sighted and godless aims.
Yesterday, Harriet Miers revealed on a Senate questionnaire that she was suspended this year from D.C. bar for late payment of dues:
U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers told the U.S. Senate on Tuesday her ability to practice law in the District of Columbia was briefly suspended this year because of nonpayment of bar association dues.
But she left out one thing. Miers was also suspended from the Texas bar for late payment of dues in 1989. She sent a letter to Pat Leahy today revealing her suspension and blaming it on an ?administrative error.? You can read the letter HERE.
It?s not a good development for a nominee whose supporters have been trumpeting her as extremely conscientious ?
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:
[Gonzales] said Miers will do well because she is ?very detail oriented? and ?very meticulous.?
Assistant Secretary of State Kristen Silverberg:
She?s very meticulous?It?s always about making sure that everything is perfect?
Looks like it?s time for a new set of talking points.
Let’s see….the Republican Majority thinks it’s ok to spend $250 BILLION to provide one man (George Bush) an education on foreign policy (i.e., Iraq and fighting terrorism), but leaves One Child Left Behind UNDERFUNDED to educate millions of AMERICAN children! What is wrong with this picture? Bring it on!
Let’s see….the Republican Majority thinks it’s ok to spend $250 BILLION to provide one man (George Bush) an education on foreign policy (i.e., Iraq and fighting terrorism), but leaves One Child Left Behind UNDERFUNDED to educate millions of AMERICAN children! What is wrong with this picture? Bring it on!
When you want someone to point out all the problems and shortcomings of society without offering any of their own soutions…talk to a liberal.
The Democrats continue to yell and scream but where is their agenda? What is their plan? where would they lead the U.S. and how? I have yet to see the national Democrats and their leader Howard Dean say what they would do.
Social Security and political games, “why do Republicans hate America?” Please give me some examples of how we hate America.
I’m reading a great book right now entitled The Right Nation, Conservative Power in America by John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge. I recommend it to all junkies, but in particulary to liberals. It is a fun read and has wit and humor. But what I’m finding most interesting in it is that it chronicles “message” in the American political world.
I don’t really feel a need to help liberals win elections, but reading this book would help them see the landscape from a different perspective.
I just read this:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/election/article/0,1299,DRMN_36_4172209,00.html
I am voting yes on C and D now. What are we doing in Colorado?
First Democrats have a great many solutions to make our nation what it should be, just because Republicans talk to other Republicans about how the Democrats don’t have any ideas doesn’t make it so. Creating caricatures must be hard.
I tried to read Coulters books…couldn’t do it, I have read Hannity’s first book, it was ok, I have read all of O’reilly’s books, he used to be ok, not sure what happened to him lately, I have read my share of conservative books. If you think the Republican pary is conservative then you really need to take a closer look.
Keith – Maybe when I stop by to pick up your donation check for our C and D bet we can trade books. 😉
Also all the C and D signs on my block were taken last night, this is just pathetic, this is how these people act.
Marshall, I have listened to the Dem talking heads on the news, I have read them in the papers and I still fail to see their plan to make the US better. I saw a lot of attacks on Republicans, but I don’t see how the Dems are going to make things better.
Marshall,
Right Nation…isn’t a hack job ala Coulter’s book. It’s an upper level text required at CU. I’d be happy to send you a copy, email me your address if you want.
Sorry to hear about your signs. Not 😉
Keith,
Sorry to hear about your signs. Not 😉
Can I infer from this that you think such vandalism is okay? Fair? Funny?
If there were any anti-C & D signs around, I can’t imagine trashing them. I would be the first to reprimand anyone doing dirty tricks, Republican or Democrat or whatever. I disagree strongly with your side, but I fully respect your First Amendment rights.
It says something profoundly sad about public discourse today that Republicans deface expressions of free speech, and you cheer them on. We should do better, and you should condemn illegal tactics.
I don’t think vandalism is okay. I oppose vandalism.
I do think that its funny that somebody pulled up Marshall’s signs. They may have been placed illegally on public right of ways, I don’t know. Could have been pulled up by CDOT, I don’t know.
Profound sadness is something I have to keep at bay every day.
Anti C and D goons tore down signs in my neighborhood this week also. I hope the goons keep it up. It’s infuriating the decent people of this state and building turnout.
Send the Goons a message,
vote yes on C and D.
All the signs were on private property in people’s front yards. If another anti C and D goon comes onto my property to steal my new Yes On C and D sign I am picking up today let it be known that I will shot first and ask questions later. How about this for a message Keith – go ahead Make My Day anti C and D goons.
Good man, Marshall! You know what Napoleon said about a whiff of grapeshot having a beneficial effect on the rabble.
So, Marshall you are willing to shoot someone and possibly kill them over a couple of yard signs? Granted, stealing is wrong, but do you think that shooting them is justified?
Whatever happened to the punishment fitting the crime?
I agree with Marshall. Thieves come on my land at the risk of being shot.
No on C. For the children!
Always knew Jonathan was a bleeding heart, soft-on-crime, gun-hating liberal at heart!
Be nice to the goons, they’re just victims of society.
NRA all the way,
Yes on C and D
Jonathan,
Don’t come onto my property and you won’t have anything to worry about. I only have a 9mm but first it?s the yard signs and the “next thing you know there’s change missing from your dresser and your daughter’s knocked up. I’ve seen it a hundred times” and I am not going to take any chances.
Sorry I didn’t answer your questions the other day, basically I don’t think Republicans want people to fail but somehow their world view doesn’t justify making group investment in the commons. I really feel some Republicans (not all I think responsible Republicans that aren’t trying to pad their name identity like Owens gets it) have no concept of the commons and how it helps us all succeed and how a little investment from each one of us makes the community stronger as a whole. It is almost like feudal system where the kings felt they were doing the right thing because the people couldn’t be trusted to govern themselves and think how long that world view existed.
Just found out that I have mutual friends in VA with the guy that got killed in Sunshine Canyon while forcing his way into a private home.
They say he was a star back in the UVA days and was a good father untill Heroin addition took over the past few years eventually ending his life.
The make my day law is a good thing.
Anti C and D idiots vandalized all “YES” signs in my neighborhood last weekend as well! Amazing these heartless lost souls.
YES on C!
Anti C and D idiots vandalized all “YES” signs in my neighborhood! Amazing these heartless lost souls.
YES on C!
I agree with Marshall and Keith about wasting sign vandals. I protected my own Yes on C and D signs with a few discreet land mines.
Unfortunately, the damn mailman took a shortcut across my lawn and I’m not sure I’ll ever get the paperwork straighted out, even though the doctors did reattach his leg and he’s expected to be walking again in six months, I’m happy to say. I would have probably been indicted, but the DA here in Texas was too busy tracking down Tom DeLay. As it is, the new mailman won’t even deliver to me any more, and especially not my copy of the Shotgun News. Plus, my pansies were blown to Kansas! And you all know how they treat pansies in Kansas.
woe, woe, woe. I don’t advocate wasting sign vandals. Yikes.
“One Child Left Behind”
OK I’m BRINGING IT on babe, heads up.
I thought it was no child left behind, or am I being stupid?
Xcel energy donated $25,000 towards the Yes on C&D group.
The free choice side of me says ok, the activist in me is calling ’em some highly filthy names and the thorn in my side ain’t goin away soon.
The Colorado Constitution
Article X
Section 20
The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.
(1) General provisions. This section takes effect December 31, 1992 or as stated. Its preferred interpretation shall reasonably restrain most the growth of government. All provisions are self-executing and severable and supersede conflicting state constitutional, state statutory, charter, or other state or local provisions. Other limits on district revenue, spending, and debt may be weakened only by future voter approval. Individual or class action enforcement suits may be filed and shall have the highest civil priority of resolution. Successful plaintiffs are allowed costs and reasonable attorney fees, but a district is not unless a suit against it be ruled frivolous. Revenue collected, kept, or spent illegally since four full fiscal years before a suit is filed shall be refunded with 10% annual simple interest from the initial conduct. Subject to judicial review, districts may use any reasonable method for refunds under this section, including temporary tax credits or rate reductions. Refunds need not be proportional when prior payments are impractical to identify or return. When annual district revenue is less than annual payments on general obligation bonds, pensions, and final court judgments, (4) (a) and (7) shall be suspended to provide for the deficiency.
(2) Term definitions. Within this section:
(a) “Ballot issue” means a non-recall petition or referred measure in an election.
(b) “District” means the state or any local government, excluding enterprises.
(c) “Emergency” excludes economic conditions, revenue shortfalls, or district salary or fringe benefit increases.
(d) ” Enterprise ” means a government-owned business authorized to issue its own revenue bonds and receiving under 10% of annual revenue in grants from all Colorado state and local governments combined.
(e) “Fiscal year spending” means all district expenditures and reserve increases except, as to both, those for refunds made in the current or next fiscal year or those from gifts, federal funds, collections for another government, pension contributions by employees and pension fund earnings, reserve transfers or expenditures, damage awards, or property sales.
(f) “Inflation” means the percentage change in the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Denver-Boulder, all items, all urban consumers, or its successor index.
(g) “Local growth” for a non-school district means a net percentage change in actual value of all real property in a district from construction of taxable real property improvements, minus destruction of similar improvements, and additions to, minus deletions from, taxable real property. For a school district, it means the percentage change in its student enrollment.
(3) Election provisions.
(a) Ballot issues shall be decided in a state general election, biennial local district election, or on the first Tuesday in November of odd-numbered years. Except for petitions, bonded debt, or charter or constitutional provisions, districts may consolidate ballot issues and voters may approve a delay of up to four years in voting on ballot issues. District actions taken during such a delay shall not extend beyond that period.
(b) At least 30 days before a ballot issue election, districts shall mail at the least cost, and as a package where districts with ballot issues overlap, a titled notice or set of notices addressed to “All Registered Voters” at each address of one or more active registered electors. The districts may coordinate the mailing required by this paragraph (b) with the distribution of the ballot information booklet required by section 1 (7.5) of Article V of this constitution in order to save mailing costs. Titles shall have this order of preference: “NOTICE OF ELECTION TO INCREASE TAXES/TO INCREASE DEBT/ON A CITIZEN PETITION/ON A REFERRED MEASURE.” Except for district voter-approved additions, notices shall include only:
(i) The election date, hours, ballot title, text, and local election office address and telephone number.
(ii) For proposed district tax or bonded debt increases, the estimated or actual total of district fiscal year spending for the current year and each of the past four years, and the overall percentage and dollar change.
(iii) For the first full fiscal year of each proposed district tax increase, district estimates of the maximum dollar amount of each increase and of district fiscal year spending without the increase.
(iv) For proposed district bonded debt, its principal amount and maximum annual and total district repayment cost, and the principal balance of total current district bonded debt and its maximum annual and remaining total district repayment cost.
(v) Two summaries, up to 500 words each, one for and one against the proposal, of written comments filed with the election officer by 45 days before the election. No summary shall mention names of persons or private groups, nor any endorsements of or resolutions against the proposal. Petition representatives following these rules shall write this summary for their petition. The election officer shall maintain and accurately summarize all other relevant written comments. The provisions of this subparagraph (v) do not apply to a statewide ballot issue, which is subject to the provisions of section 1 (7.5) of Article V of this constitution.
(c) Except by later voter approval, if a tax increase or fiscal year spending exceeds any estimate in (b) (iii) for the same fiscal year, the tax increase is thereafter reduced up to 100% in proportion to the combined dollar excess, and the combined excess revenue refunded in the next fiscal year. District bonded debt shall not issue on terms that could exceed its share of its maximum repayment costs in (b) (iv). Ballot titles for tax or bonded debt increases shall begin, “SHALL (DISTRICT) TAXES BE INCREASED (first, or if phased in, final, full fiscal year dollar increase) ANNUALLY…?” or “SHALL (DISTRICT) DEBT BE INCREASED (principal amount), WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF (maximum total district cost), …?”
(4) Required elections. Starting November 4, 1992, districts must have voter approval in advance for:
(a) Unless (1) or (6) applies, any new tax, tax rate increase, mill levy above that for the prior year, valuation for assessment ratio increase for a property class, or extension of an expiring tax, or a tax policy change directly causing a net tax revenue gain to any district.
(b) Except for refinancing district bonded debt at a lower interest rate or adding new employees to existing district pension plans, creation of any multiple-fiscal year direct or indirect district debt or other financial obligation whatsoever without adequate present cash reserves pledged irrevocably and held for payments in all future fiscal years.
(5) Emergency reserves. To use for declared emergencies only, each district shall reserve for 1993 1% or more, for 1994 2% or more, and for all later years 3% or more of its fiscal year spending excluding bonded debt service. Unused reserves apply to the next year’s reserve.
(6) Emergency taxes. This subsection grants no new taxing power. Emergency property taxes are prohibited. Emergency tax revenue is excluded for purposes of (3) (c) and (7), even if later ratified by voters. Emergency taxes shall also meet all of the following conditions:
(a) A 2/3 majority of the members of each house of the general assembly or of a local district board declares the emergency and imposes the tax by separate recorded roll call votes.
(b) Emergency tax revenue shall be spent only after emergency reserves are depleted, and shall be refunded within 180 days after the emergency ends if not spent on the emergency.
(c) A tax not approved on the next election date 60 days or more after the declaration shall end with that election month.
(7) Spending limits. (a) The maximum annual percentage change in state fiscal year spending equals inflation plus the percentage change in state population in the prior calendar year, adjusted for revenue changes approved by voters after 1991. Population shall be determined by annual federal census estimates and such number shall be adjusted every decade to match the federal census.
(b) The maximum annual percentage change in each local district’s fiscal year spending equals inflation in the prior calendar year plus annual local growth, adjusted for revenue changes approved by voters after 1991 and (8) (b) and (9) reductions.
(c) The maximum annual percentage change in each district’s property tax revenue equals inflation in the prior calendar year plus annual local growth, adjusted for property tax revenue changes approved by voters after 1991 and (8) (b) and (9) reductions.
(d) If revenue from sources not excluded from fiscal year spending exceeds these limits in dollars for that fiscal year, the excess shall be refunded in the next fiscal year unless voters approve a revenue change as an offset. Initial district bases are current fiscal year spending and 1991 property tax collected in 1992. Qualification or disqualification as an enterprise shall change district bases and future year limits. Future creation of district bonded debt shall increase, and retiring or refinancing district bonded debt shall lower, fiscal year spending and property tax revenue by the annual debt service so funded. Debt service changes, reductions, (1) and (3) (c) refunds, and voter-approved revenue changes are dollar amounts that are exceptions to, and not part of, any district base. Voter-approved revenue changes do not require a tax rate change.
(8) Revenue limits. (a) New or increased transfer tax rates on real property are prohibited. No new state real property tax or local district income tax shall be imposed. Neither an income tax rate increase nor a new state definition of taxable income shall apply before the next tax year. Any income tax law change after July 1, 1992 shall also require all taxable net income to be taxed at one rate, excluding refund tax credits or voter-approved tax credits, with no added tax or surcharge.
(b) Each district may enact cumulative uniform exemptions and credits to reduce or end business personal property taxes.
(c) Regardless of reassessment frequency, valuation notices shall be mailed annually and may be appealed annually, with no presumption in favor of any pending valuation. Past or future sales by a lender or government shall also be considered as comparable market sales and their sales prices kept as public records. Actual value shall be stated on all property tax bills and valuation notices and, for residential real property, determined solely by the market approach to appraisal.
(9) State mandates. Except for public education through grade 12 or as required of a local district by federal law, a local district may reduce or end its subsidy to any program delegated to it by the general assembly for administration. For current programs, the state may require 90 days notice and that the adjustment occur in a maximum of three equal annual installments.
Source: Initiated 92: Entire section added, effective December 31, 1992, see L. 93, p. 2165. L. 94: (3)(b)(v) amended, p. 2851, effective upon proclamation of the Governor, L. 95, p. 1430, January 19, 1995. L. 96: IP(3)(b) and (3)(b)(v) amended, p. 1425, effective upon proclamation of the Governor, L. 97, p. 2393, December 26, 1996.
VOTE NO ON REF C!!!!!
Hey folks, don’t get me wrong I think protecting your property is great. I own several guns and would use them to protect my home and family. But if I saw someone stealing my yard signs my first thought would be to call the police, not to get my gun and shoot the person.
Marshall – “I don’t think Republicans want people to fail but somehow their world view doesn’t justify making group investment in the commons.”
I think this is one of the major differences between the Republicans and the Democrats. Republicans believe in personal responsibility and achievement. Republicans want everyone to succeed in life and achieve their dream, but we don’t believe that using government to redistribute wealth is the way to accomplish it. When folks say that we need to invest in our future I think about becoming more involved in my church and the community organization I volunteer for. I don’t think “the best way to invest in our future is to pay more taxes”. I just know that why the intent to help others is good the method of using government is poor.
If we raise taxes again to “help the children” all we will get will be bridges to nowhere.
Jonathon is on it Marshall. We all want to leave the place better than we found it. We (conservatives) find that allowing people to keep their money fosters better investment than redistributing money though government.
It would be just as easy for us to call you greedy (as you assert we are) in that you are working hard to pry money out of our pocket to put into your fiances tuition. But I don’t think you’re greedy because your idea of investment is different from mine.
Calling for debt through D to be paid for by the next generation isn’t my idea of leaving the place better.
Reagan said that LBJ fought the war on poverty and poverty won.
Reagan was right. One of the crown jewels of the Clinton administration was welfare reform. He cut dependence on give away programs dramitically and increased tax revenue by fostering an enviroment of self sufficiency and job creation.
I wish you could recognize that teaching a man to fish is better than just giving him a fish.
C&D will have no adverse affect on higher education. Regardless of the outcome, the cream will always rise to the top and those who truly want to be educated will get educated. The only adverse affect will be what type of tax burden do we leave to the next generation. In my mind it would be selfish of us to leave a larger and more expensive government than what we found.
Jefferson and Adams were able to do it without C and I have no doubt that your fiance will be able to do it without C.
Keith,
“C&D will have no adverse affect on higher education”
This is just wrong – tuition went up 30 percent this year at CSU and it will go up again if C and D doesn’t pass. Hank Brown knows it and so should any other sensible Republican. How many people will that keep out of the getting a higher education which for me has been the bedrock of living the American Dream. Without affordable higher education you can kiss the American Dream goodbye for anyone not born rich, that is wrong, and that is not the type of world I want to leave to the next generation.
Do you disagree there are investment that help our society as a whole succeed that each one of us as individuals could not make like roads, legal system, and public education. These are things that have made America what it is today and things we will continue to need to be successful.
Luckily my fiance only has a year left. The question is fairness, why should tuition for my fiance go up when your generation got the opportunity to get affordable higher education by the previous generation. The greatest generation made an investment in you but now your generation doesn’t want to make an investment in us. That is wrong Keith, just plain wrong.
Been looking at tuition lately. A dreary picture has been painted by the C&D forces. The gist of what I got after reading board minutes, planning and budget reports and comparisons to other states, is that we’re a heck of a deal here. I also got the idea that CU was ready for some level of privatization but the state wasn’t keen on it. Hopefully my reactions to what I read were legitimate. It’s difficult to find the time to read all of that, comprehend and catalog the info into factual, condensed data.
While Colorado may be on the lower end of the scale for subsidizing higher education, our tuition is very low to start with. So if it costs $25,000 to attend Michigan and Michigan kicks in 15,000, it still leaves $10,000 for the student. In Colorado it costs $6000 and the state subsidizes $2800, it leaves $3200 for the student. I’m not too smart but it seems Colorado is where I’d go. I realize out of state tuition is different. I think these comparisons don’t often take into account the higher level of federal funding we receive here in Colorado, which most states are not privileged to have.
To second Jonathan, I agree. I’ve notched up my volunteering already. I feel that I’m paying a hefty amount in taxes already. Please let me keep my TABOR refund and let me really help make this state better than before. Trust me, I can make my buck go a whole lot farther than the state can.
Lastly, I don’t believe representative government does work well without the people being involved. One thing I know, having attended many legislative sessions, whether it’s a city council or beyond. The more money they have to spend, the more likely it will all get spent. The less money, the less errant they may get when they sit in a position where they want to please every voter, who each by nature has their own special interest.
Keith,
the cream will always rise to the top and those who truly want to be educated will get educated
So it really doesn’t matter if Colorado gives any money to its public Universities or community colleges? Tuition can rise, schools can close, and somehow we’ll all muddle through and the winners will beat the losers?
If I worked hard in high school, but my family can’t afford to consider more education for me because the tuition is more than our house payments, then I didn’t “truly want” to be educated?
That’s not my world. I feel I have a responsibility to make education available and affordable to people who are willing to work hard, but don’t have a personal fortune. I’m not poor, but if I hadn’t received major financial assistance, I would not have been able to attend college. And that was a couple decades ago, when costs were half of what they are now.
You can freak about Ward Churchill and preach tough love for our schools, but it’s not helping one actual person go to college.
I didn’t say that it didn’t matter. I only believe that we will make it without greater government spending.
Beaupreznit,
I understand that you are passionate about higher education, so am I. What I don’t understand is where in the Colorado or the U.S Constitution does it say that the state should pay for tuition?
Also, I guarantee you if you work hard and get a 4.0 in High school you can get a scholarship. Even if you don’t get a scholarship you can get a job like I did to get through college.
You feel that you have a responsibility to make education available to those who work hard but don’t have money? Fine, then you should pay for other people’s education yourself, not with my money. Just because you feel it it your responsibility doesn’t make it mine. I choose to give money to organizations I believe in. I volunteer for organizations I believe in. If you believe in it so much why not give $5,000 a year to the government program of your choice?
It all boils down to this. Paying for people to go to college makes you feel better, but you don’t have enough money to do it, so you feel the need to confiscate other taxpayer?s money to help them out. All of this just so you can feel good. How pathetic.
Hi Jonathan,
What I don’t understand is where in the Colorado or the U.S Constitution does it say that the state should pay for tuition?
If it’s not written in the Constitution, then we can’t do it? What a laugh.
Also, I guarantee you if you work hard and get a 4.0 in High school you can get a scholarship.
You guarantee that? Your powers are amazing.
What if I only got a 3.5 GPA? Does your guarantee apply? Or I guess in that case. I “didn’t truly want to be educated.”
I want to live in a society where anyone, rich or poor, has a good chance to learn in college and create a better life for him or herself. America agrees with me. That’s why we have some public funding for higher education. You want to do away with that.
Let’s boil it down: it’s all about money for you. Your money. Keeping your money. Money you can “spend better than the government.” Money you worked hard for, and no one else is getting their hands on it. Money, money, money.
Republicans: continuing the age-old struggle to find a justification for selfishness.
If its not about the money to you, what do you want?
Maybe we should inform Jonathan that there is nothing in the constitution about the Federal Reserve either…time to scrap that while we’re at it, because Jonathan is a self made man that doesn’t need the Fedeal Reserve keeping him down. Down with wasteful government spending, get rid of the Federal Reserve.
Affordable higher education is not about income redistribution, it is about simple economics, the more educated your citizens are the more money they make, the more GDP, the more other countries by your products…China and India gets it and the greatest generation got it…when will Jonathan get it.
All government does is income redistribution. Government does nothing else.
Keith,
All government does is income redistribution. Government does nothing else.
Government also passes laws defining criminal behavior, resolves disputes through the legal system, forges agreements with foreign nations…well, we used to…and helps protect its citizens from harm. These are just a few essential activities that government does that do not involve sharing your tax dollars with fellow citizens you consider undeserving.
I have no love for government per se. It is a necessary evil. Apparently we disagree on the “necessary” part.
Perhaps I am to minimalistic with my speech. Let me insert a few more words.
All [of what] government does is [predicated on] income redistribution. Government [cannot and] does nothing else [without redistribution].
Beaupreznit,
“If it’s not written in the Constitution, then we can’t do it?”
You are finally starting to see the light. If it isn’t written into the constitution, or it was not provided for by the constitution, we can’t do it.
Please read my post!! If you read it you would see that I specifically said that if you didn’t get a scholarship, then you could get a job like I did and work your way through school.
Here is another difference between Republicans and Democrats. Democrats say “I want to live in a society where anyone, rich or poor, has a good chance to learn in college and create a better life for him or herself.” Republicans believe that we do live in a country where, regardless of wealth, you can achieve anything, including going to college (look at Lincoln as an example).
Again, how am I selfish if I want to decide how to spend my money or give it away to? You show your ignorance when you call Republicans selfish. Let me ask you this, how much money did I give to charity last year? I bet that I gave more than you.
I agree with Keith. If it is not about money to you then what do you want? Fact is you want our money to pay for your happiness.
Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan – I want to bring to your attention that Jonathan is sick of you regulating our money supply without express written approval in the constitution and frankly he can’t see how are really benefiting him. It is time we all took individual responsibility for the economy, this is a fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats, you are just a crutch for those millions of lazy Democrats that think we don’t live in the 1800s, they should have to deal with currency and economy swings we had before the federal reserve was created. He also wants to bring to your attention that you have no relevance in the larger economy because he gives so much money to charity and he isn’t going to pay for some wasteful federal reserve that just makes a bunch of Democrats happy. Thank you for addressing Jonathan?s concerns and don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
You stole that from Lyndon LaRouche.
I don’t advocate wasting LaRouche thieves.
Marshall,
You cannot attack the arguement I present so you go completely off the reservation. If you want to debate the issues please answer the questions I ask.
As for the Federal Reserve, Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power over money and the regulation of its value. This responsibility was delegated by Congress to the Federal Reserve. And I do personally believe it would be a good thing if the government got away from regulating many parts of the economy.
If you want to have a debate, we can, but if you are going to act like a child it isn’t worth it to me to debate you.
Jonathan, I hate to tell you but the Constitution doesn’t provide for an Air Force. It didn’t establish NASA either, so apparently we never went to the Moon. If you had the IQ of a clam, you’d know that the constitition only specifies what government MUST do and CANNOT do. It MUST provide a national defense and CANNOT quarter soldiers in your home in time of peace, etc. It doesn’t limit what we can CHOOSE to do, i.e. establish an air force, go to the moon and, yes, establish a federal reserve system. That all fits under the general welfare clause. Plus, if you’d actually READ the federal constitution…sorry, I forget you can’t read…you’d see the 9th and tenth amendments reserve rights to the states. One of those is education and the COLORADO constitution …you have heard of it, haven’t you?…DOES guarantee a thorough and uniform education. It also established the University of Colorado in 1876—the territorial legislature acted before we were even a state and the university was embedded in our founding document.
Neither I nor Marshall will debate you, however.
It would be like debating a fence post.
Keith, you’re spouting nonsense to say that all government can do is redistribute.
My father in law was a combat engineer who fought in Normandy. Was stopping Hitler just a matter of “redistribution?’
My uncle was a Korean War vet , my brother served two tours in Vietnam and I stood for one myself. I’d like to think the service of my family and our many comrades had a little something to do with stopping communist imperialism.
Those wars were fought by our government. And even though we lost in Vietnam, we kept defending the ramparts of freedom until under Reagan and George H.W. Bush, the Soviet Union collapsed and we won the Cold War.
Our government did that, under our flag and in behalf of We the People of the United States.
And if you think that’s nothing but redistribution, you can join the line to kiss my ass.
You’ll have to wait your turn, though, Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore are ahead of you.
Dude. No freedom cam be protected without funding. The government must redistribute first in order to pay for all the great things you listed. I fear that you believe government has money sans redistribution.
btw, Thank you for your service ProudVeteran.
casino games
Ottomanize,obstructed commends?topple lander!keenly flinching fertilizes.blackjack http://www.casino-bu.com/blackjack.html
penis enlargement
In addition http://penisenlargment.9cy.com‘ rel=”nofollow”>penis enlargement cycle!
A great marriage is not when the `perfect couple` comes together. It is when an imperfect couple learns to enjoy their differences.
buy alprazolam online
buy alprazolam online
If there was strife and contention in the home, very little else in life could compensate for it.
alprazolam
dogs Pickman impossibly graduations Cincinnati adducible,commute!wsop http://www.luxuryrenting.net/best-casinos.html
diet pills
Alexandria cannibalizing.unmanageable.infants Patricia.basket buy viagra http://www.mine-doctor.com/
amoxil
diazepam – diazepam clonazepam – clonazepam