« | »

Tax Cuts On Ballot ‘Stir Alarm’ At The NYT

From an outraged New York Times:

Tax Cuts on Colorado Ballot Stir Alarm

September 20, 2010

DENVER — With Republican candidates thundering against government spending and the Tea Party’s popularity soaring in parts of the country, one might think that any proposal aimed at lowering taxes would be a safe bet for the Republican Party these days.

But in a state known for strict constitutional limits on taxation, even Colorado’s conservative Republicans are alarmed by three ballot measures that would — of all things — cut taxes.

The measures — which would lower property, income and sales taxes; limit government borrowing; and reduce vehicle registration fees — are widely seen as too extreme by Democrats and Republicans alike.

In what possible way are these measures "extreme"? (And notice that they just happen to be some of the core tenets of the Tea Party.)

With the November election approaching, they present a test case for a conflict that is playing out, perhaps in less drastic fashion, throughout the country: voters showing a strong inclination to diverge from the recommendations of their elected officials.

And we cannot abide the serfs getting ‘uppity’ with their masters.

Both parties here fear that if frustrated voters approve the tax measures, they could pose major challenges for state and local governments in providing basic services.

We suspect that the state and local governments could still provide "basic services" – if they would cut some of their non-basic services. Which would be most of them.

“I don’t see them as good policy,” said State Senator Greg Brophy, a conservative from the state’s eastern plains, who worries that the proposals would make it virtually impossible to balance the budget. “It’s like losing your job and getting sick at the same time. I’m for limited government, but not no government.”

What a laugh. It never fails. As soon as anyone suggests reducing taxes and government spending, we start hearing cries of ‘anarchy!’

We have tried the other ‘extreme’ for at least sixty years. Why don’t we try actually cutting spending for once, just to see what might happen?

The proposals, which will appear on the November ballot and are backed by tax reform groups in Colorado, contain provisions to change the state’s tax code.

Amendment 60 would require school districts to cut property taxes, leaving it up to the state to replace the education funds that would subsequently be lost. Amendment 61 would prevent the state from borrowing money and would limit borrowing for local governments. And Proposition 101 would reduce the state income tax rate and slash vehicle and telecommunication fees.

Yes, such extreme measures would spell total anarchy for Colorado for sure.

A recent analysis by the state legislature found that if the measures pass, Colorado would lose $2.1 billion in revenue and would be forced to increase school spending by $1.6 billion to make up the shortfall created. Colorado would end up spending nearly all of its general fund budget on education as a result, the analysis concluded. An average family would save about $1,360 a year.

Huh? Why would cutting taxes mean an increase in school spending? And who did this "analysis," the NEA? As usual, when it comes to the actual details, the New York Times gets as clear as mud.

For politicians and civic groups, even those who support limited government, those numbers are terrifying enough to have spurred a voter outreach effort by elected officials. Indeed, many officials fear that the proposals could actually be passed by unwitting voters, particularly Republicans, who might be seduced by tax cuts

This month, a vast majority of the state’s Republican legislators took the unusual step of signing a letter urging their constituents to reject the measures.

It really is the Ruling Class versus Us.

Supporters of the measures, including COtaxreforms.com, have shrugged off fears. They argue that the ballot measures would actually shield Coloradans from debt and ultimately stimulate job growth. Proponents also note that it would take years for all of the measures to be implemented

Not to mention that a black robed mullah sitting on a bench somewhere will declare it unconstitutional for the citizenry to decide such things.

That sentiment is not lost on State Representative Frank McNulty, a conservative Republican from Highlands Ranch, who said frustration with government spending was “palpable.”

Nonetheless, Mr. McNulty has been urging voters to resist supporting the antitax measures because he feels they would severely limit Colorado’s ability to finance or invest in critical services like road maintenance, education and water infrastructure

So The Times managed to find two so-called “conservatives” who oppose these measures. And this warrants their claim that “even Colorado’s conservative Republicans are alarmed by three ballot measures that would — of all things — cut taxes”?

(By the way, it is perhaps telling to note that the word ‘antitax’ is not even recognized by Microsoft’s spell check. Instead it suggests: antitoxin, ant tax, antigay, antitoxic, antiwar. So, according to Microsoft, it is more likely there would be a tax on ants than that anyone would be antitax.)

A poll conducted last month by Floyd Ciruli, a Denver pollster, found that 51 percent of voters support Proposition 101. The other two measures are faring less favorably, but a large number of voters still have little or no knowledge of any of the proposals, the poll found

Don’t worry, the more the good people of Colorado learn about these proposals, the more popular they will become. Voters everywhere tend to exhibit remarkable good sense when it comes to spending their own hard-earned money.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, September 21st, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

4 Responses to “Tax Cuts On Ballot ‘Stir Alarm’ At The NYT”

  1. proreason says:

    “It really is the Ruling Class versus Us.”


    And there are a lot more of Us.

    just saying

  2. oldpuppydixie says:

    Have the panicked cries of “no police”, “no firemen”, no hospitals and the like begun yet?? And SURELY schools will close, class sizes will triple, garbage will rot in the streets, dogs and cats will sleep together…Colorado political hacks REALLY need to borrow some of the pathetic, phony tripe Chicago Mayor Daley inevitably spouts whenever the notion of tax cuts rears its ugly head. I believe he has put it in BOOK form.

  3. NoNeoCommies says:

    Just like so much else that they fight (Arizona’s law), they cannot let something like this succeed or have any success known widely; otherwise they lose.

  4. untrainable says:

    The only suprising thing here is that these measures even got on the ballot. What happened? Who fell asleep and let this one get by the elite filter? I’m also curious about the “vast majority of the state’s Republican legislators” being against these measures. How many in a “vast” majority exactly? Let’s see the numbers. Let’s see the names. Let’s see the letter.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »