Liberal and Loving It

Amendment 52 - Lock in I-70 Transportation Funding

Summary

An amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the allocation of revenues from the state severance tax imposed on minerals and mineral fuels other than oil shale that are extracted in the state, and, in connection therewith, for fiscal years commencing on or after July 1, 2008, requiring half of the revenues to be credited to the local government severance tax fund and the remaining revenues to be credited first to the severance tax trust fund until an annually calculated limit is reached and then to a new Colorado transportation trust fund, which may be used only to fund the construction, maintenance, and supervision of public highways in the state, giving first priority to reducing congestion on the Interstate 70 corridor.

Vote No

This is another case of a special interest group trying to do an end-run around the legislature and create a specific funding stream targeted directly at their needs. The true purpose of this bill is to provide funds for traffic mitigation on I-70 in the mountains. And to have this funding trump all other transportation and other needs in the state.

What's sad in this particular case is the primary sponsors are legislators. Guys, your job is to sell your funding requests to your peers, not to do an end run around the body you are a member of. You three should be ashamed of yourselves.

Arguments Against

Amendment 52 diverts money that would help meet Colorado's rapidly growing water demand and maintain its aging water supply system. Half of the money shifted to highway projects under this measure would be available under current law to provide loans and grants for water projects, water conservation, and other programs. A recent study indicated that current and planned water supply projects are likely to meet about 80 percent of the estimated new demand between 2004 and 2030. By shifting over $100 million in the next four years from water projects to transportation projects, Amendment 52 hurts the state's ability to meet long-term water supply needs.

Amendment 52 could politicize funding for transportation projects. To prevent political considerations from influencing the allocation of transportation money, an independent commission develops a statewide transportation plan that identifies, prioritizes, and selects transportation projects for funding. Giving budgeting authority for some of the money to the state legislature could result in the legislature selecting transportation projects based on political considerations.

Arguments For

Amendment 52 creates a permanent revenue stream for highway projects, with emphasis on congestion relief for I-70. I-70 is a key transportation corridor for both Colorado residents and visitors to the state. The highway supports both intra- and interstate commerce, provides access to key ski and recreational areas, and is an important commuter route.

Amendment 51 - Increased Funding for the Disabled

Summary

A targeted sales tax increase to provide targeted funding for persons with developmental disabilities. In addition, it prohibits reductions in the level of state appropriations in the annual general appropriations bill existing on the effective date of this measure for long-term services for persons with developmental disabilities.

Vote No

This is one small special interest group attempting to set their funding in the at a level they want to see. If this passes we will see 40 groups each with their own initiative in the next election.

It doesn't matter how righteous this request is, funding sources and levels are the responsibility of the legislature where they have to make the hard trade-offs between a never ending list of critical needs vs a limited amount of money. Allowing special interest groups to do an end-run around these trade-offs with feel-good legislation is a recipe for fiscal disaster.

Arguments Against

Raising sales taxes will hurt the state's economy and citizens. The economy is already struggling with a weak housing market and high gas and food prices. Further, raising sales taxes burdens lower- and middle-income consumers the most because it cuts into a larger share of their income.

The state government already spends about $4 billion, or about 30 percent of state and federal operating dollars, to provide health-care-related services, and this spending grows every year. The measure takes an additional $186 million out of the private economy to expand the size and cost of government.

Decisions about how to spend state tax dollars are best made through an open and deliberative process that considers the needs and priorities of the entire state. Amendment 51 permanently raises taxes without any discussion about whether the measure raises an appropriate amount of money, how the new money can be spent most effectively, or how the needs of people with developmental disabilities compare with other needs in the state.

The new money must be spent on services for people with developmental disabilities even if the amount raised exceeds what is legitimately needed to provide services, which could lead to wasteful spending while other needs remain under-funded.

Arguments For

Many children and adults with developmental disabilities — and the families who care for them — are at the point of crisis because they cannot get needed services. No alternative public sector safety net exists to provide care for them. The demand for services continues to grow because people with developmental disabilities are vulnerable and often need life-long care, and there are many aging parents who can no longer care for their children with developmental disabilities.

Amendment 50 - More Gambling

Summary

The measure would allow the general assembly or voters in the cities that permit limited gaming to extend the hours of limited gaming operations; to add roulette, craps, or both to the allowed games; and to increase the maximum bet up to $100.

The extra tax revenue generated by the changes would be required to be distributed 22% to the cities where limited gaming exists for gaming impacts and 78% for student financial aid for higher education. Any increases in gaming taxes would have to be approved by a statewide vote. Only institutions of higher learning operating by July 1, 2008 could receive funds.

Vote No

Gambling is a tax on people who are bad at math.

We presently have gambling in three mountain towns. The hope was that it would prove an economic boom for those towns. That hasn't happened. Doubling down on a bad bet is good money after bad. (See, even governments can hurt themselves gambling.)

We need to move very carefully on gambling as it can bring many more problems than benefits. Any initiative on this issue should come from the legislature, not for a couple of citizens working to force their individual proposal through.

Arguments Against

Amendment 50 could significantly expand gambling in Colorado. It could turn the three historic gaming communities into high-stakes, round-the-clock gambling destinations. Further, Indian casinos that currently operate under the state's gaming limits would likely increase their limits to the maximum allowed by this measure. This expansion could occur even if the voters in Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek do not choose to change their gaming limits.

Providing more opportunities to gamble may lead to an increase in the number of compulsive gamblers in the state. The effects of compulsive gambling are costly to families and society. Compulsive gambling can lead to bankruptcy, divorce, child neglect and abuse, domestic violence, suicide, and crime.

Arguments For

The measure gives voters in each gaming community the ability to decide what is best for them. For example, one community may decide to expand casino hours of operation to help manage traffic, while another may choose to attract new visitors by expanding both bet limits and games.

Amendment 50 makes Colorado more competitive with other gaming states. Colorado has the most restricted gaming in the country. The tourism industries in other gaming states benefit from less restricted gaming, and changing Colorado's gaming limits could result in more tourist spending in the state. Colorado's gaming limits have been in place for seventeen years, and the bet limit of $5 in 1991 equals about $3 today.

Amendment 49 - Eliminate Public Employee Unions

Summary

In 2001 Governor Bill Owens signed an executive order prohibiting government agencies in Colorado from using payroll deductions for unions. In 2007 Governor Bill Ritter signed an executive order essentially undoing Bill Owens order.

This amendment will place in the constitution a rule similar to Bill Owens' prohibition of payroll deductions. The purpose of prohibiting the deductions is to eliminate union representation for public sector employees.

This initiative was the second shot in attempting to destroy the Colorado Labor Peace Act of 1943.

Vote No

Did you notice any change in labor/management relations with public employee unions before and after 2001? Any difference before and after 2007? No? I didn't either.

This is an attempt to reduce the power of the unions pure & simple. And creating conflict, where before there was peace, is blowback that the sponsors of this initiative are willing to accept. All for something that has made no noticeable difference.

In addition, to continue with the incredibly successful Colorado Labor Peace Act of 1943, this (and the other 6 peace act violators) must be defeated.

Arguments Against

To quote the Chamber of Commerce - "Continued support of these initiatives creates an adversarial dynamic between these groups and threatens Colorado's economic peace and vitality," the Chamber said in a statement, adding that the current Labor Peace Act has "served Colorado well for 60 years in allowing for cordial relations between management and labor."

Amendment 49 interferes with the authority of local governments to decide which paycheck deductions are available to their employees. These decisions are best made by individual local governments based on the needs of each community, not by a statewide vote. Payroll deductions are a benefit that public employers can offer to employees; eliminating this benefit does not save any taxpayer money.

Arguments For

Amendment 49 reduces the potential for conflicts of interest that can occur when elected officials permit the use of government payroll systems to collect money for politically active groups, such as labor or professional organizations. These groups contribute to campaigns and lobby elected officials.

Amendment 48 - Outlaw Abortion

Summary

This is officially an amendment to define what is meant by "person" in the constitution. But what it is in fact is an amendment that would outlaw not just abortion at any point, but even any birth control that occurs after the egg is fertilized such as the morning after pill.

Update: Many conservatives have emailed me to say that this amendment will not outlaw abortion. I'm sorry but regardless of how much you try to pretend otherwise, it does. And you know it does. Please, be honest in what you are asking us to vote for.

Vote No

This is a question that does belong on the ballot (one of the few). But I think this is way more extreme than what the people of this state want. We should have a discussion of what point in the pregnancy we as a people want to say abortion is no longer allowed. And we should put it to a vote. But this proposal should be shot down.

In the meantime, we should all work to make sure abortion is not only safe, but rare. And that must include comprehensive sex-ed in our schools and making birth control available. Regardless of what we do, people will have sex (that's why all of us are here) and while we should impress on our children to be responsible in when they choose to have sex, we also need to stress that they need to be responsible in how they have sex.

And if you believe that as soon as the egg is fertilized, it is a human being and anything that stops it from growing to term is murder, then you should vote for this amendment.

But keep in mind when you do, that the logical interpretation of this amendment is that a woman who takes the morning after pill has committed pre-meditated murder and will be facing a prison term of decades.

Arguments Against

This will limit the ability of individuals to make private, personal choices about their lives and health. The measure will limit access to abortions and to prohibit medical care, including emergency contraception, commonly used forms of birth control, and treatments for cancer, tubal pregnancies, and infertility. The amendment may restrict some stem cell research that could lead to life-saving therapies for a variety of disabilities and illnesses.

This allows government interference in the doctor-patient relationship and could limit the exercise of independent medical judgment. The measure will restrict a doctor from using certain medical procedures and treatments. Furthermore, the measure will subject medical professionals to legal action for providing medical care to a woman of child-bearing age if it is determined to affect another "person."

Arguments For

The measure may establish the legal foundation to end the practice of abortion in Colorado. The U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the U.S. found that the unborn were not included in the word "person" as used in the U.S. Constitution. If each human life, from the moment of fertilization, is recognized as a person under Colorado's bill of rights, Amendment 48 will provide support for legal challenges to prohibit abortions in Colorado.

Amendment 47 - Right to Freeload

Summary

An amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning participation in a labor organization as a condition of employment, and, in connection therewith, prohibiting an employer from requiring that a person be a member and pay any moneys to a labor organization or to any other third party in lieu of payment to a labor organization and creating a misdemeanor criminal penalty for a person who violates the provisions of the section.

This would make union dues optional. As it is in every person's interest for all others to pay dues, but for each individual to not pay and get a free ride from the others - this would end union dues and thereby end unions in Colorado.

This initiative was the first shot in attempting to destroy the Colorado Labor Peace Act of 1943.

Update: Many conservatives have taken issue with my calling this Right to Freeload instead of Right to Work. I'm open to alternative suggestions - but I want to describe this amendment as accurately as possible. As this has zero impact on what job a person can hold, calling it Right to Work is clearly not accurate. And the main impact of this amendment is that non-union workers get the benefits of a union contract without paying the expense of negotiating the contract. If you have a suggestion that would be more accurate, please post a comment.

Vote No

At present the balance between labor and management here in Colorado slightly favors management. Passing this amendment will change that to an overwhelming advantage to management. With no union dues there is no union. In practice this eliminates unions.

Unions are not perfect. But they are a critical counter-balance to the natural impulse of companies to maximize profits at the expense of the employees. This counterbalance benefits all workers, including those in non-union jobs.

In addition, to continue with the incredibly successful Colorado Labor Peace Act of 1943, this (and the other 6 peace act violators) must be defeated.

Arguments Against

To quote the Chamber of Commerce - "Continued support of these initiatives creates an adversarial dynamic between these groups and threatens Colorado's economic peace and vitality," the Chamber said in a statement, adding that the current Labor Peace Act has "served Colorado well for 60 years in allowing for cordial relations between management and labor."

Right to WorkFreeload states do not perform significantly better in wages, economic development or business growth than Colorado.

States with laws like Amendment 47 are often viewed as less worker friendly. Under Amendment 47, employees can avoid paying their fair share for representation to improve wages, health care benefits, and workplace safety because federal law requires that all private-sector employees receive the benefits of collective bargaining, whether they are union members or not. Labor unions with fewer resources are not as effective in standing up for the interests of all employees.

Amendment 47 may define labor union too broadly. By defining labor union to include organizations that provide mutual aid or protection, employers may be banned from requiring employees to belong to organizations that promote workplace safety or provide job-related education programs.

Arguments For

This will enable companies to increase profits by reducing compensation for their employees. In the present difficult economic times, companies need this assistance to improve their bottom line.

States with laws like Amendment 47 are often viewed as more business friendly. Labor laws are a factor that businesses consider when deciding where to relocate or expand. Therefore, the measure may help the state as it competes with other states for new jobs and business investment from companies that wish to pay low wages.

Amendment 46 - Eliminate Affirmative Action

Summary

Eliminate affirmative action of any kind by any agency of the state or local government including taking it into account in college admissions.

Vote No

This is one of those initiatives that sounds good. And we do all want to live in a state where we treat each other equally regardless of race, gender, etc. But we face two gigantic problems with this initiative. The first is that our college admission process is imperfect and as outlined in this article, affirmative action is a useful tool to improve who is admitted to college. This initiative will hurt our Colleges.

The second major reason to vote this down is it is an absolute prohibition locked in to the constitution. A law that the legislature could amend to allow for needed exceptions might be worth trying. But with this placed in the constitution, what happens if we find necessary exceptions - and cannot implement those exceptions. This is much too heavy-handed a tool.

Arguments Against

Discrimination still exists in today's society, which deprives some individuals of an opportunity to succeed. Women and minorities earn less, are under-represented in top-paying fields, and receive fewer public contracting dollars when compared to non-minority or male groups. Programs that consider race and gender provide greater access to employment, education, and business opportunities for historically disadvantaged groups. These programs have been successful in promoting diversity and correcting past discrimination, but equality has not yet been achieved.

The impact of this measure is uncertain and potentially far-reaching. Amendment 46 does not define "preferential treatment" or "discrimination," leaving these terms open to interpretation and lawsuits funded at taxpayers' expense. Entities that do not have sufficient financial resources for a legal challenge may simply discontinue offering programs that appear to target assistance to specific populations.

Arguments For

Amendment 46 treats everyone equally in public employment, education, and contracting. Discrimination occurs when people are given preference based on their race or gender rather than their qualifications. Preferential treatment leads to resentment and treats women and minorities as if they cannot succeed on their merits. Furthermore, racial classifications are divisive for society; preferencing one group over another based on race does not promote equal and fair treatment for everyone.

The idea of giving preference to an individual based on race or gender is outdated for today's society. Race, color, ethnicity, and national origin are becoming more difficult to define as more Americans identify themselves as multi-racial. Amendment 46 aligns state policies with the modern world.

Your Colorado Ballot Initiative Reference

There are so many initiatives on this year's ballot that I created a reference at www.coloradoballot.net. If you have any feedback about the site, please post comments here. And if you find it useful, please email the link to friends and associates.

Update:
Thank you to all the people reading it. And thank you for the comments. To speak to the comments about wanting a more neutral website without the summation I place on each issue, I think that would be a dis-service. There is value in stating why I think an initiative is good or bad. You can agree or disagree but it lays out my logic for my choice and I think that can help people in their decision.

Update 2:
I have received comments and email telling me that this site is clearly biased. About 2/3 say that the my recomendations are clearly very liberal (46 - 49) and 1/3 say my recomendations are clearly very conservative (53, 55-57). With both sides upset I figure that I've done a good job of finding the middle ground.

The Amendments

• 46 - Eliminate Affirmative Action (blog comments)
• 47 - Right to Freeload (blog comments)
• 48 - Outlaw Abortion (blog comments)
• 49 - Eliminate Public Employee Unions (blog comments)
• 50 - More Gambling (blog comments)
• 51 - Increased Funding for the Disabled (blog comments)
• 52 - Lock in I-70 Funding (blog comments)
• 53 - Criminalize Management Incompetence (blog comments)
• 54 - Ban some from the political process (blog comments)
• 55 - Prohibit Firing Employees (blog comments)
• 56 - Require Health Insurance Coverage (blog comments)
• 57 - Companies Liable for any Injury (blog comments)
• 58 - Increase Funding for Higher-Ed (blog comments)
• 59 - Increase funding for K-12 schools (blog comments)
• L - Lower the age for the State Assembly (blog comments)
• M&N - Eliminate Obsolete Provisions (blog comments)
• O - Improve the initiative process (blog comments)

I was over on Red State reading this front page post about the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac takeover. Like many of their posts on specific economic actions, it is mostly reasonable in it's analysis.

But buried in there is this little gem:

Today’s report makes no mention of the fact that both Fannie and Freddie have engaged in some shenanigans recently to make their capital positions look less bad. Their CEOs are being fired summarily for this. If we were in China, they’d probably have “committed suicide” with bullets inexplicably entering the backs of their heads. I’d certainly want to shoot them if I were a shareholder of either GSE. There are some things the Chinese do better than we do.

That's right, they're wishing that CEOs that screw up would be summarily shot. Now kudos to them that they want CEOs to pay a price for incompetence. But this is a bit over the top.

The rest of the article is very good including this discussion of what we taxpayers are facing:

Remember that portfolio losses are borne first by common shareholders, then by preferred shareholders, and only then by subordinated and senior debtholders. By interposing a new class of senior equity between the existing shares and the debt, the Treasury has guaranteed that holders of agency paper (including subordinated paper) will not take any losses.

Who takes the losses instead? US taxpayers. I’ll give you a minute to get the anger out of your system. Go break a few windows if you have to.

Feeling a little better? Ok, let’s keep going. Why the %^&#%&*$% would Treasury do this? Because of their first goal, which is market stability.

...

What about the stockholders? What will happen to them is best described by a technical Wall Street term that unfortunately violates the posting rules of this site. Suffice to say that the term denotes the forceful insertion of a long, pointed object into one’s anus.

But shooting the CEOs? Wow, I guess it's ok to screw regular people but when you screw the stockholders, then they're ready to exact serious punishment.

It's looking good

Yes, we are in the fight of our lives for the next 60 days. But it is looking good. from pollster.com (go there to get the interactive version - it's awesome