Amendments 60 & 61, Proposition 101 (legal, estimated, racist)

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by whoisjongalt

The reason those 3 propositions aren't going to win (I even heard Tancredo say that yesterday) is that their supporters (teachers unions, etc.) are pumping "zillions" of dollars into the campaign to defeat them not because they are bad propositions. I used to think Colorado was more libertarian before I moved here, but it seems to be becoming more like California...and things are sure working out well there. You can't keep taxing people into oblivion and simultaneously grow the economy.

I think you're kind of mixed up here. There are "zillions" of dollars being pumped into Colorado issues and candidates on all sides.

Yes, I would agree that Colorado may be going the way of California, but not because of the taxes, but rather because having voters -- who, generally speaking are not that educated on the issues -- decide on ballot propositions is a dangerous game...and not what our forefathers had in mind.

[whoisjongalt]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

I think you're kind of mixed up here. There are "zillions" of dollars being pumped into Colorado issues and candidates on all sides.

Yes, I would agree that Colorado may be going the way of California, but not because of the taxes, but rather because having voters -- who, generally speaking are not that educated on the issues -- decide on ballot propositions is a dangerous game...and not what our forefathers had in mind.

The point was that a fortune is being spent by the "anti-proposition" side and hardly any by the pro side. Money determines outcomes, right or wrong.

[Josseppie]

I am just glad they look like they will fail. That being said I am still going to wait for the final results on election day before I claim victory.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by whoisjongalt

The point was that a fortune is being spent by the "anti-proposition" side and hardly any by the pro side. Money determines outcomes, right or wrong.

To an extent, I agree. But why isn't the "pro" side spending as much money, and what is your source for that? I mean, if you are just listening to the "pro side" saying that, it may not be accurate.

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

... Yes, I would agree that Colorado may be going the way of California, but not because of the taxes, but rather because having voters -- who, generally speaking are not that educated on the issues -- decide on ballot propositions is a dangerous game...and not what our forefathers had in mind.

Agree. Government by referendum is a terrible idea which puts us right back into mob rule, known by its more polite name "tyranny of the majority." If civil rights had been a referendum issue back in the 1950's (Brown vs Board of Education) it would never have passed since the white majority would've voted it down. The Supreme Court finally called a halt to discrimination in education. Same thing with striking down the old Jim Crow laws; never would've happened under Colorado's style of government by referendum.

We need to stop this stupidity of letting any yahoo with a few pages of signatures put absolute crap on our ballots. Our elections are being held hostage by a handful of malcontents and extremists with truly insane agendas.

Tax measures are about the most dangerous of referendum items, given that many people are tempted to cynically vote to keep a few more dollars in their own pocketbook rather than consider the good of society as a whole. As you stated, a good chunk of our populace is poorly informed. These sorts are usually susceptible to fear tactics or hate mongering and thus easily led astray by pied pipers like Doug Bruce. That's poor citizenship and I wish we could educate people rather than rely on TV ads and sound bites.

We elect people to serve in public office to make the tough decisions for us on tax and spending matters; if they don't please us, we can get injunctions or court orders to stop bad spending, recall them or vote them out at the soonest election. In the respect of electing people with a slate of ideas to pursue, we do have majority rule, but to use this referendum process to overrule the ability or our elected leaders is nonsense; let them run the government and do what has to be done.

To destroy the ability of our government to function is nothing short of treason.

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

If civil rights had been a referendum issue back in the 1950's (Brown vs Board of Education) it would never have passed since the white majority would've voted it down. The Supreme Court finally called a halt to discrimination in education. Same thing with striking down the old Jim Crow laws; never would've happened under Colorado's style of government by referendum.

When the Supreme Court struck down laws against inter-racial marriage in 1967 something like 75% of the country was against the decision and were opposed to the idea of blacks and whites inter-marrying. I'm sure if it was an issue today, these same right wingers would be clamoring against it, if only because liberals think inter-racial marriage is acceptable.

[whoisjongalt]

It is quite a stretch to equate civil rights with increasing taxes. Don't you people realize that we are not talking about the "government's money"? We are talking about OUR money. Just as it derives it's power from the people, government derives it's money from the people (unless you're talking about printing more money out of thin air but that's another topic). I don't elect people to "make tough decisions FOR me"; I elect them to represent me and MY decisions.

[whoisjongalt]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

To an extent, I agree. But why isn't the "pro" side spending as much money, and what is your source for that? I mean, if you are just listening to the "pro side" saying that, it may not be accurate.

Do the math...

According to ballotpedia.org
Donors
The main committee in support of Proposition 101, Amendment 60 and Amendment 61 is CO Tax Reforms. According to August 2010 reports, the committee has reportedly received $12,262.24 in contributions and has spent $5,074.90. Their current balance is $7,187.34.[12][13]

Donors
According to August 2010 reports, Coloradans for Responsible Reform, an opponent of Proposition 101, Amendment 60 and 61, has reportedly received $4.109 million in campaign contributions and has spent $3.877 million. Their current balance is $231,335.98.[29] Compared to May 2010 reports, supporters reported that they had received $777,000 in campaign donations and a total of $671,190 in the bank.[30] In July 2010, state campaign finance records revealed that opponents received contributions from 36 businesses and 11 business & trade groups.[13]

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by whoisjongalt

It is quite a stretch to equate civil rights with increasing taxes. Don't you people realize that we are not talking about the "government's money"? We are talking about OUR money. Just as it derives it's power from the people, government derives it's money from the people (unless you're talking about printing more money out of thin air but that's another topic). I don't elect people to "make tough decisions FOR me"; I elect them to represent me and MY decisions.

Who's talking about increasing taxes? The only thing I'm hearing right now is a stressed out minority trying to fix their messed up financial situations by trying to get us to lower them. Most people don't find current tax levels overly burdensome. By lowering them all you'll do is drive up the cost of housing since that's the main thing people spend their money on nowadays.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by whoisjongalt

It is quite a stretch to equate civil rights with increasing taxes. Don't you people realize that we are not talking about the "government's money"? We are talking about OUR money. Just as it derives it's power from the people, government derives it's money from the people (unless you're talking about printing more money out of thin air but that's another topic). I don't elect people to "make tough decisions FOR me"; I elect them to represent me and MY decisions.

No, WE elect people to represent OUR decisions. It's called for "the common good", not for your individual (and perhaps selfish) interests.