CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
June 08, 2012 12:12 AM UTC
20 Comments
The obvious answer is he wouldn’t pay for roads and bridges. He’d put it to a ballot vote and it would be voted down. His fiscal conservativism doesn’t include room for public expenditures of that magnitude on infrastructure. The answer is to privatize those roads and bridges! Because that works so well (for the 10 guys running the road and bridge companies).
Both you and Pols here take the usual twisted tactic of trying to spin away from the issue.
The issue friends is the legality of FASTER. Agree with it or not the rule of law must be upheld. You believe this was constructed wihin the law, Stapleton and his followers believe it does not.
So let’s stick to this issue at hand versus your typical diversionary tactics.
The follow up questions, if it’s asked for some reason, should be how he defines “fee” and where he considers any nexus from fee to service to be present in any case.
Of course this takes us back to Ralphie’s point. And is Stapleton even an attorney? I thought I remembered him as having a real estate background, or something (not that the two are mutually exclusive).
I do have one correction. This isn’t a CoPols diary, it’s Jason’s.
Now I have to take a shower. No offense, obviously.
Actually, Stapleton has no more right to define “fee” than either your or I.
His job is to invest and safeguard the State’s money, not to decide how it’s spent.
He should sit down, do his job, and shut up.
While I enjoy your articles, Jason, there is absolutely nothing in Walker Stapleton’s job description that requires him to worry about how to pay for roads and bridges.
Stapleton is off the reservation. This is none of his fucking business, period.
As does every voter in the state.
…I’d respect his opinion on driving a little more.
The natural follow-on question is if not FASTER, then what?
It’s a lot like criticizing ACA. If you repeal ACA, what will you replace it with?
to come up with a way to pay for road and bridge upgrades.
I’m sure Democrats and/or liberals could come up with all kinds of “worthwhile” projects to spend tax dollars, if TABOR wasn’t so inconvenient for them! But that is precisely why the public put that safeguard in place.
It is the responsibility of the General Assembly to place the issue on the ballot and make the case for it to the voters.(Isn’t that how it went down with Referendum C?) People can see the disrepair some roads and specific bridges are in. I really don’t think it would be that hard a sell.
The problem with the FASTER law was that it was disguised to be a fee, so the public couldn’t weigh in on it. This is why a ruling that TABOR is unconstitutional will stampede voters to the GOP in many state legislative races.
but his job is to safeguard the state’s finances and make sure the bills get paid. Eliminating a revenue stream dedicated to paying bonds on committed projects might make his job pretty sticky. Most Republicans don’t dig the idea of an unfunded mandate.
As far as fees are concerned, when Owens was calling the shots it was absolutely in the playbook to supplement falling tax revenues with fees in order to avoid conflicts with TABOR. If FASTER is ruled to be unconstitutional, there are a lot of funding mechanisms across the state that will have to be looked at in everything from higher ed to public health.
…is now of course a majority Republican Supreme Court due to Hick’s inexplicable Boatright appointment. We’ll see how activist the court gets, perhaps disregarding clear Colorado precedent that usage fees are NOT taxes triggering TABOR. A contrary holding would eviscerate all government, which of course is the right-wing nut job’s wet dream.
you should be praising Jason
Again,
JasonDwyer, do any of thereportersDemocrats take your advice on what they “should” do?On second thought, your question is legitimate. No, as far as I can tell, none of the Democratic higher ups feel the need to respond to the republicans or to present a consistent message or to seek a “platform” that allows them to “broadcast” their message to a wider audience.
But, I am a democrat. I feel I have an absolute obligation to continue to press for better communication. For two years, many of us at the “grunt level” have expressed our concern at caucuses, with OFA and with emails and in discussions….without much luck. I do not have money, I am old, I am not gay, I am not in a position to even seek a low level party position. The only energy I see in the democratic party is for the gay agenda…I hasten to add I certainly support that….and preserving women’s rights…support that too……but that is not enough to win elections.
There is much apathy in the democratic party, and that contributed to the loss in 2010. I believe that the party has gotten much more “top down” and there is little concern for rank and file dems…..So I persist.
As for Jason, I have no idea what he is doing with his blogs. If he is a media critic, then using the format of media matters would be legitimate…pointing out factual errors. If he is reporting on the information from right wing radio, then he fails to explain that these are conservative networks with conservative perspective and an agenda that is being promoted.
To tell them that they “should” do anything, doesn’t make any sense.
I would like to see more informative reporting from him. For example, I would like to know the radio schedules for the various talk outlets and their ratings and whether the ratings are going up or down.
I think that would be good information that I would assume Jason could provide.
Finally, my sense is that right wing radio is doing just fine, energizing a niche republican demographic that will be important in the 2012 election. As for the democratic party? Not so much.
Salzman ask, “How would Stapleton pay for roads and bridges?”
I cannot speak of Walker, but I will.
First, go through every current revenue stream with fine tooth comb. Make sure it is all accounted for. Make sure none of it is being diverted to other governments.
Second, review all expenditures with fine tooth comb, make sure Davis Bacon and other thievery is not sucking it all up.
Third, ask the voter to approve modest per gallon fuel tax increase or crazily, per dollar spent on fuel, tax. Line item it on receipt, rather than hide it in the pump.
This is how honest men conduct government.
If 51% of the Colorado voting population does not approve fuel tax increase, then they get the roads they deserve. Do you trust the voter? If not, then how do you trust them enough to elect the correct representatives?
Seems as though everyone wants Democracy until they don’t.
An elected representative with no Constitution is nothing more than an elected dictator.
especially as it goes toward a fuel tax increase. I would actually propose a fuel tax increase with pledge to repeal FASTER on passage.
You are dead wrong about Davis Bacon, it only assures fair wages
A fuel tax would be pretty unstable as a revenue source. While I agree that it’s much fairer, years with either windfalls or deficits would have the legislature scrambling in their usual boneheaded way. Vehicle registrations are easier to predict year over year.