Another Republican Joins Growing Anti-TABOR Chorus

UPDATE: Vic Vela at Colorado Community Media sheds some light on the arcane workings of TABOR in play here:

A TABOR technicality may require the state to issue pot revenue refunds – even though voters intended for money that's collected from marijuana tax money to go towards school construction and the cost of pot industry regulations.

TABOR is generally thought of as being a statute that requires all tax hikes be approved by the voters. But the technical clause also includes an area that requires the state to issue tax refunds when state spending exceeds expectations that are included in voter information material that is sent out each election, otherwise called the "Blue Book."

That seems to be the case this year and lawmakers are trying to figure out how to deal with it.

"This is confounding," said Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver. "TABOR told us to let the voters decide. The voters have decided and their wishes may be frustrated by something hidden in the TABOR amendment."

Doug Bruce says, "mwah!"


Rep. Cheri Gerou (R).

Rep. Cheri Gerou (R).

As FOX 31's Eli Stokols reports, things sometimes look different from a seat on the powerful legislative Joint Budget Commission. And that includes, where the subject is a reasonable actor, Republicans:

For years Democrats have been ranting and raving about Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights, which requires voters to approve all tax hikes and keeps state spending from rising beyond a certain level.

On Tuesday, during a Joint Budget Committee briefing on the state’s quarterly revenue forecast, a Republican lawmaker joined them.

“I have to tell you, quite honestly, the more I learn about TABOR, particularly what it did with the floods in our counties, the less and less I like TABOR, and the more insidious I think it has been to state government,” said Rep. Cheri Gerou, R-Evergreen, who sits on the Joint Budget Committee and is in her final year at the legislature…

“I’ll have an effigy burned in my front yard when I get home, but it’s the honest to goodness truth,” Gerou said. “It’s not been good.” [Pols emphasis]


Reminder: TABOR Has a Dark Side


As FOX 31's Eli Stokols reports:

Tax revenues from Colorado’s new recreational marijuana industry are pouring into state coffers — and that’s actually a bit of a problem for lawmakers…

According to a legal analysis conducted by the state and obtained by FOX31 Denver, the marijuana revenues are subject to the state’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), which will require lawmakers to take action if tax revenues from the new legal marijuana industry exceed the estimated $67 million in annual revenue that was anticipated in the 2013 Blue Book analysis of Proposition AA, the new sales and excise tax rates voters approved in November.

The legal memorandum from the Office of Legislative Legal Services was sent to members of the Joint Budget Committee Monday night…

The most current Dept. of Revenue estimate forecasts that the state will take in $107 million, exceeding the Blue Book estimate by some $40 million.

The conclusion: the state must lower the tax rate and either refund the excess amount of revenues above the $67 million estimate or refer a measure to the November 2014 or 2015 ballot seeking permission from voters to let the state keep and spend all of the tax revenue from recreational marijuana.

As news reports came in that the tax revenue being collected from the legal sale of marijuana in Colorado was greatly exceeding early estimates–something we predicted would be the case–the possibility that this new robust source of revenue might be subject to Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) limits was in the back of our minds.

When defending TABOR, Republicans generally stick to the most popular provision of convicted felon Doug Bruce's labyrinthine 1992 constitutional "tax reform" measure: its requirement that affected citizens vote on tax increases. If that was truly all TABOR did, it would be harder for Democrats and good government-minded Republicans–some also part of a lawsuit seeking to overturn TABOR–to publicly oppose it, though the basic question of whether that disrupts the whole principle of small-r republican government remains. When you poll that one aspect of TABOR, naturally, it polls well.

But when you start getting under the hood–how tax increase elections are subject to stringent limits on timing and ballot question language, how TABOR stymies the ability of the state to plan in good times for bad times, how (as may be in this case) the state cannot even take advantage of a huge new revenue source twice approved by voters–it's not nearly as rosy a picture now, is it?


School Funding

Pols reporting of the ongoing school funding issue in the legislature seems nonexistent. Check out Chalkboard for the news on a united front of Colorado educators asking for no more unfunded mandates and some backfilling of the cuts of the last few years.

Democratic legislators appear to be under increasing pressure to restore funding, WITHOUT requiring implementation of their pet projects. Yesterday's letter to Gov. Hickenlooper signed by almost all superintendents in the state is unprecedented, yet very clear in what educators feel they need.

Federal Suit Challenging TABOR Lives Another Day

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

In the case of Kerr v. Hickenlooper, state legislators and others have sought to have Colorado's taxpayer's bill of rights (TABOR) declared unconstitutional because it deprives Colorado of a Republican form of government, under the federal constitutional guaranty clause and the act that authorized Colorado to become a state.

On Friday, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado refusing to dismiss the lawsuit either on the ground that the Plaintiffs lacked standing to sue, or on the grounds that this was a "political question" beyond the jurisdiction of the courts to resolve.  An additional equal protection claim was dismissed by the trial court, but that dismissal was beyond the scope of the appeal decided with the permission of the trial court judge prior to a final ruling in the case.

As a result, the case will now go forward on the merits of whether or not TABOR deprives the citizens of the State of Colorado of a Republican form of government, unless an en banc panel of the 10th Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court decide to stop the suit now (both of which are unlikely since this is not a final determination of the case of the merits).  Since the decision will now be on the merits of the case, the stakes are now much higher.  Realistically, however, this lawsuit is still a long shot that is unlikely to prevail.

The 10th Circuit ruling is available at:

“Obamaquester” No More!

The Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold reports:

[In summer 2011], the GOP and President Obama agreed to set caps on annual spending and to set in motion a bigger, broader budget cut: sequestration. This was a massive cut — $85 billion in the first year — spread across much of the federal government…

When the House GOP created a PowerPoint presentation titled “What We’ve Achieved,” these ­sequester-driven reductions in spending were trumpeted in the first slide. “For the first time since the Korean War, total federal spending has gone down for two years in a row,” the party declares, meaning fiscal 2012 and 2013. The spending cuts were also on the second slide. And the third. There were five slides total. (The other two focused on tax increases that might have happened, but didn’t.)

“It forced the spending curve downward,” Rep. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) said. “It actually made government and Washington, D.C., finally deal with what the American people have been dealing with, and that’s having to deal with less income and revenue.” [Pols emphasis]

The large across-the-board budget cuts mandated by the “sequester” provisions of the 2011 Budget Control Act, as Fahrenthold explains, were meant to be a “booby trap” to force both sides to negotiate over future budget reductions. The agreement to set up this negotiation “incentive” came after the last great budgetary impasse between President Barack Obama and House Republicans in 2011, which led to the first-ever downgrade of the nation’s credit rating and tremendous turmoil in financial markets.

Here’s Rep. Scott Tipton, similarly praising the sequester cuts locked in by this week’s deal:

Today’s agreement includes positive steps to extend responsible spending reforms, prevent a national default on nearly $17 trillion of U.S. debt, and reopen the government. It protects the economy and sets the stage for further budget negotiations to address our nation’s spending crisis. Our nation is facing a staggering national debt, and this plan continues to address the debt by extending sequester-level spending reforms. [Pols emphasis]

But just a few short months ago, Republicans were saying something very different.


Cruz Plots Against Boehner? Fiscal Fight Goes Red-on-Red

SUNDAY UPDATE: As the New York Times reports, fevered apocalyptic rhetoric is the order of the day:

Representative John Culberson of Texas said that as he and his colleagues were clamoring for a vote, he shouted out his own encouragement. “I said, like 9/11, ‘Let’s roll!' [Pols emphasis] ” That the Senate would almost certainly reject the health care delay, he added, was not a concern. “Ulysses S. Grant used to say, ‘Boys, quit worrying about what Bobby Lee is doing. I want to know what we are doing.’ And that’s what the House is doing today, thank God.”

Because when you invoke 9/11 and the Civil War at the same time, you surely must mean business.


UPDATE: It looks like Sen. Ted Cruz has prevailed over John Boehner, and a shutdown it will be–Politico:

House Republicans will vote to pass a one-year delay of Obamacare in exchange for funding the government, a plan that drastically increases the chances of a government shutdown this Tuesday.

The decision was announced by the GOP leadership in a closed meeting Saturday afternoon, according to sources present. Republicans will also pass a bill to fund U.S. troops if the government shuts down, according to GOP lawmakers. The House’s funding measure will keep the government open until mid December…

“We’ve had enough of the disunity in our party,” Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told the meeting of House Republicans Saturday afternoon. “The headlines are Republicans fighting Republicans. This will unite us. [Pols emphasis] This protects the people who sent us here from Obamacare.”


Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

A key development in a brief Hill story yesterday:

Sen. Ted Cruz on Friday appeared to confirm that he plotted with House conservatives to prevent Republican leadership from shifting strategy in the government shutdown fight. 

“We’ve had numerous conversations with numerous members of the House,” Cruz (R-Texas) said after the Senate approved a continuing resolution that was amended by Democrats to preserve funding for ObamaCare…

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his leadership team on Thursday tried to round up votes for a bill that would tie a debt-ceiling increase to a wish-list of Republican priorities. But conservatives balked, forcing GOP leaders to postpone a vote on the bill.

The National Review reported Friday that Cruz and his allies had met with House conservatives on Thursday and urged them to oppose Boehner’s move to push a fight over the healthcare law to the debt ceiling.

House Speaker John Boehner (R).

House Speaker John Boehner (R).

​We haven't yet heard if any Colorado movers/shakers were in that meeting, but here's looking at you, Cory Gardner.

To be honest, given the much more dire consequences of a default on the nation's debt–even the discussion of it–than a government shutdown, steering away from that particular battleground could be a smart strategic decision by Sen. Ted Cruz. But the fact remains that Republicans are apparently not anywhere near agreement even amongst themselves as they clamber on in pursuit of what Colorado Rep. Doug Lamborn describes as "the Holy Grail" of killing President Barack Obama's eponymous health care reform law. Polling shows that Sen. Cruz's 21-hour "pseudobuster" this week was seen by many more Americans as a useless stunt than an effective action. Polling also shows that even Americans who are uneasy about Obamacare do not want the government shut down in order to stop it. And the additional leverage that Speaker John Boehner seeks in holding the so-called "debt ceiling" hostage is directly the result of the even greater harm that would be done if Republicans don't get their way.

If you thought 2011 was a train wreck, maybe you haven't seen anything yet.

A Few Words About Morse and Marijuana

The Colorado Springs Gazette's editorial page blared a nasty headline yesterday targeting liberal support for Senate President John Morse, perfectly timed with robocalls going out to Democrats in Senate District 11:

It's a safe bet many of the students who rallied for Morse last week would also rally for more marijuana rights. That's not to pass judgment on Colorado College. It's just a young, liberal college thing to advocate marijuana freedom.

Morse claims to favor legalization, but advocates of that cause do not favor authoritarian Morse.

Don't ask us. Ask the Marijuana Policy Project, the country's largest and best-funded organization working toward legalization of pot. The organization feels so threatened by Morse – a purported advocate of their cause – they named him this year's worst legislator in the United States…

If Morse could tax the air we breathe, he probably would. So at the end of the last legislative session, he co-sponsored a bill that would have suspended Colorado's Amendment 64, the law that legalizes marijuana, unless voters approve a giant tax increase on pot.

Our readers will recall coverage of the resolution in question here, which had the shortest lifespan of any legislation we can remember–about three hours from introduction to demise as alarmed marijuana activists descended on the capitol. That has apparently (we didn't actually know this) led the Marijuana Policy Project, a respected pro-legalization thinktank, to label Morse "the worst legislator in the United States."

The robocalls hitting Democrats in Senate District 11 cite the MPP, but are paid for by a group linked to longtime GOP operative Patrick Davis, former National Republican Senatorial Committee political director–and who we can assure liberal Democrats has no interest in legalizing marijuana. A larger problem is that both MPP and the robocalls are flat wrong about that bill's purpose. Senate Concurrent Resolution 003 would not have "resulted in the repeal of a voter-approved initiative to regulate marijuana like alcohol." None of the provisions legalizing personal possession and use of marijuana would have been affected. The resolution would have tied the opening of retail marijuana stores to the approval of the marijuana tax initiative headed for the ballot this November. As long as the tax initiative passed, the stores would be allowed to open. If not, well, they'd need to try again.

As we've said over and over about Amendment 64, the revenue opportunity is one of the big reasons pot is now legal. We believe it was a big part of motivating voters who were otherwise ambivalent about legalization.

Senator Morse said after the bill died that he introduced it to "get the attention" of the marijuana industry, which has been noncommittal to outright opposed to the tax initiative. The problem is that Amendment 64 was indeed not written in compliance with TABOR, which means the tax provisions built into the amendment are invalid–that's why the second initiative is necessary. Morse, simply put, was concerned about bad faith.

Those are the facts of what happened. We recognize that there are some who will read all of it and still disagree with Morse's short-lived proposal, and that's fine. The facts of this are not nearly what they're being represented to be by either pro-legalization advocates or opportunistic Republicans. And we think a full airing of the true facts would leave a lot of Democrats backing Morse–including plenty of pot smokers.

Hickenlooper To Kick Off School Finance Campaign Thursday

Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane!

Up in the sky! It’s a bird! It’s a plane!

The announcement went out from the Colorado Commits to Kids campaign moments ago–no word yet on how Gov. John Hickenlooper plans to arrive (see photo right), but regardless assuming the public face of the campaign to significantly revamp Colorado's income tax structure to properly fund the state's public education system:

Please join Gov. John Hickenlooper and supporters of the Colorado Commits to Kids campaign for our official kick-off on Thursday, August 15 at 1:00 p.m. Full details are below.
Colorado Commits to Kids is working to provide vital funding needed to improve our state’s schools and ensure a quality education for every child in Colorado…

Who: Gov. John Hickenlooper and Colorado Commits to Kids supporters
What: Statewide Campaign Kick-off
Where: Green Mountain High School
13175 W. Green Mountain Dr.
Lakewood, CO 80228
When: 1:00 pm

Backers are glad to have Hickenlooper's persuasiveness on their side however it arrives, of course, but we're suckers for a good stunt. And Green Mountain High School's football field is big enough to land on, right?

“Colorado Commits to Kids” Turns In 160,000+ Signatures

Photo courtesy Colorado Commits to Kids

coloradocommitskidsThat's the news in a press release a short while ago from proponents of Initiative 22, the school finance ballot initiative headed for this year's statewide ballot with nearly double the required number of signatures:

Backers of the Colorado Commits to Kids Initiative on Monday turned in to the Colorado Secretary of State signatures from more than 160,000 people who support placing a school-finance measure on the November ballot.

“We’re not just delivering petitions today,” said Gail Klapper, director of the Colorado Forum, which has been working with business, civic and educational leaders for nearly two years to craft an initiative with broad, bipartisan support. “We’re delivering a message to our students and our businesses that Coloradans understand the best investment we can make in their economic futures is through our education system.”

The Colorado Commits to Kids Initiative will ask voters to approve a two-step state income-tax rate increase to pay for reforms that would make Colorado a national model for P-12 education…

Details after the jump. 


School Finance Ballot Initiative Raises $1 Million

FOX 31's Eli Stokols:

Lawmakers passed legislation last session, hoping to change the way Colorado funds its schools, directing additional money to full-day kindergarten across the state and distributing more money per pupil to districts with higher percentages of at-risk students.

But none of it will take effect unless voters approve $950 million in new tax revenues to pay for it.

Initiative 22 would set a flat tax rate of 5 percent — up slightly from the current 4.6 percent rate — for all incomes of less than $75,000 a year.

But the proposal those earning more than that would see their income taxed at two different rates:  the 5 percent flat rate for income up to $75,000 annually and then a 5.9 percent rate for all earnings above that threshold.

And the Denver Post reports today:

Colorado Commits to Kids surpassed the $1 million mark in overall contributions with $739,250 taken in during the July reporting period. Combined with more than $260,000 raised in June, the effort moved to $1,081,550 primarily with the help of a few deep-pocketed donors.

The Post reports diverse funding sources for this campaign, ranging from Democrat Pat Stryker and Sam Gary of the Piton Foundation to the right-leaning education reform group Stand for Children. Along with backing from Gov. John Hickenlooper, Initiative 22's hefty war chest should underscore the seriousness of this effort compared to 2011's Proposition 103–which failed after attracting only tepid support. It's worth noting that some of the lack of support for Proposition 103, particularly on the left, can be attributed to concerns that it doesn't raise enough revenue to address the problem. This latest initiative is no "band-aid," but a real attempt to solve the longstanding and growing problem of paying for public education in Colorado.

And unlike two years ago, this campaign will have the resources it needs to succeed.

Concerns Over Fixing Aging Infrastructure Continue

Whether they will admit it or not, most people understand that the government (and yes, taxes) are a necessary part of our everyday lives when it comes to basic things like firefighters, police officers, and roads. It can be difficult to continue your daily commute if a giant freakin' hole opens up in the middle of the road — Sheridan Blvd., for instance.

Infrastructure needs

Continue on for a half-mile, then turn left at the GIANT FREAKIN HOLE IN THE STREET.


As 9News reports, Colorado's aging infrastructure needs some love:

It is the hidden problem waiting to happen. Beneath the streets and highways, all across this country, pipes carrying water to residents are aging and getting a day closer to failing.

"The system was designed for about a 50 to 100 year lifetime and many of them were put in shortly after World War II," said Ross Corotis, an engineering professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder. "They've reached really the end of their aging life span."

A ruptured 12-inch water main on Sheridan Boulevard between Fourth and Fifth Avenues is representative of the problem. The pipe was installed in 1952. The pipe ruptured and created a sink hole approximately 27 feet long, 15 feet wide and 10 feet deep on Sheridan Boulevard. It forced the closure of northbound Sheridan between First and Fifth Avenues and southbound Sheridan between Fourth and Fifth Avenues.

Denver Water expects the repairs to be completed and the road reopened by midnight. The water main break left one building and 16 residential customers along Sheridan without water.

"You see this and you say this is a shame. But it is not unexpected. In a statistical sense it is going to happen," Corotis said. [Pols emphasis]

Events like this are a good opportunity for elected officials and community leaders to remind the public that you can't fix roads and bridges without money. Nobody wants to pay more taxes, but there is a difference between desire and understanding that some things we take for granted are pretty damn important.

He Can Skydive Later, That’s Fine

See you in October.

See you in October.

The Durango Herald's Joe Hanel reports on the word yesterday by Gov. John Hickenlooper that he will, as fully expected, support the school finance ballot measure set to dominate Colorado politics for much of the rest of this off-year:

The governor already had committed to supporting a ballot initiative this fall to fund reforms to the school-finance system that he signed into law in May.

But he has been silent since education advocates settled on Initiative 22, which raises income taxes and creates a two-bracket income-tax system. It was one of nearly two dozen options that the campaign had filed as possible ballot initiatives…

“I’m not sure it is my exact preference. You know, the bottom line is you’ve got to have something on there that’s winnable,” he said. “In that sense, in all that array of ballot language that could win, I think this is the best.”

Adds FOX 31's Eli Stokols (who first reported the news about Hickenlooper's "official" support):

“The governor has been talking to business leaders about how transformative the new school finance law will be for Colorado kids,” said Alan Salazar, Hickenlooper’s chief strategist, in a text message to FOX31 confirming accounts from other sources who heard Hickenlooper’s remarks Wednesday.

Salazar called Hickenlooper’s support for the proposal, however tacit, “probably the worst kept secret in town.”

Republicans are making as much as they can out of Hickenlooper's "quiet" announcement to business leaders yesterday, but the truth is his endorsement was never in doubt. It took time for proponents to settle on the one initiative everyone could agree on. Now that they have, there will be a united push for Initiative 22, a much more ambitious education funding proposal than 2011's failed Proposition 103. And unlike Proposition 103, Gov. Hickenlooper and a broad coalition–including some of those same business leaders–are on board. It's increasingly clear a repeat of the stillborn Proposition 103 is not in the cards: maybe the next Referendum C, the 2005 "TABOR timeout" measure that passed with Hickenlooper's charismatic support (above right)?

Either way, Hickenlooper can wait until Labor Day, when voters start paying attention, to turn on his fabled charm.

The Right to Destroy Ourselves?

Garrett Epps has an interesting column in The Atlantic about Colorado's TABOR battles and the legal effort to overturn it, specifically Kerr v. Hickenlooper. The issue is laid bare in the headline: "Does a State Have the Right to Self-Destruct?"

TABOR makes as much sense as this does

If you think TABOR is a great idea, you probably understand this picture.

As public policy, TABOR is bad enough. The legislature, though, could always ask the people to repeal it. However, in 1994, another initiative limited future constitutional amendments to a "single subject." Since TABOR covers such a wide area of revenue policy, it thus can no longer be repealed except by a laborious string of statewide referenda. In other words, the controls are now smashed. Colorado's legislature can no longer effectively govern, and can't even effectively ask for authority to do so. This is the most radical limitation on state taxing authority anywhere in the country.

The plaintiffs in Kerr, a group of present and former legislators and officials, argue that this radical change violates the Guaranty Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article IV § 4. The Clause requires the United States to "guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government." Whatever a "republic" is, the plaintiffs argue, it must have power to tax and spend funds for the public benefit. TABOR, in effect, takes Colorado out of its status as a state…

…Even if the state wins on standing, its argument ought to disquiet advocates of "state's rights" and an aggressive reading of the Tenth Amendment. If the Guaranty Clause is a promise to the federal government, then nothing would stop the Justice Department from bringing a suit to void all or part of a state's constitution as not "republican" — or, for that matter, stop a majority in Congress from repealing a state's constitution that displeased it. In our time, as in the years before the Civil War, we hear voices insisting that the "true" meaning of the Constitution involves state sovereignty and state dominance over federal power. It's a curious notion. What sort of "sovereign" can be overthrown at will by its "creature?" [Pols emphasis]

Such a "sovereign" isn't sovereign at all. And a "republic" that has no government isn't "republican." The control-mashing "friends" of state government are fighting for the states' "right" to commit suicide. It's a bleak quest, and one that bodes ill for the future of the country.

The ins and outs of TABOR are certainly difficult to understand, and some parts are worse than others, but it's hard to argue that TABOR has been a benefit to Colorado overall. That's what makes this legal case so fascinating, as Epps explains brilliantly. Whatever your opinion on TABOR, it's curious to consider whether the Founding Fathers would have wanted to a system of government that could essentially destroy itself.

“Smaller Government, Lower Taxes” Mantra Hurts GOP with Young Voters

Politico reports on the findings from extensive polling and focus groups made public by the College Republican National Committee, which sought to understand how the GOP has lost "young voters." The full story, and the report, are worth reading because it brings to light new concerns with several longtime Republican talking points. For example, it's no surprise that Republicans are losing young voters because of their opposition to gay rights — but far more interesting is that the old "smaller government, lower taxes" approach is increasingly perceived as a negative as well:

Turning to a key talking point during the election, the report found that while Republicans during the 2012 cycle invoked jobs and the economy at every turn, the younger age group was put off by the way the GOP presented those issues.

“Policies that lower taxes and regulations on small businesses are quite popular. Yet our focus on taxation and business issues has left many young voters thinking they will only reap the benefits of Republican policies if they become wealthy or rise to the top of a big business,” the report says. “We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it but won’t offer you a hand to help you get there.” [Pols emphasis]

Younger voters — especially those in the Hispanic focus groups the CRNC conducted — are deeply familiar with the challenges posed by a less-than-robust economy, the report said, citing struggles with student loans and people who are delaying marriage because of financial issues. But the study said the party must explain how its policies translate into chances for economic advancement and should seek to do so in a more “caring” tone.

“If we don’t believe that Republicans are the ‘fend for yourself’ party, then it’s time for us to explain why — and to show our work,” the report said. “This will go a long way overall, but particularly with Latino voters, who tend to think the GOP couldn’t care less about them.”

The college Republicans warned that the party’s primary message of cutting taxes and reducing the size of government failed to resonate. In fact, one of the CRNC’s polls found that 54 percent of young voters said “taxes should go up on the wealthy” while only 3 percent said “taxes should be cut for the wealthy.” Bashing Big Government also didn’t play well and was even damaging, according to some of the focus groups, the study found. [Pols emphasis]

It's one thing to advocate for a smaller government and reduced spending when the economy is humming, but eventually people start wondering how roads and schools are going to get funded — particularly as the economy slows down. As it turns out, it doesn't take voters very long to figure out the disconnect.

That’s The Point, Scott Tipton

Always the last to catch on.

Always the last to catch on.

As the Durango Herald's Stephanie Dazio reports:

The U.S. Senate passed the Marketplace Fairness Act by a 69-27 vote last week. The bill generally would subject online shopping to state sales taxes. The taxes would be sent to the state where the purchaser lives.

Current law says states can force retailers to collect sales taxes only if the company has a physical presence in the state.

That can give online companies a leg up over brick-and-mortar stores that must collect taxes on all transactions.

A few years ago, Colorado tried to "encourage" online retailers to collect and remit Colorado's state use tax, which has always technically been owed on online purchases under Colorado law but uncollectible in practice due to federal restrictions on state sales tax remittance dating from the Sears Catalog era. Local retailers led by the Colorado Retail Council supported this legislation, citing the years-long drop in sales for local "brick and mortar" retailers at the hands of online merchants–who enjoyed a competitive advantage for local consumers, and use the same taxpayer-funded infrastructure for product delivery that local retailers do. What's more, local retailers are often used by consumers as "showrooms" for products they then buy online tax-free, adding insult to injury.

Colorado Republicans energetically fought against the so-called "Amazon tax" bill, claiming the measure would "hurt Colorado business," when it in fact was intended to level the playing field on behalf of local business. Ultimately, though, Colorado's attempt to push online merchants to collect and remit Colorado sales tax wound up mired in court. Meanwhile, the push for a federal solution began as other states pressed the issue–which led to passage in the Senate of the Marketplace Fairness Act last week. A key change was on the part of Amazon, the same internet retail giant who fought the Colorado tax legislation at all costs. With Amazon on board, taxation of online purchases in every state seems closer than ever.

But don't tell that to Colorado's Rep. Scott Tipton, folks.

U.S. Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Cortez, will oppose it, said his spokesman Josh Green.

“Do we really need to be raising taxes?” Green said. “It’s going to impact local businesses.” [Pols emphasis]

Now folks, as we've just explained, and as local businesses throughout Rep. Tipton's district would tell him if he listened to them, a measure of fairness for local brick and mortar retail is the point of the legislation. That's why local retailers have pushed for this for years at the local and federal level. In addition to boosting revenue for the state of Colorado, brick-and-mortar retail can finally begin to recover from a competitive disadvantage they have suffered from against large internet retailers for over a decade.

So yes, dunderhead! It's going to "impact local businesses." As in positively.