jump to navigation

She Wants to “Improve Our Lives” Part 1 December 29, 2007

Posted by awatcher in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , ,
1 comment so far

In what might be one of the boldest and most misleading essays ever written on tax and spending, Improving the lives of middle class Coloradans, Colorado State Rep Dianne Primivera (D-Broomfield) promises more intrusive government and pretends that no one will pay the costs.

 This legislative session I’m committed to expanding access to health care; limiting the financial burden placed on individuals, families and employers; and putting a premium on personal responsibility and prevention. I will work to hold insurance companies accountable for their rates and make sure that hospital charges are clear and transparent.

Yes, all of our health care costs can be blamed on the nasty old health insurance companies.  Last year, the Democrats in the legislature were unhappy that the the major malpractice insurer in the state was keeping costs down by fighting bogus lawsuits.  Their solution:  they wanted to make it more difficult for that insurer to fight lawsuits through regulation. 

Primivera can’t have it both ways, but tries.  Not once does this essay mention the massive tax increases on the middle class that will be required to pay for what has proven in other nations to be a broken health care system.  Socialized medicine simply doesn’t work, but the taxes needed to support it are oppressive. 

Dianne Primivera’s motto is more government, more expenditures, more lawsuits, and more taxes, but she will take no responsibility for her own actions.  Indeed, she wants to “improve our lives.”

We like short essays, so this is part one, with more parts to follow.

AMT Bait & Switch December 14, 2007

Posted by awatcher in Uncategorized.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

In the Denver Post’s monthly pitch for higher taxes on someone, David Sirota twists the truth once again.

The subject is the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT).  He leaves out a few facts:  1)  The AMT was designed with an intentional inflation trap.  2) Congress tends to use inflation traps to increase taxes. 3)  The Democrats could have fixed the problem decades ago, but didn’t because they like inflation traps.  4)  This inflation trap is aimed at the middle class.  5)  By threatening the middle class each year, the Democrats can pull a bait and switch to tax someone else, ratcheting up taxes by $50 billion a year.

David Sirota cleverly claims that an ugly millionaire is holding the middle class hostage.  That is not what is really happening.  The real hostage is the middle class as he says, but the real hostage taker is the new Democrat Congressional majority.  He thinks taxpayers have a short memory and a low IQ.

New Information Source December 13, 2007

Posted by awatcher in Uncategorized.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

CU Boulder alerts us to a new information site on federal spending that tracks spending by congressional district.  It does much more.  We didn’t have time to play with it.  They brought up 2CD as an example because CU Boulder is in the 2d CD.

A Tax Bill Ritter Doesn’t Like? December 11, 2007

Posted by awatcher in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Colorado Confidential published a fluff piece on Rep. Kathleen Curry that contained the following:

“If I propose a severance tax hike and the measure gets on the ballot,” Curry said with a laugh. “I’ve been told the energy industry has set aside a $50 million advertising budget to fight it. I’ll admit the industry watches me pretty closely.”

Curry said Gov. Bill Ritter also has asked her to hold off on such a proposal, “but that’s about all I hear from my district,” she said. During one day, she counted two live interviews and four media calls, all about severance tax.

“I’m getting a lot of resistance on all levels to not forward a bill to increase the severance tax rate,” Curry said, shrugging, “but I have an obligation to my constituents.”

We would guess that he likes the tax increase but he wants to hold it off as an easy tax to pass compared to the inevitable taxes that his “blue ribbon” special interest panels will propose.  You know, a billion here, two there, and before long the state budget is doubled and businesses are leaving the state for a friendlier climate.

Quote of the Week December 11, 2007

Posted by awatcher in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , ,
add a comment

The Grand Junction Sentinel is reporting on the decision by the Mesa County Commissioners support the Independence Institute in its quest to enforce TABOR:

County commissioners, by a vote of 2 to 1, approved joining a lawsuit last week to stop the freeze. Acquafresca does not favor joining the suit, which is being spearheaded by the Libertarian Independence Institute, based in Golden.

“Frankly, this lawsuit, it doesn’t look like a great case,” he said. “The Independence Institute doesn’t care what a great case it is. Their job is just to rattle the Democrats.

And a mighty fine job they do!  If Democrats would simply follow the Constitution, there wouldn’t be a need for an Independence Institute.

Another Democrat, Another Tax November 27, 2007

Posted by awatcher in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Rep. Claire Levy has a problem.  She got involved with what people in Boulder are calling a legalized land grab by her campaign’s treasurer.  If she had kept quiet, the scandal might have passed her by.  She didn’t keep quiet, and now she is in damage control mode.

Now, in what appears (to the commenters on the link we provide) to be a diversionary tactic, she has announced the intention to create a new tax for a pet project.

The problem for Levy is that the transportation blue ribbon panel has already laid claim to this particular tax, but it is nice to see that she is always thinking of new (to her) ways to separate taxpayers from their money.

Of course, the biggest taxer in the state is our friend Bill Ritter.  One of the best in depth analysis of Ritter’s spending plans on transportation that we have seen is by Morgan Liddick at Summit Daily News:

Pretty soon we’re going to be talking about real money here. By the way, this new tax is intended to replace the revenue stream currently provided by Senate Bill 1 of 1997 and House Bill 1310 of 2002, which provided CDOT with $272 million this year.

Apparently, this funding mechanism had the fatal flaw of being sensitive to the state’s economic condition; during the last recession, funds tapered off as growth slowed. Rest assured, the new tax won’t let that happen again.

And the $272 million which will probably be raised by the old mechanism next year? If you believe that will be counted as part of the billion buck boost, well … that’s just cute. Credulous, but cute. Instead, it will reportedly be transferred to the higher education segment of the budget, together with the $59 million of “new money” — remember the code — that Governor Ritter has already requested.

Grab Your Wallet November 25, 2007

Posted by awatcher in Uncategorized.
add a comment

The Grand Junction Sentinel is reporting that a former Democrat candidate for the legislature has submitted a proposed ballot issue to the legislative leadership council:

In ballot language submitted last week to the Colorado Legislative Council, Fort Collins resident and failed 2006 Democratic House candidate Sue Radford proposes charging energy companies an annual fee for every ton of carbon dioxide they produce. The fee, the ballot language states, would have to be passed along to consumers on their electrical bills…

“I am somebody who is deeply concerned about the way our climate is changing,” Radford said. “A carbon tax is the most fair and comprehensive and transparent and enforceable way of dealing with the problem.”

Under Radford’s ballot question, sponsored by the Colorado Clean Energy Tax Shift, all carbon-tax revenue would be refunded to taxpayers through reductions in sales, business personal property and payroll taxes. A portion of the revenue also would be rebated to taxpayers.

Clever leftist that Radford is, she thinks she has found a way to do a massive income transfer to her favored constituiency from those who own buildings and homes that must be heated and lit.

While her proposal is made to appear to send money back to us regular folks, not a cent will go to anyone until the first targeted tax recipient (EIC) is paid in full:

Earned income tax credit supplement fully funded at 20% of federal level.
Thirty percent (30%) of remaining funds used to reduce sales tax.
Twenty percent (20%) of remaining funds used to rebate business personal property tax.
Twenty percent (20%) of remaining funds used to rebate payroll taxes.
Thirty percent (30%) of remaining funds used for per capita rebate to residents.

Pretty clever, eh?   The ballot issue is far more scary than the Sentinel would lead one to believe.

It even has a tax ratcheting device that is more severe than any one might imagine:

The annual change in the fee from the previous year will be limited to twenty-five dollars ($25) per metric ton carbon dioxide or ten percent (10%) of the fee from the previous year, whichever amount is higher.

Hello world! November 19, 2007

Posted by davekopel in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.