December, 2009 Assembled By Dana West

The last two months we partnered with other Metro Denver Republican groups and listened to
several candidates for Colorado Governor and U.S. Senate.

Our next meeting is December 12th. Don Marostica and Shawn Mitchell
will debate/discuss the Colorado State budget, how TABOR fits into it,
and answer your questions.
MEETING TIME AND PLACE
We will be at Gander Mountain, 9923 Grant Street, Thornton, CO from 9:15-10:45 a.m. on the
second Saturday of each month in the employee training room. If you live in Adams County or
Denver's northern suburbs, come join us for lively spirited debate and to meet Republican
movers and shakers

Directions to Gander Mountain:

Gander Mountain is a huge sporting goods store in the old Biggs, now Wal-Mart/Home Depot
shopping center just east of I-25 and south of 104th Ave. Just go in the front door, turn
left at the first aisle and follow it to the employee meeting room on the far left.

Yearly membership dues are $20, while a couple is $30. Make checks payable to NSRF. It’s $3
per person to attend the monthly meeting to pay for the provided continental breakfast.

For more information on politics or the Republican Party, go to the following internet sites:

www.Examiner.com/Denver www.CompleteColorado.com http://www.ColoradoPols.com/

www.FaceTheState.com/ www.i2i.org/ www.TonysRants.com/ www.ALineOfSight.com/

http://www.peoplespresscollective.org/ http://www.adcorepublicans.com/ http://www.tonyoncolorado.com/

www.AdamsCountyGOP.com/ www.ColoGOP.org/ www.RNC.org/

www.PoliticalLiveWires.com www.OpinionJournal.com http://FactCheck.org

www.850koa.com/pages/MikeRosen.html www.Heritage.org/ http://Townhall.com/

This Saturday we are holding our annual election for officers of the North Suburban Republican Forum.

In addition, breakfast burritos will be served. Please join us.

1
Citizens to Politicians: We Like TABOR

By Barry Poulson

In 2001, the Colorado Commission on Taxation surveyed citizens' attitudes toward the tax system. It was an
important survey because it reflected the views of ordinary citizens rather than that of politicians or special
interest groups. It revealed some hostility toward taxes and a low trust in the efficiency of government. This
skepticism appeared directly related to the size of government; citizens have more confidence in local
government, less confidence in state government, and least confidence in our federal government.

Widespread citizen support for the TABOR Amendment may come as a surprise to many because of the
opposition mounted against TABOR in recent years. Some in the media appear to have launched an all-out
attack on the TABOR Amendment. The Denver Post, for example, has published a number of editorials in
criticizing TABOR and recommending either changes or abolition.

Critics argue that Colorado citizens dont understand the provisions of TABOR nor the impact it has on state
fiscal policies. Sometimes it is argued that citizens support the provisions of TABOR requiring voter approval of
tax increases, but not those provisions that impose limits on the amount of revenue the state can collect and
spend.

If there is one thing that we learned from the survey it is that Colorado citizens not only understand, they
support the specific provisions of TABOR. The controversy is not one of misunderstanding, but rather is founded
on a fundamental difference between how taxpayers and special interests view the TABOR Amendment. When
citizens passed the TABOR Amendment through citizen initiative, they made a clear distinction between the
revenue the government collects within the TABOR limit and any surplus revenue collected above that limit.
From a taxpayer perspective, that surplus revenue represents excess taxation that must be rebated to those
who paid the excess taxes.

2
Special interest groups in both the public and private sector take a different view of TABOR surplus revenues.
Their idea is that once the government has collected the revenue, whether it is within the TABOR limit or is
surplus revenue, this is government money to be used at the discretion of politicians and the special interests
they represent. Every special interest group with a lobbyist seems to want to lay claim to what they perceive as
their right to the surplus revenue.

Politicians have responded with more than 20 bills providing targeted tax cuts and tax refunds to these special
interest groups. The most powerful interest group in the state, the education lobby, has successfully laid claim
to a significant portion of the TABOR surplus, which is now earmarked for spending on education K-12. Other
special interest groups from transportation lobbies to municipal governments have proposed similar earmarking
of TABOR surplus revenue.

Given this controversy, it is important to understand what the impact of tax and spending limits has been in
Colorado. Unfortunately the media has often presented a distorted and erroneous picture of the impact of
TABOR on state fiscal policy. To correct these errors and present a factual analysis of the impact of tax and
spending limits, go to www.IndependenceInstitute.org and explore the Fiscal Policy Center's celebration of
TABOR. With the Taxpayer Bill of Rights under relentless attack, it is more important than ever to understand
its success and protect it from those who want to destroy it.

TABOR for Dummies

By Mark Hillman

Here they go again.

Faced with a budget that’s hemorrhaging dollars, it was only a matter of time before one of our spendthrift
legislators made headlines by erroneously pointing the finger of blame at Colorado’s Taxpayers Bill of Rights
(TABOR).

Never mind that last spring Governor Ritter and the Democrat-controlled legislature ignored numerous warning
signals of a looming recession.

Never mind that they ignored the consensus lesson of the last “budget crisis” — when times are good, save a
little money for when times aren’t so good.

Never mind that in November voters rejected higher taxes and defended the few remaining constraints on
government spending.

Nope, to hear the Denver Democrats tell the story, the problem with the state budget isn’t the economy or
undisciplined spending. A few degrees further from reality, newly-elected Boulder Democrat Sen. Rollie Heath
says the problem is TABOR.

Apparently Sen. Heath didn’t hear about Referendum C which loosed Colorado’s government from most of
TABOR’s constraints — except for that pesky requirement that voters still get to decide whether to raise taxes.

“We’re hamstrung,” Heath complained to a legislative committee even before taking office. “Not only does
(TABOR) put a limitation (on spending), it takes away your flexibility. We desperately need flexibility right
now.”

So perhaps it’s time a for a quick session of “TABOR for Dummies” to benefit anyone else who’s been elected to
state government after spending the past four years in a galaxy far, far away.

Lesson 1 — TABOR doesn’t limit spending during a recession.

To quote James Carville, “It’s the economy, stupid!” During a recession, the limiting factor on state spending is
the economy. After all, Colorado — unlike Congress — has a balanced budget amendment, so the state can’t
spend money it doesn’t have.

3
Lesson 2 — Ref C doesn’t expire in 2010.

When the voters passed Ref C in 2005, they changed the way the original TABOR worked. Even after portions of
Ref C expire in 2010, the new, revised spending limit under TABOR 2.0 will no longer “ratchet down” spending
during a recession and will rarely restrict spending during an economic recovery.

According to the legislature’s economists, TABOR will not limit government’s ability to spend in the foreseeable
future.

Lesson 3 — Amendment 23 doesn’t expire in 2010.

The constitutional amendment that actually makes matters worse during a recession is Amendment 23, which
mandates that K-12 education spending must increase every year — even when revenues are decreasing.

In the current budget, Amendment 23 requires a spending increase of $189 million. Meanwhile, economists
predict that total general fund spending must be reduced to $172 million less than last year.

K-12 education accounts for 41 percent of the general fund budget, so the remaining 59 percent of the budget
must be cut by $172 million to compensate for falling revenue plus another $189 million to accommodate
Amendment 23.

Will Sen. Heath and his fellow Democrats buck the teachers unions to pull the teeth of the real shark in the
budget process? Don’t hold your breath.

Lesson 4 — Flexibility under TABOR 2.0.

Ever since Ref C suspended the TABOR spending limit, legislators have enjoyed absolute flexibility to spend, to
save or to strike a balance between the two.

Guess which option they chose? Not saving. Not balance. Just more spending.

The flexibility they haven’t enjoyed is the flexibility to raise taxes without a vote — although they even tried
that with Gov. Ritter’s property tax increase.

Herein lies the lesson for voters:

For four years, legislators have budgeted without TABOR’s training wheels. They could have saved money
during good years, but they didn’t. They should have asked our permission before raising property taxes, but
they didn’t.

What possible justification exists for relaxing the remaining safeguards that protect taxpayers?

Should TABOR be retired or revamped? NO

By Jon Caldara

To hear the chorus of tiny little violins and their grating, one-note symphony of "TABOR Must Be Changed,"
you'd think that Colorado's Taxpayer's Bill of Rights causes acne. But no matter how well-financed and well-
publicized their whining is, it will be a hard sell persuading Coloradans to alter the nation's most successful tax
and expenditure limitation law.

We have seen TABOR return around $800 of surplus tax revenue to every man, woman and child. That's $3,200
per family of four. We also have seen TABOR save Colorado's fiscal fanny.

During the overheated 1990s, excess tax revenue in Colorado was returned to taxpayers. In other states, like
California, the excess tax money went into expanding government budgets. So when the economy slowed,
deficits soared, government nearly went bankrupt and a governor was recalled.

4
Thanks to TABOR, Colorado avoided that fate.

The Colorado media, one of the loudest little violins, have failed to report that TABOR has been such a success
here that other states are working to emulate it.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has had discussions with Colorado Gov. Bill Owens over how to bring
TABOR to California. Officials in New Jersey, Maine, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Arizona and New York are
among many working to bring TABOR to their states.

Is TABOR actually shrinking the size of government? To hear the tiny violins, you'd think so. But nothing could
be further from the truth.

In the decade since TABOR's passage in 1992, the size of state government has grown by a whopping 64
percent. Government is hardly withering away.

You're gonna hear a lot of yapping in the coming months about the so-called ratchet effect of TABOR, that
spending levels will never be allowed to reach the higher, pre-recession levels. But of course they can, and
within the existing TABOR law. All the state has to do to keep that excess money is - now get ready for this -
ask us for permission.

TABOR has the built-in flexibility to let government keep every dime it takes in and never return a penny. It's
called a TABOR override, nicknamed "de-Brucing."

While local governments have been overwhelmingly successful in de-Brucing, the state hasn't. In 1998, voters
slammed down a $1 billion spending increase. And the tiny violins don't like hearing that "no" means "no." So
instead, they want to legalize fiscal date rape and just keep all the future refunds without asking for your
permission.

Government can only successfully de-Bruce when it convinces voters that it is running as lean as possible.

But some governments do rein in their budgets. Washington state faced a bleak financial picture with a $2
billion deficit, many times that of Colorado's. Democratic Gov. Gary Locke instituted priority-based budgeting
and forced officials to do their jobs and decide what is most important, and what is least. He closed the budget
gap without raising taxes.

But lawmakers here are hobbled in their efforts to set priorities because Amendment 23 locks in the largest line
item. Even in times of recession, Amendment 23 requires K-12 education spending to increase above the rate of
inflation, without any way to fund it except cutting other budgets like higher education.

It's interesting that Amendment 23's authors originally planned to include a large tax increase to pay for their
spending mandate but pulled it when their polling showed it wouldn't pass. So instead, they promised that
Amendment 23 would work within the limits of TABOR, which had been on the books for years.

They even paraded an economist who proclaimed that it would take financial devastation on par with the Great
Depression for Amendment 23 to cause a budget problem. The sluggish couple of years we've just seen hardly
compares to the Depression.

So now they're trying to blame TABOR and get you to vote away all your future tax refunds instead of
addressing the real budget mess they made with Amendment 23.

The little violins want you to give up your right to vote on future spending increases. How could that possibly be
good government?

Don't buy their snake oil again. Leave TABOR alone.

5
TABOR Amendment has Saved
Colorado

By Barry Poulson

Re: "Scary California stories aren't true,"

Sept. 20 guest commentary.

In his guest commentary, Matt Sundeen

challenged my view that Colorado will go
the way of California. Our tax and
spending limits are the most effective
constraints on the growth of government
in the country. Those tax and spending
limits are under attack in Colorado, just
as they were in California. Do we really
want to follow California's disastrous
abandonment of fiscal discipline?

The Golden State's GANN Amendment, a

precursor of TABOR, limited the growth of
state revenue and spending to the sum of
inflation and population growth. In the late 1980s, the California legislature abandoned the GANN Amendment.

As a result, state spending in California increased more rapidly than personal income and taxes were increased
to one of the highest levels in the country. Business investment and jobs left the state for other states with
better tax climates.

In 1992, Colorado voters passed TABOR. It also limits the rate of growth of state revenue and spending to the
sum of inflation and population growth.

The TABOR Amendment has worked much the way it was intended, allowing Colorado citizens to decide how
much government they want and are willing to pay for.

Critics often incorrectly argue that TABOR forced the state to cut spending. But the reality is that from 1993 to
2007 real per capita state spending grew 28 percent, while per capita GDP grew 30 percent.

With an effective tax and spending limit in place, Colorado has been able to lower tax burdens, creating one of
the best business tax climates in the country. Over the period since TABOR was passed, Colorado has
experienced one of the highest rates of economic growth in the nation, while California has experienced
retardation in economic growth.

States that impose an effective tax and spending limit create a better business tax climate compared to states
that pursue profligate fiscal policies, such as California. Critics who argue that state spending should not be
constrained by tax and spending limits are really arguing that government should grow more rapidly than the
private sector.

Politicians and special-interest groups routinely attack TABOR because it doesn't give them carte blanche
authority to tax and spend. In Colorado, we are fortunate to have our TABOR amendment. It strengthens fiscal
rules and policies conducive to economic growth and prosperity, and prevents the kind of fiscal debacle
occurring in California.

6
Friends --

With Members of Congress heading back to Washington, the Democrat leadership in Congress seems
ready to renew its push to pass government-run health care, in spite of the vocal opposition of the
American people.

It is imperative that those who oppose this dangerous experiment let their voices be heard and send a
strong message to Members of Congress returning to Washington: reform is necessary, but the
Democrats’ government-run health care experiment is the wrong way to go.

America needs to protect Medicare, not raid it to fund another government program.
America needs a health care system that protects the doctor-patient relationship.
America needs health care reform that will ensure those who are currently covered are allowed to keep
their coverage.

America does not want a health system that rations care.

America does not want a system in which the government interferes with end-of-life decisions.
Bottom line: Americans want reforms that put patients and consumers in charge of their health
care decision-making, not government bureaucrats and politicians.

There are many ways in which you can make sure your Representatives return to Washington and hear
these messages:

 Call or email your representatives’ offices. Call the U.S. House and Senate switchboard at
(202) 225-3121 and ask for your local Senator or Congressman by name or find their direct
contact information below.
 Write Letters to the Editor.
 Distribute palm cards (available from the Republican Party of Colorado) via door to door
and at community events.
 Call your local radio stations during talk shows to voice your opinion.
 Post messages on blogs, Facebook groups, and Twitter.

Jared Polis, 2nd Congressional District:

Boulder office: 303.484.9596
Washington, D.C. office: 202.225.2161

Betsy Markey, 4th Congressional District:

Fort Collins office: 970.221.7110
Washington, D.C. office: 202.225.4676

Ed Perlmutter, 7th Congressional District:

Lakewood office: 303.274.7944
Washington, D.C. office: 202.225.2645

Michael Bennet, U.S. Senate

7
Denver Metro office: 303.455.7600
Washington, D.C. office: 202.224.5852

Mark Udall, U.S. Senate

Denver Metro office: 303.650.7820
Washington, D.C. office: 202.224.5941

Visit www.barackobamaexperiment.com for additional information regarding the health care debate

Sincerely,

Michael Steele
Chairman, Republican National Committee

The North Suburban Republican Forum’s upcoming meetings

are:
Jan. 9th US Senate Candidates Jane Norton & a preview of Colorado’s 2010 Legislative session

Feb. 13th Colorado Secretary of State & Treasurer candidates

Mar. 13th CD-7 House of Representative candidates

Apr. 10th State Senate and House Candidates

May 8th Open

NSRF Board of Directors Email Address

John Lefebvre President john.lefebvre@comcast.net

Phil Saner Vice-President psaner@msn.com
Jan Hurtt Treasurer jansadvertising@msn.com
Phil Mocon Secretary ph7ss@msn.com
Jerry Cunningham Membership jlcham4@aol.com
Wanda Barnes Planning Wandaleabarnes@aol.com
Dana West Communications dana.west@live.com

Any questions or concerns, please contact any NSRF Board member.

8
 The North Suburban
Republican Forum
1149 W 102nd Ave
Northglenn, CO 80260
Membership Application

This application is for:

Regular Membership (individual)
$20.00 fee
Regular Membership (couples)
$30.00 fee
Associate Membership
$10.00 fee

Name (Both names if couple); Please Print.

___________________________________________________
Last: _ _________ ____First:__ _______ _ MI:_____

___________________________________________________
Last: _____________ First:_______ __ MI:_____

Address:___________________________________________________________________

City:___________________________________________Zip Code:____________________

Telephone:(________)____________-_____________________

E-Mail Address:_______________________________________@_____________________

Signature

Signature

Payment by: Cash Check

Date:__________________________
2nd VP Treasurer