Colorado’s leading candidates for governor on Tuesday challenged each other’s economic-development plans and experience at a debate sponsored by suburban business leaders.
Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez called for a “massive cash infusion” into public schools and floated a plan to offer tax credits to companies that invest in the state’s education system.
Democrat Bill Ritter pounded a constant theme that last year’s voter-approved Referendum C – opposed by Beauprez – was a necessary step toward improving Colorado’s schools and roads.
Ritter repeated the point so often that Beauprez even teased him about it and one of the attendees grumbled that Ritter sounded like “a broken record.”
“If Mr. Ritter actually wins this election, what in he world would he do as governor?” Beauprez said. “Because Referendum C passes, it’s kind of like there isn’t anything that needs to be be done. All the problems are fixed. I’m shocked by that, Bill.”
Ritter said he didn’t consider Referendum C a cure-all for every issue facing the state.
“Congressman, I did not say Referendum C fixed everything,” Ritter said. “But what I will tell you is that there are 36 projects under construction because Referendum C passed.”
Referendum C suspended limits on tax revenues for five years, allowing the state to keep more than $4 billion that would have been refunded to taxpayers.
Most chambers of commerce and other business leaders were key supporters of the measure.
Both candidates promised to be active salesman for the state. Both candidates said they would ramp up the efforts of the governor’s economic-development office.
Both candidates supported the study of rail options to help ease congestion on the Interstate 70 corridor through the mountains west of Denver. Both candidates said toll roads should be considered as a last resort to fund transportation projects.
The candidates offered contrasting visions of the state government’s involvement in citizens’ lives.
Ritter said government should offer a “hand up” to people who need help. He said his mother depended on food stamps for one year after his father left home when he was 13 years old.
“I was able to go there because there was student aid available for me and I worked as well,” Ritter said. “It was a combination of personal responsibility and my being able to take advantage of the social contract.”
Beauprez said government is often the source of frustration.
“The biggest dividend we could pay is not more government. I mean, look around. The frustrations you all have – wherever it is – isn’t government at the root of a lot of it?”
The debate mostly focused on education and roads – building blocks that many business leaders consider essential to promoting economic growth.
In a series of “what-if” questions, Beauprez proposed a way to channel funding into schools.
“What if we were to provide a tax incentive that gave you two for one?” Beauprez said. “For every $2 that you contributed to education, we’ll give you $1 tax credit.”
His campaign did not provide an estimate on how much additional revenue that would provide to schools or explain how much the incentives would cost the state.
“What if we provide incentives to target those funds to the poorest and most needy kids, to special education, to science and math, to technology, to a great teachers fund so that the very best of our teachers got compensated like the other professionals like some of you here in this room?”
“What if we did that?”
Ritter, the former Denver district attorney, was not impressed.
“As a criminal prosecutor, a lot of the time, I would stand at the podium and hear the defendants explain some their actions and talk about what they’ve done. Even sometimes, the judge would be taken in and you’d have to say, ‘Judge, no. You have to look beyond the words.”
Staff writer Mark P. Couch can be reached at 303-820-1794 or mcouch@denverpost.com.
