With Dan Maes now firmly entrenched in the Colorado governor’s race, Tom Tancredo must be trying to reclaim his mantel as the most radical candidate running. How else do you explain Tancredo taking the most extreme position among the Colorado gubernatorial candidates regarding a trio of tax-cutting measures that would cripple state and local governments?
In the first debate featuring John Hickenlooper, Maes and Tancredo, the recent convert to the American Constitution Party said he would support Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101.
“It’s really a reaction to people being overtaxed and being taxed without their permission,” Tancredo said. He added that he understands the measures have been described as “draconian.”
Indeed, they are.
Hickenlooper wisely rejects all three. Maes said he stands by Amendment 60, which would cut property and income taxes to the point Colorado would have almost no general fund money left after it paid its obligation to K-12 schools.
Amendment 61 would stop the state from borrowing, and greatly restrict local governments from being able to do so. Say goodbye to new schools or improved roads.
And you can say goodbye to corporations that want their employees to have such necessities.
Proposition 101 would cut or eliminate many fees, like those for vehicle registration.
So, Tom, tell us how you plan to govern a bankrupt state if Colorado voters pass these measures that you’ve heard are draconian?
A recent analysis by the General Assembly’s non-partisan Legislative Council found that if all three were fully implemented and applied to the 2010-11 state budget, the state would lose $2.1 billion.
The general fund budget is just over $7 billion.
Further, big drops in the property tax collections for local school districts under Amendment 60 would trigger an existing state law that requires the state to make up the difference. That would mean another $1.6 billion would have to come out of the remaining general fund to help pad what the state already sends to local school districts.
The Legislative Council has said there would be about $38 million left to cover such vital services as courts and prisons, roads and bridges, higher education and human services.
If that’s the kind of state budget Tancredo wants to oversee, we can’t imagine what he hopes to accomplish other than preside over the ruins.
The proponents of the three proposals tried to block the Legislative Council’s cumulative analysis from being included in the Blue Book, which voters receive to help understand complex ballot measures.
But voters need to be told the truth about these measures.
And Tancredo and Maes need to spend the next several weeks explaining how they plan to govern a state with no money and what programs they want to eliminate.
