Mount Virtus

That’s got to be how the Democratic trio of Governor Bill Ritter, Speaker Terrance Carroll, and House Finance Committee Chairman Joel Judd have to be feeling after knowing they accidentally turned one of their tax hike bills into a tax cut and therefore had to kill it. The majority party under the Golden Dome couldn’t let a pesky problem like that make it into the light of day.

You can’t make this stuff up, folks. Yet somehow it escaped even the watchful eye of the Denver Post‘s “The Spot” blog. Oh, well….

Thanks to Americans for Limited Government, brings our attention to something you may have missed, namely a key vote in the U.S. Senate last Thursday:

It was also on this day that the Senate voted 60-39 to increase the national debt ceiling by another $1.9 trillion to $14.294 trillion.

It is the largest debt ceiling increase in U.S. history — in human history, in fact — totaling even more than the projected federal budget deficit for 2010, which CBO states will be an eye-popping $1.35 trillion….

The vote was straight down party lines, with Senate Democrats enabling the Barack Obama administration to continue the federal spending spree, putting my children and grandchildren deeper in debt. Yes, that means the Appointed One Michael Bennet on his 2010 U.S. Senate Farewell Tour, and Mark Udall — he of the “dirty politician filter.”

Another reminder for Colorado’s fiscal conservatives, limited government supporters and liberty lovers to get involved and support the GOP candidate who you believe best fulfills your values and can unseat Bennet. Let’s keep the momentum going.

A quick follow-up to my recent posting on the campaign reports from candidates in Colorado’s 7th Congressional District. Most notably, Republican frontrunner Ryan Frazier outraised incumbent Democrat Ed Perlmutter, despite the fact that Perlmutter gained nearly half his money from various special interest PACs.

For this distinction, The Hill rates Perlmutter as one of Congress’s fundraising losers, noting that Frazier’s “$219,000-to-$215,000 advantage in the fourth quarter was slight, but it serves as notice that a district that began as an afterthought could see a race.”

Meanwhile, Lang Sias has filed his report: He raised $30,914. To be fair, Sias wasn’t in the race for the entire October-December reporting period (his first contribution was received on November 2). Nearly half his contributions come from the Washington DC area — including $5,000 from John McCain’s Country First PAC and $1,000 from Joe (brother of John) McCain.

Update, 2/2: Americans for Tax Reform links back here. They have taken a real interest in “educating all those voting in the districts represented by the aforementioned lawmakers as to how they voted on this tax package during the 2010 campaign season.” ATR’s help is much appreciated.

Saturday I highlighted the Democratic House seats in the Colorado state legislature most vulnerable in the upcoming election. Today the House voted (with a 37-27-1 Democratic majority) to approve eight of the “dirty dozen” tax hike bills on: Direct mail (1189); Candy and soft drinks (1191); Software downloads (1192); Online sales (1193); “Non-essential” food containers (1194); Insecticides, pesticides and bull semen (1195); Alternative fuel vehicles (1196); Corporate net operating losses (1199).

When push comes to shove, I can give a pass on HB 1196. As for the other seven, it’s interesting to see which Democrats exhibited momentary symptoms of common sense and voted No … and which Democrats did not. Among those who voted Yes on every one of the tax increases: (more…)

Update, 2/2: It seems that HB 1198 in particular was too good — so good, Colorado’s legislative Democrats had to kill it. As Government Underground skillfully reports, the Democrats accidentally had a bill drafted that would repeal not only the AMT credit but the AMT itself, and thus are “not even competent enough to raise our taxes as they would like.” If it weren’t our tax dollars at stake, it would be downright hilarious.

I have tried to make the point before — if inartfully — that some of the “dirty dozen” tax hikes are worse policy than others. The fact they are being rammed through so quickly with so little deference to the concerns of large numbers of citizens showing up in protest has earned them all the “dirty” appellation.

But now, at last, we have a thoughtful analysis from the Tax Foundation’s Mark Robyn that carefully distinguishes nine of the bills: Bottom line? Seven are bad, two are good. (more…)

Last night on my guest co-hosting gig for Backbone Radio, we discussed not only the growing trend of government workers beginning to dominate the union movement.

But the subject also came up about the Obama administration’s efforts to backdoor the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (aka card check) through the appointment of SEIU lackey Craig Becker.

One advantage of this approach? Fellow Democrats in Congress like the indecisive appointed junior U.S. Senator Michael Bennet wouldn’t have to take an obvious position that either offends the Obama administration or the overwhelming number of Coloradans (and a majority of Colorado union members) opposed to this destructive proposal to re-write labor laws.

It would just add to the growing “backroom” Obama M.O. Michael Bennet then might want to consider writing the President a thank-you note — and while he’s at it, urge him not to make any more campaign visits after February. Then again, Bennet would have to vote on Craig Becker’s confirmation — so with the clear message of what Becker stands for, Bennet won’t be completely off the hook.

As fellow RMAer Don Johnson has noted, Republican 7th Congressional contender Ryan Frazier won a small but noteworthy victory by raising more money ($218,824) in the 4th quarter than incumbent Democrat Ed Perlmutter ($215,201).

More notable is that Frazier very nearly raised as much money just from individual contributors ($215,074) as Perlmutter did altogether. The incumbent Democrat brought in nearly half his take from PACs and political committees — including PACs belonging to corporations, trade groups, trial lawyers, labor unions and various liberal interest groups ($103,100 vs. $112,101 from individuals). Even with all the special interest heft that often comes with incumbency, Ed Perlmutter was narrowly outraised by Ryan Frazier.

Of course, GOP frontrunner Frazier still has plenty of ground to make up. Perlmutter has $1,045,319 on hand, compared to Frazier’s $280,355. It’s an uphill battle for the challenger, but the momentum is slowly starting to move in the right direction.

Demonstrating individual fundraising prowess, combined with a strong showing through the Republican primary process, should eventually open up more outside group donations to Frazier’s campaign. Meanwhile, though, people who live in Colorado are speaking more loudly with their pocketbooks to support Ryan Frazier than Ed Perlmutter.

The only other active Republican candidate to file a fourth quarter FEC report was Michael Deming, who raised $229 and has $341 on hand. According to the FEC website, Lang Sias, Jimmy Lakey and Mike Sheely had no reports to file.

This Sunday evening from 5 PM to 8 PM I will be guest co-hosting Backbone Radio on AM 710 KNUS with fellow bloggers Joshua Sharf and the Peoples Press Collective‘s Tom James (not only local bloggers, but Leadership Program of the Rockies Class of 2006 takes over).

With very few guests, it should be a good three hours of enlightening discussion and entertaining political banter. Go here to listen live.

I hope you enjoy one or more of the following:

• David Freddoso at the Washington Examiner points out that Senate Democrats very quickly have killed President Obama’s very modest “spending freeze” proposal before it barely had a chance to get going.
• Speaking of Obama, my PPC friends are licking their chops at the prospect of The One coming to Denver to stump for our appointed junior U.S. Senator Michael Bennet.
• Speaking of arrogance, guest writer Don Rodgers at Reclaim the Blue calls out Democrats in our state legislature for their hubris, after shoving through four of the Dirty Dozen tax bills on Wednesday (and are scheduled to hear the rest starting this morning) as a prelude to their dying political majority.
• Speaking of death, the New Ledger‘s Benjamin Kerstein gives Howard Zinn, the very recently deceased Marxist historian of A People’s History infamy, a harsh critique more grounded in reality than the one Zinn gave to the United States to manufacture his own career.
• Speaking of harshness — yes, as Lynn Bartels blogs for the Denver Post‘s The Spot, the Independence Institute is having its own “Biggest Loser” weight-loss competition — no, I’m participating in the “Biggest Gainer” competition instead.

Have a great Friday!

Update, 9:00 PM: They fixed it. That’s responsive, same-day government service for you!

First of all, I have to commend to you the Secretary of State’s work in creating the new TRACER campaign finance website, which is a more user-friendly, valuable tool than its predecessor. On the lighter side, while it’s imperative for candidates and committees filling out important disclosures to cross their t’s and dot their i’s, someone should have checked on TRACER’s main page to ensure the same level of accuracy: (more…)

Locked in a primary against grassroots candidate Bob McConnell, Colorado 3rd Congressional District candidate Scott Tipton touts an endorsement that could go a long way with many in the Tea Party movement: (more…)

A startling statistical development emerged last Friday, that you may have missed if you weren’t paying attention too closely. New data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that for the first time in U.S. history there are more union members working in government than working in the private sector.

I sat down yesterday for a 9-minute iVoices podcast conversation with Brian Johnson, executive director of the Alliance for Worker Freedom, to explore the effects of the changing labor movement on the fight for liberty and limited government. Follow the link here or click on the play button below to listen: (more…)

Update: I’m not a big fan of the tax credits and exemptions per se. Some represent better policy than others. I would love to see a legislator propose an amendment that one or more of the tax credit revocations be offset by a general reduction to make it revenue-neutral. But since the Democrats’ motivation with these “dirty dozen” bills is about scratching together more funds to help backfill the state budget, and not about creating a more equitable tax system with a minimal shared burden by businesses and consumers, I don’t see the idea going anywhere.

And that doesn’t even bring us to the whole legal question of whether some or all of these bills violate TABOR in the state constitution because they raise taxes without a vote of the people.

Most of the dirty dozen tax hikes will be heard today in committee, reports the Denver Post‘s Tim Hoover:

But [Democratic Sen. Moe] Keller said lawmakers already have cut a property-tax break for seniors, higher education, public schools, programs for the developmentally disabled and mentally ill, and Medicaid payments.

“They’ve all done their part,” Keller said. “The business community can take a hit, too.”

That’s my retiring state senator. Except what happens when tax exemptions are revoked: Is it just the “business community” that is hit?

On Monday, the commerce and industry association released the results of a survey that showed 72 percent of companies polled said they would halt or delay business expansions if four specific tax incentives were eliminated. Meanwhile, 55.2 percent of the companies said they would cut workers’ wages, and 50 percent said they would lay off workers if the tax breaks were eliminated.

All of which holds back economic growth, and cuts into future tax revenue. No one says there are easy answers for everyone involved. But aren’t there some other cost-cutting reforms Colorado can try first?

The article’s headline reads “Industries, lobbyists sour on proposals to curb Colo. tax breaks” — but I have a feeling the Democrats running the show at the State Capitol may hear fairly loudly from some regular small business owners and other taxpaying citizens, too.

Are you a political junkie who is planning to tune in to tonight’s State of the Union address (9 PM Eastern / 7 PM local)? Why not have more fun by making it interactive? This sounds like a potentially interesting opportunity:

For those on or off the same political page, they are invited to participate in the NRCC’s live chat via SMS during President Obama’s State of the Union address.

To participate, consumers can text either keyword, SOTU or STATE, to the short code 777218.

After opting-in, consumers receive a text message that reads: “Thank you for participating in NRCC’s State of the Union Text Chat. Look here on Wednesday 1/27 for the link to participate.”

Several hours before the State of the Union address, consumers will receive chat instructions via text message: “Voice your opinion! Send ur comments as a message to 777218. View America’s response at www.nrcc.mobi. Don’t forget to refresh/reload the page to view more msgs. Txt help for help.”

Let’s see if the Republicans can pull it off. Let’s see if they listen. Let’s see if they can mobilize people around the agenda of rolling back the growing Federal leviathan, not just “freezing” it. Whatever they do, let’s represent Colorado in force.

What do I think of Barack Obama’s so-called “spending freeze”? Imagine someone you know who’s in a little bit of debt increasing his household spending until he maxes out all his credit cards, then reassuring the bank that he’s going to stop increasing his spending rate for 3 years. Yeah, I guess it’s good that he’s not going to try to outlive his means any more than he already does. But then again, it doesn’t really address the problem, does it?

Check out this Red State diary for a more detailed and down-to-earth deconstruction. Or Al Maurer and the Cato Institute article he cites pointing out the true “smoke and mirrors” behind the “spending freeze” pronouncement.

Then I recommend you go over to Hot Air and vote in Ed Morrissey’s poll on how to respond to Obama’s proposal, and decide whether conservatives should “support it as a good start, demand more action” or “oppose it as a fraud, demand across the board freeze and cuts”. (Far better and more realistic than the other two choices, in my estimation.)

As uninspiring policy, Obama’s “spending freeze” isn’t much better than our own lame duck Colorado governor Bill Ritter’s 2007 “mill levy freeze”. And even though it’s a transparent and self-serving tactic, nevertheless here’s hoping that the “spending freeze” least is more faithfully applied than Ritter’s 2009 “hiring freeze”.

What is it with Democrat leaders and rhetorical “freezes” these days, anyway? Is it some subconscious ploy to hush the talk about the fraudulent science behind global warming hysteria? Or maybe we can take the whole temperature metaphor too far…