Colorado Gov-Watch 2006

Party Watch: Asymmetrical Warfare

In the Press: Identity Thief Strikes Well-Known State Official

Election Rights Watch: Legislation Enables Identity Thieves to Commit Vote Fraud

In the Know: Vote Centers Rejected in El Paso County

Charge of the Blind RINOs: Correction

Referendum C Watch: The Great Divide


Colorado Gov-Watch 2006

So far, the Draft McInnis for Governor committee has kept its cards close to the vest. Registered agent Natalie Meyer, former Colorado Secretary of State, filed papers for Draft McInnis in April, but McInnis has not yet filed candidate papers with current Secretary of State, Donetta Davidson. Based in Pueblo, the Draft McInnis for Governor committee presently shows a zero balance and an incomplete “view candidate� page. McInnis was among the prospective governor candidates making the rounds at the April Lincoln Day Hoedown Dinner hosted by the Mesa County Republican Women.

Recap of Previously Reported Items in Gov-Watch

If Bob Beauprez is a committed contender in the 2006 race for Colorado governor, it won’t be obvious on the ledger until after July 15, when the next round of campaign finance reports are due to the Colorado Secretary of State. Presently, his exploratory campaign shows a zero balance.

Maybe it’s really too early in the race for governor candidates to be in fundraising mode. The announced or exploratory Dems who’ve pulled state papers also show zero balances.

However, Marc Holtzman has already reported $396,787.71 on hand—not bad for an exploratory committee. And that was as of March 31. Holtzman was last seen in Mesa County at the annual Lincoln Day Hoedown organized by the Mesa County Republican Women.

Party Watch

Mesa County Republicans interested in attending the Executive Board meetings may have some difficulty tracking down date, time and location. While the new website has been enthusiastically received, the calendar so far has not included Executive Board meetings since April.

Meanwhile, the local (D)onkeys have wasted no time organizing their forces in preparation for what is shaping up to be an all-out war. Among other things, they have a list of over 1,000 volunteers and contacted them back in May to update their records. They’re also organizing an army of volunteers to provide each precinct captain with a list of people to cover their respective precincts. More to the point, their leadership lists their executive board meeting at the top of their calendar so that the rank-and-file can stay informed of their party’s strategic activities, get involved, and shoulder a good share of the workload.

Previously Reported in Party Watch

Locally in Mesa County, the (D)onkey party has shaken a money tree somewhere. Their 2004 Spring Fling annual fundraiser netted around $4,000 according to their treasurer’s report. However, this year’s fling flung $12,500 into their war chest from 308 paid dinners at $25 a plate. Debate is open on the question of whether locals paid for the plates. For a party that historically can’t get its party assembly attendance into triple digits, a triple-digit dinner implies that they have somehow snatched wallets and warm bodies from elsewhere.

Big picture: if the (D)onkey party can pull this off in conservative Mesa County, how are they doing in the rest of the state? With so many open R seats in 2006, the legislature could become even more firmly rooted in the Dem column if GOP fundraising and organizing fails to keep pace. With the governor’s mansion opening for occupancy, the famous Owens veto pen may go into retirement if the elephant is too starved to stave off a jackass invasion.

In the Press

Who would be dumb enough to attempt to cash a convenience check in the name of John Suthers-- Colorado Attorney General John Suthers? Yes, identity fraud is thriving in Colorado. In fact, the June issue of the Colorado Notary Bulletin reveals that the Federal Trade Commission ranks Colorado 5th in the nation in the number of reported cases of ID theft.

Election Rights Watch

Notwithstanding the troubling prevalence of identity fraud in his state, Colorado Governor Bill Owens signed SB 106, legislation that among other things, would remove the current provision requiring that a notary public witness the mark of a voter who is unable to write when notifying the county clerk of a change of residence. Now the statute allows any person to witness the mark of such a voter, but there is no provision that this witness be either impartial to the transaction or that the request even be made at the clerk’s office. Thus, a fraudulent-minded person could write up a “personal letter,� “witness� the voter’s signature, and then change that voter’s residence on the county voting records. Worse, there is no requirement to establish that the person can’t write, show that the person knowingly submitted change of residence, or to prove the person’s identity. Since the Secretary of State’s office has a mailing list of all Colorado notaries, mails a monthly newsletter to them, and even thoughtfully provides the mailing list to the National Notary Association and other reputable organizations who sell notary supplies, it’s inconceivable that no effort has been made to call upon Colorado notaries to witness such signatures to protect these especially vulnerable voters from identity fraud.

Amidst the hot-bed environment of identity fraud nationwide, one is left to wonder if the true name of the federal H.A.V.A. legislation should be the “Help Anybody Vote Act� rather than “Help America Vote Act.�

In the Know

The Mesa County Vote Center Taskforce rolls out its findings from 5:30 to 7:00 pm Tuesday June 14 in the Old Courthouse. El Paso County discovered that Vote Centers would cost from $1.24 to $1.7 million dollars, far more than the $807,698 for polling place elections. Survey results of election preferences showed that vote centers were the least preferred for the mail-ballot 2005 election. For the 2005 off-year election, respondents preferred the polling place and mail ballot election over vote centers—in that order. El Paso County’s Vote Center Task Force also discovered that those who voted early or absentee would likely continue to use those methods and not use vote centers.

Here in Mesa County, it seems counter-intuitive to spend a large amount of money implementing vote centers because at least half our voters prefer early or absentee voting. That’s a lot of money to spend to serve perhaps half the voters and that only every other year.

Correction to Charge of the Blind RINOs

Republicans in Name-Only have unfortunately lost sight of the big picture: firing upon a fellow Republican at the local level can contribute to disastrous results downrange. Just ask Senator Mark Hillman, who had to vacate his Majority Leader office in the Senate in part because some people around the state broke ranks and strengthened the opposition with their votes, volunteer hours and even their money. By supporting the left flank, RINOs position the left to put more bodies and therefore votes in the liberal/socialist/progressive column, which makes destructive legislation that much harder for the remaining traditionalist Republicans to kill.

Dems recaptured the Colorado legislature—shamefully, with the help of around 200 in-name-only Republicans in Mesa County who listed their names in paid newspaper advertising, contributed cash to the Dem candidate, and blasted a fellow Republican at every opportunity in the papers to throw the 55th HD back into Dem hands. True to form, the lefty legislature had barely moved into their new offices before crafting Referendum C in the liberals’ ceaseless quest to eviscerate the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR). Colorado taxpayers even now complain about escalating property tax rates, and especially the onerous business personal property tax which strangles high-capital industries which also provide the best paying jobs. In the words of Ronald Reagan, “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!� Blasted by the state treasurer as a failure in leadership, this referendum is likely to be merely the first in a series of steps toward repealing the Taxpayers Bill of Rights and returning to the pre-TABOR era of steeply escalating taxation.

RINOS have poor eyesight. A charging RINO is especially hazardous because it is too nearsighted to see who or what is trampled underfoot. In this case, their blind charge herded the legislature back into the D column and rewarded even freshman liberal legislators with powerful committee assignments. Locally, the donkey party members and chair must be laughing themselves silly as they recall how local Republicans spent their own money to spank the Senator from District 7 out of the Joint Budget Committee to replace him with their freshman Dem rep to the 55th HD. Of course, every dollar spent by a RINO to advance the Dem cause is money the Dems don’t have to spend…And incredibly ironic as it may seem, the GOP senator from District 7 participated in the same RINO charge that trampled him right out of the majority party and into a smaller office at the state capitol. (Wonder what kind of hangover that was when he woke up to find the Dems in the large offices and in charge.)

Referendum C Watch

Representative Josh Penry, Colorado House District 54 spoke out against Ref C on Monday June 13 to a full house at the Mesa County Republican Women luncheon. Acting Treasurer Mark Hillman and his predecessor, Mike Coffman are both on record against Ref C.

Inexplicably, Club20 maintains a pro-Ref C position even though the referendum lacks any provision to commit funds in the interest of Western Colorado and its citizens. Rather than serving as “the Voice of Western Colorado,� Club20 seems to be more in league with Front Range money and interests than voicing the interests of Western Colorado taxpayers.

For instance, the Colorado Municipal League officially supports Referendum C (HB 05-1194) and its sister Referendum D (HB 05-1333). The lobbyist staffers at the League claim a 70% success rate in the legislature on bills the League supports. However, an infrequently viewed campaign website belies a lack of broad support for these measures. So far, the website’s endorsements area lacks any entries. However, the committee has reported over $230,000 in contributions, raised during April alone. Nearly all of that was contributed by the Denver Chamber of Commerce—Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation. Possibly anticipating income opportunities from bonds if Ref D passes, the Colorado Bond Dealers Association contributed $10,000. And the Colorado Bar Association contributed $50,000.

Previously Reported in Referendum C Watch

“During a briefing ordered by Democrat leadership, budget staffers indicated that the Legislature was facing $340 million in “budget cuts� this year and next. Capitol staffers work tremendously hard to report facts without partisan spin, but the majority party’s purpose for convening the joint session was clear: to lay a foundation for dismantling the spending limit in the Taxpayers Bill of Rights.

“Over the next 118 days, something amazing happened. Budget writers avoided those projected cuts and even increased general fund spending by $480 million over two years – all without changing TABOR.

That’s not to say that everything’s rosy as far as the eye can see. Under current projections, the 2006-07 general fund budget will increase by just $6.9 million, while the state refunds $512 million.�

--Senator Mark Hillman, The Capitol Review

Referendum C spending is already off to a healthy start. The spree begins with the SB 237 Healthy Business Healthy People Program (Keller, Green) The enactment of this bill is contingent on Referendum C passing in November. If Referendum C passes, the bill earmarks $15 million for this new program. As reported by Colorado Counties, Inc county commissioners urge caution in proceeding with the earmarking of Referendum C funds before the measure passes in November. Even the Colorado Progressive Coalition admits that Referendum C can be used for new spending: “Earmarking of funds for new programs and services may crowd out needed funds to restore past cuts and could result in scaling back current services.� For folks not familiar with quaint agricultural terms like “earmarking,� an earmark is used to identify livestock such as pork, and in Ref C’s case, pork and bull.

Outgoing treasurer Mike Coffman blasted Referendum C as “nothing more than a temporary solution.�

“This plan is unfair to the taxpayers since it will do nothing to address runaway, mandated spending. There's nothing balanced about this proposal since it places the entire burden on TABOR and taxpayers.

Simply put: This proposal defers making the difficult decisions on a long-term solution to others, and represents a failure of leadership.�

In his May 4, 2005 edition of Treasur-E Notes, Coffman provided a clear view through the fog of smoke and mirrors of whether or not $1 billion really has been lost in funding to state services over the past few years. In just one page he lays out the facts, concluding that

“Unquestionably, state general fund expenditures today are at a level significantly lower than they would have been if the state had collected enough revenue to increase spending at an annual rate of six percent. On the other hand, it is clear that total state spending never actually decreased in any year of the recession.

These are the facts. Thus the question: does the inability to increase spending to the allowable limit constitute a cut in spending or does a cut have to be an actual decrease in spending. You decide.�