Printed on 8/23/08
Here is a predictable and yet chilling reaction to the passage of Ref C sent to me from the Colorado public employees union. I have truncated their message to save you time and more clearly get to their point.
"Dear Kevin,
"Congratulations one and all! We won - We won - We WON!! TABOR's shrinking of government forced the cannibalization of vital public services and Colorado was on the verge of a major shutdown... Voters saved us from all of that and the massive public employee layoffs that would have followed the service cuts.
"Thanks to the voters and thanks to all of our members, our national AFT for being a TOP CONTRIBUTORon behalf ofCFPE and allAFT Colorado affiliates (over $100,000), all of labor and friends of labor - the Colorado Progressive Coalition and their supporters!... It isn't over - we have just begun.
"...the critical areas outnumber the dollars available - but it is a start and definitely keeps things in Colorado from getting any worse. Now that we've all worked on the spending side of the state's budget, it's time we all start looking at the REVENUE side and see where we might make improvements..."
The passage of Ref C was a hugh victory for the left and it is clear from this letter that they are now working harder than ever to fully implement their agenda.
It is also most disturbing to note that they are now training their sights on the REVENUE side, as if the billions of dollars from C didn't even count! Before the ink is even dry for the election they want more and more.
As I said in my editorial article sent out the day after the election, we must continue to hold the legislature accountable for the prudent use of the people's money.
I will not give up the fight for good government that is limited to only its appropriate role. I trust you will be vigilant as well.
-Rep. Kevin Lundberg
Back to Top
House District 49
November 2, 2005
The dust has settled and it's a split decision. C passes and D fails.
The people of Colorado have given state government several more billion dollars, but also said pay as you go and don't mortgage our future.
The Tax Payers Bill of Rights required government to live within its means. Since Referendum C will now remove much of that constitutional restraint, the legislature must find a way to exercise self-restraint. It's a novel idea for a legislature, but anything less will ultimately be a disaster for the citizens, families and businesses of Colorado. Without a much greater restraint than we have exercised before, it will not be long before the state budget will need more tax money than what C is already taking from the people.
As I see it, the state needs a savings account, not a spending spree. That is why I initially introduced a rainy day bill in my first session in the House and I pledge to continue to fight for long-term fiscal plans that will work in good times and in bad.
We must address the budget items that are supposedly on "automatic pilot." That is why I will continue to offer solutions for the budget busting parts of Medicaid and Amendment 23. We can cure the priority disparity between k-12 and higher education by modifying Amendment 23 to be a simple and straight forward guarantee of per pupil funding plus inflation for k-12 and college. Measures that expand school choice and encourage cost effective private education should also be incorporated into Colorado's public policy.
Medicaid reform is essential. The Federal government is begging states to find solutions that save Medicaid dollars. Colorado cannot afford to watch this forty-year-old bureaucratic system continue to devour valuable general fund dollars. Medicaid will take time to fix, so we must start now to see savings before our budget is again way out of control.
Due to the constraints of the constitution, Colorado state government spending has been automatically under control. Now the test begins. With the constitutional controls dramatically reduced, can we find that internal restraint to maintain a limited government system that is good for the families and businesses of Colorado, or will this influx of cash be squandered on spending that grows, once again, beyond our long-term ability to pay?
The people have entrusted the legislature with much more of their hard earned money. I ask the legislative members of both parties to use this newly granted authority and responsibility wisely.
Can we come together with prudent plans that live within our means?
The next legislative session will be the answer.
Back to Top
Referendum C is Part of the Problem
-opinion column written by Rep. Kevin Lundberg
Referendum C is wrong for Colorado. Spending is the problem, and Referendum C doesn't fix the problem. Instead, it allows spending to continue to grow out of control.
That is why it was rejected by the majority of Republican legislators in both the House and the Senate. On the other side of the isle, the Democrats gave Ref C 100% of their support.
This is a fundamental choice between accelerating the growth of Denver's control over our lives, or following the time-honored principles of limited government.
Referendum C removes all Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) refunds for five years. That means nearly $4 billion (that's 9 zeroes for anyone counting) in increased government spending. Moreover, it also establishes a permanent increase for all subsequent years.
A few days before the general session began last January, I surveyed my house district on several key issues. The first question was concerning the TABOR refund. Over 68% of the 4,500 people who answered that question said: Rather than spending it on government services, return it to the people.
However, statesmanship sometimes calls for a vote that is cast despite what the people in your district think. Is this the case here? Is a lack of revenue really the problem, or is it a spending problem?
Last session I set out to answer that question for myself. I prepared three bills aimed at finding substantial solutions to the spending side of our state's financial difficulties. One established a rainy day fund to deal with future economic down turns. The other two addressed the two largest line items in our general fund budget: Medicaid and k-12 education. Both of these areas are growing at rates we cannot sustain. I was presenting practical changes in the major areas of the General Fund that we are so often told cannot be changed.
The bills concerning Medicaid and education would have set up voluntary programs that simply gave people choices they do not enjoy today and both of the measures held the prospect of saving the state millions of dollars.
Yet, despite the real savings these bills could have provided, they were not even given a chance for debate on the House floor. They were all killed in committee. I found that our current legislature is not willing to seriously consider solutions that address the spending problem.
When the governor first talked of changing TABOR, it was within the context of a compromise between Amendment 23 and TABOR. And while a dollar for dollar compromise between the revenue limits of TABOR and the budget busting demands of Amendment 23 would be a compromise, Referendum C is an outright affront to that spirit.
What about higher education? Is Referendum C the solution? It will give higher education some money for five years, but it will not increase the priority for higher education. After the five year spending binge Ref C will create, the legislature will have put so many new programs in place with even greater budget demands that higher education will once again be on the budgetary chopping block.
As long as we continue our schizophrenic policy of guaranteeing k-12 funding at unsustainable rates while leaving higher education as the most vulnerable state program, higher education will always be in peril.
If you think supporting C will fix transportation, think again. Only a small fraction of Referendum C dollars will go to transportation projects, and none of those few dollars will find their way to Larimer County!
Has the recent economic down turn really crippled our ability to function and given us no other option? Do we have a budget crisis that can only be cured with more of the people's money? I don't believe we do.
The current dire prediction of a $400 million shortfall next year sounds a lot like last year's rhetoric. When the legislative session began last January, we were told that we were facing $340 million in budget cuts. Yet, as the session continued, accounting adjustments wiped away over $200 million of that predicted shortfall, and true to our spending habits, we ended up with a big increase in spending.
A good example of this spending spree is the over $50 million we spent above and beyond what Amendment 23 required for k-12 education.
Since 1984, the overall state budget has more than quadrupled, growing from $3.6 billion to $15.2 billion. For this fiscal year alone, the state budget is up 7%!
This is not the picture of a starving state government.
Even under the current limits of TABOR, the state government budget continues to grow at a considerable clip. After three years in the legislature I am convinced that the real solutions will only be found if we control spending.
Referendum C will hike our state budget up to levels that threaten our state's economic health and vitality, and certainly squeeze the budgets of Colorado's families. The cost of Referendum C, in the first five years alone, averages out to well over $3,000 per family.
This substantial amount of money can strengthen our economy, but only if it is left in the hands of the taxpayer. The private sector is where we find the true economic engine that produces jobs, sustains families, and has made Colorado a truly wonderful place to raise a family or retire in.
To call Referendum C an economic recovery act is to turn sound economic principles upside down. Referendum C is a "lets continue to prop up out of control government spending with more of the people's money act."
The vote this fall will be a pivotal decision for the citizens of Colorado.
If C passes, it will take the heart out of TABOR. Tax and spend politics will rule and big, intrusive government will be the result. To be certain, Ref C is a $4 billion tax and spend measure.
If C is defeated which I believe it will and must be Coloradoans will have given the legislature a strong message that we must live within our means, restrain the growth of government, and refocus on the essential priorities of state government.
I believe the people will make the right choice, and I am ready to tackle the job of finding the best solutions for the people of Colorado in the next legislative session.
Back to Top
< Back to The Issues
Referendum C
Home / The Issues
The election is over, but the main issues continue. I will keep this section of the website live for as long as there is relevent information to post.
Life After C
November 4, 2005Here is a predictable and yet chilling reaction to the passage of Ref C sent to me from the Colorado public employees union. I have truncated their message to save you time and more clearly get to their point.
"Dear Kevin,
"Congratulations one and all! We won - We won - We WON!! TABOR's shrinking of government forced the cannibalization of vital public services and Colorado was on the verge of a major shutdown... Voters saved us from all of that and the massive public employee layoffs that would have followed the service cuts.
"Thanks to the voters and thanks to all of our members, our national AFT for being a TOP CONTRIBUTORon behalf ofCFPE and allAFT Colorado affiliates (over $100,000), all of labor and friends of labor - the Colorado Progressive Coalition and their supporters!... It isn't over - we have just begun.
"...the critical areas outnumber the dollars available - but it is a start and definitely keeps things in Colorado from getting any worse. Now that we've all worked on the spending side of the state's budget, it's time we all start looking at the REVENUE side and see where we might make improvements..."
The passage of Ref C was a hugh victory for the left and it is clear from this letter that they are now working harder than ever to fully implement their agenda.
It is also most disturbing to note that they are now training their sights on the REVENUE side, as if the billions of dollars from C didn't even count! Before the ink is even dry for the election they want more and more.
As I said in my editorial article sent out the day after the election, we must continue to hold the legislature accountable for the prudent use of the people's money.
I will not give up the fight for good government that is limited to only its appropriate role. I trust you will be vigilant as well.
-Rep. Kevin Lundberg
Back to Top
We Need A Savings Account, Not a Spending Spree
by Representative Kevin LundbergHouse District 49
November 2, 2005
The dust has settled and it's a split decision. C passes and D fails.
The people of Colorado have given state government several more billion dollars, but also said pay as you go and don't mortgage our future.
The Tax Payers Bill of Rights required government to live within its means. Since Referendum C will now remove much of that constitutional restraint, the legislature must find a way to exercise self-restraint. It's a novel idea for a legislature, but anything less will ultimately be a disaster for the citizens, families and businesses of Colorado. Without a much greater restraint than we have exercised before, it will not be long before the state budget will need more tax money than what C is already taking from the people.
As I see it, the state needs a savings account, not a spending spree. That is why I initially introduced a rainy day bill in my first session in the House and I pledge to continue to fight for long-term fiscal plans that will work in good times and in bad.
We must address the budget items that are supposedly on "automatic pilot." That is why I will continue to offer solutions for the budget busting parts of Medicaid and Amendment 23. We can cure the priority disparity between k-12 and higher education by modifying Amendment 23 to be a simple and straight forward guarantee of per pupil funding plus inflation for k-12 and college. Measures that expand school choice and encourage cost effective private education should also be incorporated into Colorado's public policy.
Medicaid reform is essential. The Federal government is begging states to find solutions that save Medicaid dollars. Colorado cannot afford to watch this forty-year-old bureaucratic system continue to devour valuable general fund dollars. Medicaid will take time to fix, so we must start now to see savings before our budget is again way out of control.
Due to the constraints of the constitution, Colorado state government spending has been automatically under control. Now the test begins. With the constitutional controls dramatically reduced, can we find that internal restraint to maintain a limited government system that is good for the families and businesses of Colorado, or will this influx of cash be squandered on spending that grows, once again, beyond our long-term ability to pay?
The people have entrusted the legislature with much more of their hard earned money. I ask the legislative members of both parties to use this newly granted authority and responsibility wisely.
Can we come together with prudent plans that live within our means?
The next legislative session will be the answer.
Back to Top
C is part of the Problem
Referendum C is Part of the Problem-opinion column written by Rep. Kevin Lundberg
Referendum C is wrong for Colorado. Spending is the problem, and Referendum C doesn't fix the problem. Instead, it allows spending to continue to grow out of control.
That is why it was rejected by the majority of Republican legislators in both the House and the Senate. On the other side of the isle, the Democrats gave Ref C 100% of their support.
This is a fundamental choice between accelerating the growth of Denver's control over our lives, or following the time-honored principles of limited government.
Referendum C removes all Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) refunds for five years. That means nearly $4 billion (that's 9 zeroes for anyone counting) in increased government spending. Moreover, it also establishes a permanent increase for all subsequent years.
A few days before the general session began last January, I surveyed my house district on several key issues. The first question was concerning the TABOR refund. Over 68% of the 4,500 people who answered that question said: Rather than spending it on government services, return it to the people.
However, statesmanship sometimes calls for a vote that is cast despite what the people in your district think. Is this the case here? Is a lack of revenue really the problem, or is it a spending problem?
Last session I set out to answer that question for myself. I prepared three bills aimed at finding substantial solutions to the spending side of our state's financial difficulties. One established a rainy day fund to deal with future economic down turns. The other two addressed the two largest line items in our general fund budget: Medicaid and k-12 education. Both of these areas are growing at rates we cannot sustain. I was presenting practical changes in the major areas of the General Fund that we are so often told cannot be changed.
The bills concerning Medicaid and education would have set up voluntary programs that simply gave people choices they do not enjoy today and both of the measures held the prospect of saving the state millions of dollars.
Yet, despite the real savings these bills could have provided, they were not even given a chance for debate on the House floor. They were all killed in committee. I found that our current legislature is not willing to seriously consider solutions that address the spending problem.
When the governor first talked of changing TABOR, it was within the context of a compromise between Amendment 23 and TABOR. And while a dollar for dollar compromise between the revenue limits of TABOR and the budget busting demands of Amendment 23 would be a compromise, Referendum C is an outright affront to that spirit.
What about higher education? Is Referendum C the solution? It will give higher education some money for five years, but it will not increase the priority for higher education. After the five year spending binge Ref C will create, the legislature will have put so many new programs in place with even greater budget demands that higher education will once again be on the budgetary chopping block.
As long as we continue our schizophrenic policy of guaranteeing k-12 funding at unsustainable rates while leaving higher education as the most vulnerable state program, higher education will always be in peril.
If you think supporting C will fix transportation, think again. Only a small fraction of Referendum C dollars will go to transportation projects, and none of those few dollars will find their way to Larimer County!
Has the recent economic down turn really crippled our ability to function and given us no other option? Do we have a budget crisis that can only be cured with more of the people's money? I don't believe we do.
The current dire prediction of a $400 million shortfall next year sounds a lot like last year's rhetoric. When the legislative session began last January, we were told that we were facing $340 million in budget cuts. Yet, as the session continued, accounting adjustments wiped away over $200 million of that predicted shortfall, and true to our spending habits, we ended up with a big increase in spending.
A good example of this spending spree is the over $50 million we spent above and beyond what Amendment 23 required for k-12 education.
Since 1984, the overall state budget has more than quadrupled, growing from $3.6 billion to $15.2 billion. For this fiscal year alone, the state budget is up 7%!
This is not the picture of a starving state government.
Even under the current limits of TABOR, the state government budget continues to grow at a considerable clip. After three years in the legislature I am convinced that the real solutions will only be found if we control spending.
Referendum C will hike our state budget up to levels that threaten our state's economic health and vitality, and certainly squeeze the budgets of Colorado's families. The cost of Referendum C, in the first five years alone, averages out to well over $3,000 per family.
This substantial amount of money can strengthen our economy, but only if it is left in the hands of the taxpayer. The private sector is where we find the true economic engine that produces jobs, sustains families, and has made Colorado a truly wonderful place to raise a family or retire in.
To call Referendum C an economic recovery act is to turn sound economic principles upside down. Referendum C is a "lets continue to prop up out of control government spending with more of the people's money act."
The vote this fall will be a pivotal decision for the citizens of Colorado.
If C passes, it will take the heart out of TABOR. Tax and spend politics will rule and big, intrusive government will be the result. To be certain, Ref C is a $4 billion tax and spend measure.
If C is defeated which I believe it will and must be Coloradoans will have given the legislature a strong message that we must live within our means, restrain the growth of government, and refocus on the essential priorities of state government.
I believe the people will make the right choice, and I am ready to tackle the job of finding the best solutions for the people of Colorado in the next legislative session.
Back to Top
< Back to The Issues
