Colorado Democrats Target TABOR!

They just hate that Colorado taxpayers control the power of the purse.

And they want taxpayers to fund it!

BTW, 70% of Colorado voters approve of TABOR

It would be nice if the GOP put some ad money into this state so they could wake up the morons who have no idea what TABOR is and why losing it will turn us into a California shithole. I know, we're almost there anyway.

Democrats have sought an end to TABOR since the day it was enacted in a democratic election, starting with the judicial pronouncement that "fees" aren't "taxes". I'm unable, actually, to remember the last time a statewide vote asking for an exemption from TABOR failed.

Why are Democrats, the supposed defenders of democracy, so incensed by the democratic process, and the consent of the governed, enshrined in law by TABOR?

That's a great question, but you know as well as I that a Democrat would never answer that.

The whole point of an amendment to the constitution is . . . wait for it . . . to change what is considered constitutional, is it not? Prior to the passage of the 25th Amendment, it would have been unconstitutional for Congress to pass a law that limited the executive to two terms. After the 25th Amendment was ratified, it was no longer unconstitutional to limit the executive to two terms.

We could, if we wished, via the amendment process, repeal the 2nd Amendment's protection of the people to keep and bear arms. We could, if we wished, via the amendment process, strengthen the 2nd Amendment and say that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall be understood to include an arm comparable to that issued to the common foot soldier and nullify every state law that has sought to limit access to semi-automatic arms and magazine capacities.

We could, if we wished, via the amendment process, prohibit the levying of an income tax on any citizen or person residing within a State or in these United States.

TABOR is constitutional because . . . wait for it . . . it's a constitutional amendment. Federal laws, the federal constitution, have nothing to say on whether or not a the citizens in one of the sovereign States belonging to the Union may limit their own legislature's ability to levy a tax. The citizens of the State of Colorado decided that their consent to be governed included a restriction upon how they may be taxed, end of story. This is, after all, a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, yes?

The reason we can limit our governor and State legislative members to a set number of terms, while being unable to similarly restrict our federal representatives, is that the federal constitution defines the qualifications of Senators and Representatives for the federal legislature and our State constitution defines the qualifications of our State senators and representatives. The federal charter has no impact upon the sovereignty of the citizens of this State establishing their own qualifications for their own representation in their own State legislature.

The federal compact has no say in the matter. We could, if we wished, alter the federal compact and require the federal government to operate with a balanced budget outside of a declared war or national emergency if we desired to do so. The States could abolish the federal government entirely, just as they established the federal government, if they wished to do so.

TABOR is constitutional because it is part of the State constitution and does not violate any provision of the federal constitution. That anyone would think to challenge TABOR on constitutional grounds is to expose that person's utter lack of even a basic understanding of our system of government.

60% of Colorado voters want to keep TABOR. Thank you Douglas Bruce.