by Anthony Lane
If you think the state's budget situation is ugly right now, you could see it get downright hideous if three measures on the November ballot pass.
(Alternatively, if you share the ideals of Doug Bruce, you could look at these measures as the next step in turning Colorado into a pothole-riddled, uneducated utopia.)
The three — Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 and 61 — would further squeeze the state budget by $1 billion or more a year and wreak other havoc. (You can read one opposition group's summary of the measures here.)
The Denver Post has asked various candidates for office in 2010 for their thoughts on the measures.
Interestingly, gubernatorial front runners John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, and Scott McInnis, a Republican, both oppose the measures. (Of course, that's only risky for McInnis, who must try and appease the anti-tax, tea party crowd.)
Even tea party favorite Dan Maes, a Republican challenging McInnis, doesn't offer unqualified support for the measures. He supports Amendment 60, opposes 61, and apparently wants it both ways on Proposition 101.
I see tax cuts as part of our overall strategy for the future after we cut the size of government and increase revenues via energy and small-business success first. I agree with the spirit of these issues as the people of Colorado are very angry with recent increases in taxes and fees while the state government seems to continue to grow. However, I also think universal passage of all three would be very detrimental to our current budget situation.