Behold—WISDOM, wrapped often in sarcasm and humor…

1. In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a congress. — John Adams

2. If you don’t read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.– Mark Twain

3. Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself.– Mark Twain

4. I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.– Winston Churchill

5. A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.– George Bernard Shaw

6. A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money.– G. Gordon Liddy

7. Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.– James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)

8. Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.– Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University

9. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.– P.J. O’Rourke, Civil Libertarian

10. Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.– Frederic Bastiat, French economist(1801-1850)

11. Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.– Ronald Reagan (1986)

12. I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.– Will Rogers

13. If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free!– P.J. O’Rourke

14. In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.– Voltaire (1764)

15. Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn’t mean politics won’t take an interest in you!– Pericles (430 B.C.)

16. No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.– Mark Twain (1866)

17. Talk is cheap…except when Congress does it.– Anonymous

18. The government is like a baby’s alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.– Ronald Reagan

19. The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.– Winston Churchill

20. The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.– Mark Twain

21. The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.– Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)

22. There is no distinctly Native American criminal class…save Congress.– Mark Twain

23. What this country needs are more unemployed politicians.– Edward Langley, Artist (1928-1995)

24. A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.– Thomas Jefferson

25. We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.– Aesop

FIVE SENTENCES; Infinite Wisdom – by Adrain Rogers

• “Friend, you cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom.  And what one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government can’t give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody. And when half of the people get the idea they don’t have to work because the other half’s going to take care of them, and when the other half get the idea it does no good to work because somebody’s going to get what I work for. That, dear friend, is about the end of any nation.”

CAPITOL REVIEW

Mark Hillman, 3 January 2012  

Early on Oct. 6, Xcel Energy set a world record for electricity from wind power. Between 4 and 5 a.m. that day, 55.6 percent of the electricity consumed by Xcel’s 1 million customers in Colorado came from wind farms dotting the state. 

“We’re proud of that and believe it shows that wind is an important part of the portolio,” said Michelle Aguayo, an Xcel spokeswoman. 

While that seems like a tremendous accomplishment, let’s take a look at what was accomplished, and what it means for Xcel customers.

The record itself is not that impressive. In a recession at 4:00 in the morning, overall electric usage is pretty low. When the economy is humming along at full steam, manufacturers that require lots of electricity often add night shifts, because electricity often costs less at night, and it’s cheaper than building more production capacity. This creates more jobs. But in this economy, it’s a safe bet there ain’t much happening.

October 6 was a high wind day. Portions of I-70 were closed that day from winds. In Denver, the wind uprooted power a light pole, which landed on a light-rail power line,
delaying the trains. Lots of wind combined with a recession produced the record.

Wind energy costs up to 80% more than conventional power production. When Xcel brags that they broke a record for wind power generation, they are really saying that at 4 a.m. they produced high cost energy at a time that was once considered to be the least expensive time of day to buy electricity.

Let’s go a bit deeper in our analysis. Coloradohas a 30% Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), meaning 30% of our electricity must come from renewable resources by 2020. The citizens voted in 2004 for a 10% standard, but a “too eager to please” legislature has since raised it twice. Solar and wind devices provide roughly one third of their rated capacities, because the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. A wind farm rated at 100 megawatts will only deliver 33 megawatts. Because they mandated the 30% RPS, we must overbuild renewable generation by nearly three times.

That sounds great, right? Except that there is no way to store the power produced when the wind is blowing for use when it isn’t. Therefore we must have stand-by generation capacity that can meet all our electricity needs.

Coal power can’t easily or efficiently be “cycled”, meaning you can’t turn it off and on to complement wind speeds or sunshine. Some clean coal plants violate clean air  standards because solar and wind are too variable.When they are cycled, their clean status is compromised.

Nuclear power, which has no carbon or other bad emissions, can’t be cycled at all. It can only be used for “baseline generation”, the lowest amount of electricity that gets used during a day. As we approach that 30% standard, nuclear can not be part of the mix, because sometimes all our power must come from renewables. The stand-by generation will all have to be quick cycling sources, such as oil or gas.

In recent years, technology has rapidly advanced to make coal a much cleaner fuel for electricity generation. Now that Colorado and President Obama have decided that coal will be eliminated or minimized as a fuel, there will be no incentive for further advancements in clean coal technology. Meanwhile, advancements in wind, solar, and storage technology are creeping along at a snail’s pace. Government interference is misdirecting research and resources.

Colorado’s Renewable Energy Standard is raising electricity costs when families and
businesses are struggling, costing hardships and preventing job creation. The environmental savings, if there are any, are negligible. Readily available, clean burning fuels are being ignored, or shipped to China where they burn without the benefit of our clean technology, creating global pollution. It’s time to eliminate the arbitrary Renewable Portfolio Standard and let market forces, guided by sensible restrictions on pollution, determine how we will generate electricity for families and the businesses that create jobs.

Jefferson would have denounced the inarticulate and uninformed Occupy thugs that know little or nothing about America and the principles upon which it rests.  The current Democrat Party embraces them.

Thomas Jefferson—unlike some of today’s Democrat leaders—was a very remarkable man…

• Thomas Jefferson studied previous failed attempts at government.  He understood actual history, the nature of God, his laws and the nature of man.  Jefferson articulated them in the Declaration of Independence.  The Occupy folks and their Democrat supporters today just don’t get it.

• Jefferson is a voice from the past that can help lead us into a future of limited constitutional government.  A Jeffersonian approach would lead to decision-making informed by history and sound personal and economic principles instead of the failed ideology of social justice and wealth redistribution—or whatever other pseudonym for big government control of our lives might be employed by the Democrat Party.

Thomas Jefferson would be at home at a Tea Party rally and the crowd would applaud his position on almost every issue of today…

“When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes.  A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”  Thomas Jefferson

 

Thomas Jefferson said in 1802: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property – until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Try as it might, the Democrat Party can no longer claim that it ascribes to the Jeffersonian principles that lay at its foundation and that of America.

The Democrats claim to be for the folks while at the same time…

• allowing the FED to ruin the economy by manipulating currency and the free market
• supporting Wall Street and other bailouts with the hard earned dollars of everyday American workers
• waging war on small business—especially the small banks that serve small business
• bypassing the constitution with bureaucratic regulations
• allowing special interests—especially unions and environmentalists—to make rules that burden everyone and reduce or eliminate job opportunities
• using public money to experiment in industries eschewed by free markets
• growing government to a size that makes it unaffordable to its citizens
• reducing our defense capabilities and risking the safety of every American and especially the safety of our brave young volunteer service men and women

It was a Democrat—John Kennedy—that encouraged Americans to find ways to make the American dream a reality in their own lives without intervention from the government.  It was a Republican—Ronald Reagan—that showed Americans how to do that.  It was a painful partnership between Clinton and Gingrich that moved us closer to the Constitution and a permanently balance budget.  That window to enlightenment slammed shut with the onset of the now famous Bush Derangement Syndrome that poisoned the minds and hearts of Democrats after the 2000 election and intensified after the 2004 election.  (Maybe it would be more accurate to call it the Sore Loser Syndrome.)

It’s time for everyday Americans to speak up boldly.  The Washington elite—regardless of party affiliation—and the Democrat Party in Colorado have lost sight of the most basic American principle and value: the government serves “We the People…” not vice versa.

A few in Congress and in Colorado are attempting to restore the government to its rightful place.  Let’s support them.  Let’s also identify and support candidates that can replace elitists.  And—most of all—lets elect a leader as president that truly embraces the Jeffersonian idea that “bad government results from too much government.”

http://tinyurl.com/GovtGoneWildVideos

• If your daughter or son or best friend asked you to articulate why you are proud to be an American, what would you say?
• How well can you describe the fundamental philosophical, economic and political principles of freedom that our great country was founded on and that we rely upon today?
• Why are these important questions?

Here are some excerpts from the course syllabus:

This course is designed for business and community leaders, college students and the general public as well. Too few of today’s adults were taught the fundamentals of a free society. This course pulls together the basic principles of liberty and a free market, showing you why these cohesive fundamentals allow our society to work well. The course material springs from the great thinkers and achievers who have shaped America. The course makes the moral and philosophic case for free-market capitalism and develops the relationship between economic liberty and political liberty. You’ll be introduced to the philosophy of the Austrian School of Economics and its connection to the founding ideas of the American experiment. Participants are awakened to their heritage of economic liberty. It will be more than worth your time.

I along with many others have taken Penn’s course. It was truly a meaningful experience for me, which is how others I know have described their participation. I asked myself at the time why didn’t I take a course like this many years ago. I strongly believe that this type of course should be required for every junior high school, high school and college student in America.

We at CRBC encourage you and your associates to take this course. If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact me at 303-829-9435 or at principlescourse@smallbizgop.com.

Shown below is the link to the Free People, Free Markets: Principles of Liberty Flyer.
Please share it with others.

Thank you.
Free People, Free Markets: Principles of Liberty Course Flyer

We just saw Proposition 103 defeated at the polls. It would have been a major tax increase, supposedly for public education. A major chunk of it would have probably gone to increasing teacher compensation. Proponents say that the defeat is just a minor setback – they are still looking for “the Big Fix”, essentially more tax revenue. It’s reasonable to ask if teachers should be paid more.

I met many teachers while I was on the campaign trail in 2010. Every one impressed me as a caring, devoted, hard worker. They expressed a sincere desire to make a difference for the youth they teach. Teachers, like all of us, want to do good and also better their own lives. That’s a common instinct for all of us, and it’s what led to America’s prosperity.

Wages and benefits, like other valuable resources, are controlled by supply and demand. That’s the essence of a free market. In times of full employment employers often find it difficult to find workers. To entice people to join their companies they offer higher wages than other companies who are competing for those workers. If the strategy is successful the companies that are losing workers have to raise wages. At some point the businesses will either have to become more efficient or pass the increased costs on to customers. Those who can’t will lose customers. If they go out of business, their laid-off workers add to the supply. The fresh supply of new job-seekers
reduces wages. In a free market for workers, wages never quite reach stability, but are always moving toward balance.

In contrast, public education is a monopoly with wages set by union demands and school board acquiescence. Public teacher unions will always push for higher wages and benefits, regardless of sustainability, because public education simply won’t go out of business. Taxpayers are forced to meet the demands of these unions because the consumers (parents) never have to pay directly for the product. In contrast, private sector unions often give up some of their benefits to help in the survival of their industries.

Back to Caldara’s question about how much public school teachers are paid: we can look at schools that compete for the same teachers but aren’t compelled by a union contract. This won’t give us a complete answer, because the supply of teachers is mostly consumed by public schools, but it could give us an indication.

In 2007-08, private school teachers were paid $13,000 less than their public school counterparts, and that doesn’t even include the far superior benefits most public schools offer. So do private schools have trouble finding qualified teachers at a considerably lower price?

Compared to private schools, public schools are free. Private schools must offer enough value to persuade parents to pay for them. If private schools could not get enough teachers, or if they were only able to hire teachers rejected by public schools, they would not be able to compete for customers. Who would pay thousands of dollars every year to put their children in poorly staffed schools? The existence of successful low-paying private schools indicates that they can find good teachers.

Meanwhile, unions are sending good teachers to the unemployment lines. There are about 50,000 public school teachers in Colorado. If unions agreed to accept lower wages and benefits for teachers, every 25 cents per hour in reduced compensation would allow our public schools to retain 3-400 teachers. Would public schools be able to find enough teachers at lower wages?

Principal Pat Gardner of BroomfieldAcademy (a private school) tells me that she quickly gets 40 qualified applicants for every open full time teacher position. After that she quits taking applications. Broomfield  Academy pays less than public schools. Granted, working for a private school has other benefits. Because of the greater freedom to hold students and parents accountable, a teacher can be more effective. Does that added benefit make up for less pay? As Caldara said, how can we know?

Some of the proposed requirements include: imposing the same burdens on all employers including very small businesses (1 to 9 employees); giving paid leave not only to full-time workers but also to part-time and temporary workers; retaining records documenting hours worked and paid sick and safe time taken by employees, for a period of five years, and allowing the Agency for Human Rights and Community Relations access to such records; preventing employers from requiring disclosure of information relating to domestic abuse, sexual assault or stalking or the details of an employee’s medical condition as a condition to provide paid sick and safe time leave; etc.

Please note that the definition of “Employer” per this proposed Ordinance includes any Colorado employer, thus for example a Broomfield business that has employees making regular deliveries to Denver locations would be subject to this Ordinance. Think about that.

Furthermore the Denver City Attorney’s analysis includes an estimate that Denver would incur an additional annual expense of $690,500 to administer this new Ordinance, which does not include the yet to be determined additional cost to enforce it.

Imposing additional expensive burdens on Denver employers will lead to less sales and tax revenue and fewer jobs, because some Denver businesses will leave, there will be fewer new start-up businesses and fewer existing businesses moving into Denver. If this Initiative 300 passes, why would any business owner prefer to operate in Denver rather than Aurora, Lakewood, Westminster, Arvada, Littleton, Longmont, Castle Rock, Louisville, Golden, Evergreen, Broomfield……..?

For more information regarding Initiative 300, please go to www.keepdenvercompetitive.com and also to CRBC’s website www.smallbizgop.com, where you will find a detailed analysis by the law firm of Hogan Lovells US LLP, along with the Denver City Attorney’s analysis.

CRBC opposes Proposition 103 (“Proposition”) which proposes to amend the Colorado Revised Statutes by increasing the individual and corporate income tax rate from 4.63% to 5.00% (nearly 8%) and the sales and use tax rate from 2.93% to 3.00% (over 3%), for five years, and would require the additional tax revenue be spent on public education. The estimated amount of additional tax revenue would be $2.9 billion. The Proposition not only does not specify how the additional tax revenue would be allocated amongst the many preschool through higher education programs, it doesn’t offer a plan as to how the additional expenditures will improve public education.

Raising taxes during these difficult economic times, with Colorado’s unemployment rate at 8.5%, makes no sense. Consumer spending and business investments will drop, thus weakening the economy further, leading to the elimination of 30,500 jobs by 2017 (per a study by Dr. Eric Fruits, President, Economics International Corp).

Senator Rollie Heath (D-Boulder) is the driver behind Proposition 103 and yet he hasn’t been able to convince Governor Hickenlooper to publicly support it.

Proposition 103 is a bad idea, passing it would not be good for Colorado.

For more information about Proposition 103, please refer to Too Taxing For Colorado’s website www.tootaxing.org, and Save Colorado Jobs’ website http://savecoloradojobs.org along with the Colorado General Assembly’s Legislative Council’s 2011 State Ballot Information Booklet, “Notice Of Election To Increase Taxes On A Citizen Petition”, www.colorado.gov/lcs , Ballot & Blue Book.

Additional Reading and Sources:

Hogan Lovells report on Denver Colorado Paid Sick Leave, Initiative 300
City of Denver Colorado Legal Analysis of Paid Sick Leave, Initiative 300
City of Denver Colorado report on the Fiscal Impacts of Paid Sick Leave, Initiative 300

By Brian Vande Krol, CRBC Director

There will be no floor debate, no committee hearings, no amendments. Proposition 103 is already written, and if we approve it we are stuck with it.

Boulder Senator Rollie Heath’s Proposition 103 increases sales and income taxes to raise over $500 million per year, supposedly for education. I applaud Senator Heath for properly proposing this tax increase. He’s following our constitution’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) that requires tax increases be voted on by the people. A whole slew of groups are trying to circumvent and destroy TABOR.

The Colorado Supreme Court ruled that property taxes could be increased without our vote. They also ruled that removing a tax exemption is not a tax increase, leading to the “Dirty Dozen” tax increases in 2010 which killed businesses and jobs. The legislature raised fees instead of taxes to get more money, and we got a huge increase in our vehicle registration fees.

Westminster City Councilman Bob Briggs sued the state to end the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. Separately, Lobato v. Colorado would more than double education spending, creating a crisis that would require emergency tax increases. It’s another end-run around our Taxpayer’s Rights. If this assault on TABOR continues, our right to vote on taxes will soon be but a cherished memory.

But Senator Heath got this one right. At least he’s asking us for more tax money. That’s
where my appreciation for Heath’s efforts ends.

Heath and his campaign to raise taxes have been, shall we say, less than honest. Heath used fourth grade students as campaign props without asking permission. Robo-calls say it’s a time-out in cuts to education instead of a tax increase. The website for Prop 103 falsely claims that the new revenue will go to education.

The biggest deception of all is in the proposed law itself. It requires the money raised by the tax increase to be spent on education. This is pure folly. Heath knows it and yet it’s his biggest selling point.

The legislature is under no obligation to spend the money on education. Prop 103 is a law, and it is only valid until it is superseded by another law. That law is the budget. Prop 103 will not automatically move money into education. It must be done through the budget, a law that is passed every year by the legislature. They are not obligated to write the budget in accordance with Prop 103.

Heath could have written this as a constitutional amendment to direct the new taxes to education. He chose not to. He knows that the money is not required to be spent on education, yet he and his campaign continue to sell it that way. Heath is also not telling you if the money is spent on education it will create two huge education budget cuts.

The 2012-13 education budget would have roughly $783 million in extra revenue for education. In 2013-14 there will only be $533 million in extra revenue. That’s a $250 million cut. And when (or if) the temporary tax increase ends in 2017, education funding would lose over $500 million.

As disheartening as all of that is, the second worst part is that there is no plan for this additional spending to improve education. There is no correlation between higher levels of funding and improvements in educational outcomes as many studies have shown. AJTT.org compares spending to outcomes. Washington D.C. spends more per pupil than
47 states and is ranked dead last in outcomes. North Dakota is outspent by 41 states and has the 6^th highest quality educational system. Money spent on education funding will not guarantee better education.

Now for the worst part: Prop 103 is a job killer. A study by Economics International Corp. found that the proposal would result in a loss of 30,500 jobs. The average family of 4 will pay $400 per year to lose those jobs.

A dishonest tax increase. Future education cuts. Huge job losses. Is this what we want to be stuck with?

Brian Vande Krol of Westminster, Colorado owns three small businesses. In
2010 Brian was a candidate for State Representative and was narrowly defeated
by the incumbent in a hotly contested election. He writes a column for the MetroNorth Newspapers. You can read his other columns at his blog.

Boulder Democrat Sen. Rollie Heath’s tax increase initiative, calls for a “time out from school cuts” but Prop 103 is actually a cash transfer to government at a time when most families are struggling to meet their monthly bills. 

The income tax hike is on families and small businesses as well as higher sales and use tax, including phone and Internet services.  If passed, it’s estimated to cost at least 30,500 jobs in Colorado.

The intent is more spending for education, but depositing tax revenues into the General Fund allows the Legislature to spend the money as it chooses.  Analysis shows that more money spent per pupil has actually done nothing to improve academic performance. 

 Rather, it is likely the higher taxes will simply find their way into union members’ retirement accounts.  See www.tootaxing.org for more info.