Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Profiles in courage - not

Rocky Mountain News

Published May 10, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

We've been fairly upbeat regarding the accomplishments of the legislative session that concluded Tuesday - praising, for example, major measures that will create a permanent fund for higher education and go a long way to repairing decrepit rural school buildings.

Still, we can't let pass a rather startling admission from Gov. Bill Ritter and Senate President Peter Groff this week, namely that progress on another vital need - transportation funding - stalled because Democrats didn't have the courage to act alone.

That's not quite how they put it, naturally. But that is effectively what they said when they blamed Republicans for the legislature's failure to approve measures that would have boosted transportation funding - including a late bill sponsored by Sen. Abel Tapia, D-Pueblo, and Rep. Joe Rice, D-Littleton, to raise fees for vehicle registration and rental cars.

We supported Senate Bill 244 as a modest but reasonable fee increase justified by the compelling need for more highway funding. And unlike any new tax, which requires a statewide vote, the fees could have been passed by lawmakers themselves.

So why didn't they, particularly since Ritter himself had endorsed higher fees earlier in the session?

Because, explained Ritter, Democrats "could not get the Republican leadership to act on it at all." Groff concurred, quipping, "So, we are now just crossing our fingers and hoping a bridge doesn't fall down between now" and next year's session.

Not terribly funny. And particularly not when you consider that the alleged Republican "veto" was from a party that controls just 25 of 65 seats in the House and 15 of 35 seats in the Senate.

The real reason Democrats refused to act is not that they needed Republican support but, as Ritter acknowledged, they didn't want to "get beat over the head" by Republicans this fall over increased fees for transportation.

Rarely have we heard elected leaders admit so openly that they shied away from action they could have taken and should have taken from a purely political calculation. If a copy of JFK's Profiles in Courage is anywhere on their book shelves, they might as well pack it into storage.

Incidentally, Republicans haven't exactly been sitting on their hands regarding transportation funding. Sen. Josh Penry of Grand Junction and Reps. Frank McNulty and Cory Gardner, of Highlands Ranch and Yuma, respectively, are pushing a ballot initiative that would divert some of the ballooning severance tax revenue from state lands into highway maintenance and upgrades. Their measure would not reduce the share of severance tax controlled by local governments or affect the new permanent fund for higher education we mentioned above. It would even ensure that the Department of Natural Resources received at least as much revenue as it is getting now, with an annual inflation adjustment.

Without any new taxes, they argue, their measure could pump several hundred million dollars over the next few years into transportation projects.

Worth a close look? You bet. Especially given the timidity of the statehouse majority on this issue.

Comments

  • May 10, 2008

    8:08 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    DougH writes:

    I guess the Rocky editorial writers don't ever take the time to read postings to their own web site.
    At every mention of a Toll or a Fee , the mighty hordes of anti-tax warriors rose up in protest at the slightest thought of raising revenue for transportation. No doubt pushed by the radio talkers who make a living by stirring up the faithful.
    Bi-partisan means just that, both parties act responsibly to solve problems for the state. They did it with the farm workers bill and they can do it for highways.
    Democrats were correct in holding off with new fees in an election year as Republicans show every sign they were very eager to use it against them, especially with Dick Wadhams running the show.

  • May 10, 2008

    8:24 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    irisman writes:

    It's truly unfortunate that fixing the bridges became a partisan issue, with Democrats being for bridges and Republicans being against bridges. In my never-ending quest to make life better for my fellow man, I have a suggestion. In order to prolong the life of the, bridges, the people who were against the fee increase should drive on the secondary roads only. This would reduces the load on the bridges and help them last longer without repair. Better yet, they should consider fording the streams, which would further preserve the bridges.

  • May 10, 2008

    9:06 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    DougH writes:

    Earl, I read the same story, I also have followed the issues and politics in Colorado for some time. Republicans have been living for years by howling about tax and spend liberals confiscating our hard earned money and throwing it away.
    If the Dem's don't want to give them another opportunity to bitch about taxes and fees, then good for them. At least they have gotten smarter over the years.
    When the Rebublicans start working for the benefit of all of the citizens of the state, not just their campaign donors, than maybe we will get things done.

  • May 10, 2008

    9:32 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    DougH writes:

    While we are discussing this subject, let us not forget that Republicans controlled the State Legislature for about 30 years and the governor for 8 of the last 10 years.
    So, exactly why did they not do anything about this when they had the chance ? Didn't Republicans have the courage to face the voters with the reality that there is no free lunch. If you want roads you have to pay for them with money raised through taxes.

    I guess that bit of reality is too much for the for our fearless Republican leaders to face

  • May 10, 2008

    9:50 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    irisman writes:

    I must be getting some attention. Earl has called me the L-word. I don't have a clue what Earl's definition of a Liberal is, so I don't know whether to feel flattered or insulted. If Earl would would please define "Liberal" for me, I would know whether or not I am one.

  • May 10, 2008

    12:49 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Brain writes:

    The dems have the majority and won't do anything and it is the Republican's fault?

    If we are talking about "transportation funding" then why are the taxpayers paying almost 90% of RTD fares; why don't we increase what people pay to use RTD to lower the amount it is subsidized and then use that for highways? Why should taxpayers be paying for someone's transportation to work; from highlands ranch to downtown Denver, for instance?

    The severance tax issue was at least doing something that would not have increased monies out of the taxpayers pocket and would not have either party guilty for raising taxes disguised as "fees". Were the dems afraid the Republicans would get credit for that?

  • May 10, 2008

    1:22 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cwillyrun1 writes:

    Doug, if you've followed Colorado politics for some time, surely you must be aware it was a Democrat, Roy Romer, that diverted $500 million in federal money from transportation funding to social programs, always a favorite for Democrats?

    Ritter is NOT a leader. The problem that Republicans have with new taxes is they're either diverted for something else than what was intended, or they just don't go away. That's what the citizens of the state are against, Doug. Politicians aren't for our best interests, just whatever gets the most votes when re-election time comes. In this case, it's the Democrats, not the Republicans.

    PS- I'm independant, and moderate.

  • May 10, 2008

    2:18 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    DougH writes:

    Dear Cwillyrun1, You mean you are telling me that Romer spent money on Social Programs !!! Ooooh, perish the thought.
    As I recall the budget is constructed by the JBC , which at the time was a Republican get together. If Romer felt he had to divert money , it was probably because those programs had been shorted by the JBC. GIve him credit for having the courage to do so.

  • May 10, 2008

    3:20 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cwillyrun1 writes:

    Courage?? HAHAHA....... it doesn't take courage to divert money from tranportation to feel good programs. One is a necessity (maintaing the roads and bridges), the other is not. This isn't a socialist society, in case you've been out of the loop. It's one of the reasons people are against raising taxes.

    Our taxes pay for things like infrastructure, education, etc., not so people can get more and more welfare. Since you haven't completely followed Colorado politics, the idea was that the economy would never go in a downturn like it has, so why put money into transportation when Romer felt it wasn't needed? It was shortsighted of Romer!

    It's like Madam Pelosi (a Democrat)..... she wants a Windfall tax on investments, even 401k's, so that poor people and illegal immigrants can have money they didn't earn, to be a part of society. That's great, further water down people's retirement capabilities. Tell you what, if you want money to go to those who don't have it, feel free to donate to charity. And if you're in favor of money you earn, and put away for retirement, going to others, I'll say hi to you if I walk in Wal-Mart and you're greeting the customers.

  • May 10, 2008

    9:22 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    RMN nails the dems rightly so - they failed on trans and many other fronts.

  • May 10, 2008

    10:33 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    freethinker07 writes:

    If the Democrats believe that taxes should be raised, they should say so and put the measure before the people for a vote. If they don't have the guts to do what they think is right, then they shouldn't be in the legislature.

    And if we, the people, don't vote for tax increases; it must be because we think that is the wisest course of action. It's our money, we get to decide. And if we do something stupid, it's our fault.

    I am a fiscal conservative and life-long Republican. I support increased taxation for road repair because I think that the cost in lowered gas mileage, increased wear on tires, and more frequent alignments to the citizens of Colorado is probably greater than the cost of repairing the roads. In other words, it will save us money in the long run.

    The other, less quantifiable, benefits comes in environmental savings from reduced tire wear and improved gas mileage.

    Improved gas mileage has resulted in a decrease in gas tax collections per vehicle mile. We should, at least, adjust the gas tax for inflation.

  • May 11, 2008

    8:48 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    vudumom writes:

    Here is what I don't understand. I have never seen an accounting of the lottery money,that is supposed to go to open space and conservation. This is billions of dollars that no one sees and no one has an oversight. I bet you if this money was audited we would see a huge black hole of wasted dollars. I'm not sure but doesn't the money from the casino's go to the same "fund" as lottery money? I think the citizens don't realize what a slush fund they have. You never see an accounting or oversight of this money. Why can't they take some of this money and divert it to transportation? If the government can get an accounting of these billions and billions of dollars , I can guarantee that the people who do control it have been having an long ongoing party with the money.

  • May 11, 2008

    10:31 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cwillyrun1 writes:

    vudumom, the revenue the state receives from lottery proceeds go to local parks and recreation providers (cities and counties), state parks, Great Outdoors of Colorado for projects that impact a community, and school health and safety issues. Since 1983, the state has had 1.7 billion returned from lottery proceeds.... not billions and billions of dollars, huh?. So when money for these concerns is taken away to pay for transportation, how do you suppose the state makes up for that loss? Ya' think it might be to tax us? The voters wanted the money to go to these issues, and it's accounted for.

    Here's the link so you know the facts: "http://www.coloradolottery.com/about/...