The Colorado Index

Friday Cartoon

My boss sent this cartoon to me this morning. While it is over 50-years old, this cartoon, entitled "Make Mine Freedom", seems even more relevant in these times.  Share and enjoy!

by Civil Sense

New Video On Health Care Mandates

The Independence Institute produced this great video about government mandates on coverage (hat tip to Ari Armstrong at FreeColorado.com).

I had higher deductible coverage in college, and so did my wife.  Hopefully, government meddling will not ruin this option for those who can least afford it.

by Civil Sense

Colorado Republican Business Coalition Lunch Highlights

The Colorado Republican Business Coalition had two interesting speakers for its monthly lunch meeting today.

First, Director Matt Arnold of Clear the Bench Colorado spoke about his organization.  He spoke of three cases where he believed to be the Colorado Supreme Court’s most egregious:  Bill Ritter’s illegal property tax freeze, the Telluride Land Grab, and the redistricting decision of earlier this decade where the court redrew the lines.  His organization supports voting to not retain four Colorado Supreme Court justices in 2010.  As Colorado’s judicial retention process is a joke, I support his efforts.  However, while the Telluride case was certainly an egregious overreach of eminent domain, it was not unconstitutional (as I wrote here).

Second, Dick Wadhams, State Republican Party Chair, spoke.  His demeanor was positive.  Obviously, he believes that Democrat overreach will be their downfall over a period of time, especially in regards to the increased taxation and fees imposed on the state in flagrant violation of TABOR.  He pointed out that the Republicans gained two seats in the Colorado House, and that it was the Republican Party’s first gain of seats in that chamber since 1994.  One interesting tidbit was his belief that Governor Bill Ritter and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper have a strained relationship.  Apparently, the Mayor wanted the US Senate seat to which Governor Bill Ritter appointed Michael Bennet.

Dick Wadhams also stated that primaries are good things and make the party stronger, as long as they are not nasty.  Therefore, I assume that he supports Tom McDowell’s State Senate bid, at least in principle.

by Civil Sense

Republicans Require Big-Tent To Limit Government Expansion

I believe in liberty, and that liberty requires limited government.  Government, left unchecked, grows in scope and size due to its (mostly) well-intentioned public representatives and employees.  Some people prefer to add regulations and restrictions (see the cell phone texting ban); others prefer to merely transfer wealth to political contributors (see Governor Bill Ritter’s “green” economy measures or the Federal Government taking over GM).  Of course, all government money is transferred wealth that others created, so minimizing this wealth transfer is crucial to maintain individual liberty and property rights.

TABOR, the taxpayer’s bill of rights, kept Colorado’s government from growing out of control in the good times, so the government cuts are not so painful during the lean times.  The budget “hole” for this year is only $1 billion.  That looks pretty good compared to California’s $50 billion deficit. 

However, for some (including Governor Bill Ritter), enough is never enough.  The Governor declared a hiring freeze for the state and then proceeded to add over 2,000 new employees to the government payroll.  Recently, outgoing Senate President Peter Groff (amongst others) gave bonuses to his staff while state employees are asked to take some furlough days to save money.  Ben DeGrow, writing at Mount Virtus, writes of the “Colorado Democrats’ Taxpayer-Funded Arrogance” with regard to a partisan retreat recently held on the taxpayer’s nickel.  How are these programs funded?  Funding comes from tax increases, of course.

While TABOR does not allow for increases in tax collection without a vote of the people, politicians invented rather sneaky ways to circumvent TABOR.  There was the new tax fee on car registrations.  The Colorado Supreme Court declared Governor Bill Ritter’s illegal property tax freeze as legal.  Of course, the court also will get a brand new state-constructed building (apparently its 30-year-old building in Denver is too old).  This ruling led to all sorts of new “allocation strategies,” a code word for raising taxes without a vote.  Hence, everyone’s cigarette taxes increased fifteen cents a pack.  Republican Don Marostica crossed party lines to co-sponsor Senate Bill 228, which removed the six percent annual governmental growth limit.  While the six percent limit may seem low, it merely meant that the government would take only twelve years to double in size.  With that obstacle removed, the government is nearly unlimited in its growth potential.

What could the Republicans do to stop this madness?  They could do little this year.  Kent Lambert’s statement in January that we need to “thin the ranks” of weak Republicans is wrong on multiple levels.  Yes, the ranks of the Republicans are thinner, and the Democrats control every branch of government.  What does a party gain when its membership is ideologically “pure”, yet it is unable to influence public policy?

When asked at a luncheon about what the party should do to Don Marostica due to his sponsorship of Senate Bill 228, State Senator Shawn Mitchell responded, “I think public excommunications do more harm than good.”  Luckily, Kent Lambert did not “thin the ranks”, and Shawn Mitchell’s side won out.  While the Democrats plot to further neuter TABOR, Marostica wants to revisit the true problems in the state: the automatic funding increase in spending due to Amendment 23 and the Gallagher Amendment.

Slowing the growth of government is hard work, and it will require (at a minimum) divided government.  Big-tent Republicanism is the only way to achieve a majority in either one of the legislative chambers.  Therefore, the best way for me to support Tom “A Watcher” McDowell’s campaign for State Senate is to keep this blog alive to promote our shared values in a big-tent Republican Party focused on limited government and fiscal responsibility.

by Civil Sense

Intermittent Publication

I have come to the realization that I can't both be the kind of candidate that I want to be and also write a quality blog.

Effective immediately, regular publication of this blog is suspended.

Thought for the Day - 2

When in human history has society respected or admired someone who set out to lose at whatever endeavor he got involved in?

Why would anyone respect or admire someone who admitted that he would prefer to be in the minority in the legislature?

Why would anyone respect or admire a party that didn't object when one of their office holders proclaimed a desire to be in the minority?

Seen On The Street Recently

1.  A van with a "respect life" license plate and an Obama sticker.

2.  More vintage cars and trucks in garages being rebuilt than I can count.

3.  A monoplane with folding wings sitting in someone's front yard.  Worse for wear, almost certainly not airworthy.

4.  Not as many boats as in previous years and none that are very big.

5.  A few campers and motor homes.

6.  A political activist who admitted he doesn't know much about how the legislature works.

7.  Only one house with a sheriff's eviction notice.

8.  A lot of empty rentals.

Our Private Motorcycle Gang Exposed

I am almost certain that few in our local motorcycle gang like this.  

I know a bit more about one officer on this list than I can say.  It was no surprise to find his name here.  His transgression is also familiar.

If there is  a lesson to be learned it is that when the blue line covers up conduct it shouldn't, the conduct is repeated.

James Dobson's Successor

The Denver Post has an interesting article on Jim Daly, successor to James Dobson at Focus on the Family.

Nowhere does it mention politics.  It does suggest that Daly will be more open to working with others than Dobson has been.

Registration Again

I picked up four volunteers yesterday.  Three were fiscal conservatives and one a social conservative. None were registered Republican.

Two, a mother and daughter, were registered Democrat.  It was obvious from listening to their comments as they read my flyer that they were conservative.  Both were married to servicemen, with one husband in Afghanistan.

The funny thing is that I wouldn't have talked to them or dropped a flyer if they hadn't been in the yard as I walked by.  I talk to everyone I see because I want people to know what I am doing. There isn't a lot of point in having the cops called when that can be avoided with a self introduction and a smile.

Even if I think everyone in the house is a Democrat, I begin the conversation after the introduction with "Do any Republicans live here.  They answered "We're not sure what we are."  Sometimes I get told straight out that everyone in the house is a Republican.  That most often happens with rentals.

The precinct lists I am using are badly out of date.  I'm not sure that is anyone's fault. The recession probably has a lot to do with it.  I walked down one block that had three empty rentals.  My list said Republicans had lived in each of them.  On another block, I found two Republicans moving into a Democrat house.  Again, I caught them outside.

It is reaching the point that I am considering knocking on Democrat houses too because I can't be sure who lives behind those doors.

If Republicans want to win in the future, they need to fix the registration. They need to register people somewhere other than in churches.  

I know some would find that inconvenient.

Sports and Politics, So Different

The Rockies' winning streak comes just after the firing of Clint Hurdle.  Doubtless the Broncos and Avalanche hope for the same results.

None of the recently departed managers and coaches intended that any of their players and teams not do well.  They wanted to win.  They knew their jobs depended more on results than rhetoric.

The newspapers covering the teams didn't try to conceal their failings, and wouldn't try to conceal the impact of the following kinds of events:

A Hockey team that is perpetually on the wrong end of a power play can play exciting hockey for a few minutes, but eventually they will lose.  Often they will lose badly.  

A Football team with a center who repeatedly tries to trip the quarterback by stepping on his feet is going to lose more often than it wins.  Usually it will lose badly.

A  Baseball team that tried to play with two outfielders would have some pretty big alleys and a lot of scoring, but little success.

The media would get the word out, and after a while, the fans would stop coming.  Everyone loves a winner and even a loser that tries to win. No one loves a loser that is content losing.

No owner would tolerate keeping a coach or manager who actually tried to lose.

How different Republican politics are.  

When you hear the term "the base," you might think that the people in that group must be the most reliable Republican voters around.  Actually, they are the least reliable.  They have no values that stir them but one, and the target of their wrath are most often their own teammates.

We actually have a group of Republican office holders who have publicly announced that they would rather lose than seek a majority that included people with different views.  Worse, they act on that premise.

And the same media that is so eager to report on sports coaching follies wants to be a player in all of this, wants to help the part of the party that is set on losing.

Check your pocketbook.  Sports is illusion.  Politics is reality. 

My Campaign War Chest

Earlier this week, I was told that I was running a very unorthodox campaign.  If I win, it will be because of a grass roots effort, not the amount of advertising I can buy.

I am sure that when the campaign finance reports come out, pundits will look at the numbers and laugh.

I'll save you the trouble. My focus since I began walking precincts is on getting volunteers, not money.

If I have a flyer that a volunteer delivers, it costs me about 2.5 cents. If that same guy gave me the max, $400, and I used it to mail the flyers, I could mail about 250 flyers. If I have him deliver 12 times to 45 houses, I have put out 540 flyers and I have a local ambassador.

Most people don't give the max, so asking for money when they would volunteer is even less productive than the example above.

It is my expectation that if I can find enough volunteers, the funds to support them will follow. Build it and they will come.

Another Observation

The people I meet as I walk who are least interested in having a Republican majority in the legislature or Congress are the ones who begin spouting back Hannity and Rush.

They are also the ones who have been deeply politicized by their churches.

What is happening is not in the interest of any fiscal conservative. 

If this continues, fiscal conservatives will eventually begin to ask why they would want to go out of their way to protect the free speech interests of people and organizations who are openly using that freedom to act against their interests.

I predict that fiscal conservatives who see past the rhetoric won't necessarily cheer the reimposition of a Fairness Doctrine, but they are unlikely to be enthusiastic opponents.

Isn't that a sad prediction for our democracy?

Busting Up a Proprietary Information Scam

This is a post intended for one person, so it is a bit obtuse.  It is easier to write about this than try to explain it.

Most people don't know what proprietary information is, even some otherwise well educated people. While one doesn't see the term all that often in ordinary commerce, it is not a term unknown to people who have served in higher level government research positions.  There, every fifth paper produced by a contractor is marked as that contractor's "proprietary information."

Because I understood what proprietary information was, I was sensitive when someone sent a letter claiming that his information was proprietary and assigning a price for my use of it.  The thing that made most wary was that the guy had never given me the information he claimed to be proprietary, but had set his paperwork up so that he could claim that he had.  I also had a signed contract in my possession that didn't mention that the information was proprietary.

It was a scam directed solely at me.  It had the potential to take my life savings.  Fortunately, I also understood that there was a way to bust it up.

In general, for information to be considered proprietary, companies must treat it as confidential. Courts will not treat information readily available in public sources as proprietary. In addition, proprietary information must give the firm some sort of competitive advantage and should generally be unknown outside of the firm. A company must be able to demonstrate that it has taken every reasonable step to keep the information private if it hopes to obtain court assistance in protecting its rights. "Courts require that trade secret holders take 'reasonable' steps to maintain the secrecy of their trade secrets," Randy Kay wrote in the San Diego Business Journal. "Courts do not require that companies take all measures conceivable to maintain the secrecy, nor do courts require absolute secrecy. Rather, the confidentiality measures must be 'reasonable under the circumstances.'"

All I had to do to prove that this was a scam directed at me was show that he hadn't told anyone before my project that his information was proprietary and that he had conducted business after he did business with me without telling one or more of his clients that his information was proprietary.

That is what discovery is for, if it is properly enforced.  Aye, there's the rub.

In 2003, the guy claimed he had too many documents to give me the ones not marked proprietary.  Then he admitted in deposition that my project was the first he ever claimed was proprietary.  His last claim was that he never saved any documents--he gave everything to his clients including his copy of the original signed contract.  We got nothing.  Of course we had a judge who was blind to this kind of obstruction.

We could also prove that he hadn't told at least two subsequent clients that the information was proprietary.  In no way could he come close to meeting the burden in the blue quotes.

It took me eight years to get to that point.  Meanwhile the only way I could keep from being the victim was to avoid going into the business.  Justice delayed is justice denied in many ways.

Nothing is ever as simple as it seems.

Even though you may think you are in a position to do something about this, please don't.

Temporary Chrysler Stay

Those who are curious as to why one of the most liberal members of the Supreme Court, Justice Ruth Bader Gisnberg, would issue a temporary stay that slows down the Obama administration's reallocation of private assets, visit my favorite site on Supreme Court issues.

Want to Read a Troubling Editorial This Morning?

Go no farther than the Denver Post editorial by David Peterson.  It includes the following sentence:

To paraphrase the old quote about General Motors, "What's good for grocery workers is good for America."

One wonders where the economics student who wrote it has been over the past several months.

If any companies in any industry in America can afford to do the right thing and boost employee incomes and pensions, grocery chains are at the top of a short list. The wage boosts being sought are neither outrageous nor excessive — especially relative to the growth of their top executives' pay the past decade. The good news is that the companies and the union that represents their workers are back at the bargaining table to try to reach an agreement by June 15.

He is proposing that the Grocery companies follow the exact compliant to unions path that led to the GM bankruptcy.  I guess that he thinks that having the government bail out the grocery industry will be "good for America."  After all, it is another industry that can't be allowed to fail.

Save us from the ignorance of the ivory tower, and the ignorance of David Patterson.

Tone Down the Abortion Debate

I liked last week's Denver Post editorial, Tone Down the Abortion Debate.

A good part of the Republican Party's problems are rooted in the abortion debate and the people who won't vote for anyone but a social conservative.

Yesterday, while walking, I met a gentleman who told me that Fox News had reported that Dr. George Tiller had performed 60,000 late term abortions.  Since the number hadn't been challenged, he was sure it was accurate.

Common sense challenges that number.  He would have had to do an abortion every 30 minutes, 8 hours a day, 50 weeks a year for 30 years to get to that number.

In this day of lawsuit prone medical practice, scheduling a major procedure every 30 minutes would be asking for trouble.

Like most people, I find the concept of late term abortions repugnant, but this claim isn't even close to being credible.  Whomever made it was trying to justify Tiller's killing, whether he will admit it or not.

Lopsided Voter Registration

It appears that the El Paso County Republican Party is going to take steps to fix this, but one of the reasons that fiscal conservatives are under represented is that no one targets them for voter registration.

Social conservatives, on the other hand, are regularly targeted in their churches.

I am finding that about one third of the people volunteering to help me are not registered Republicans because no one has asked them to register.

Smoking Gun: Schultheis Content in the Minority

In 2005, The Gazette wrote:

 A newly formed Republican cell in the Colorado General Assembly wants to purge GOP Statehouse ranks of those who aren’t true to the party’s “core values.”

The conservative-leaning Republican Study Committee of Colorado was recently started by Rep. Dave Schultheis, R-Colorado Springs, and several other lawmakers. They say they would rather see a small group of pure Republicans operating in the Legislature than a Republican majority populated by lawmakers who support abortion rights, gay marriage or higher taxes.

Schultheis has recruited 13 or 14 other House Republicans — almost half the GOP House caucus — to join the committee.

This is unbelievable!  Until now, all I had were puzzle pieces that I put together.

I guess that I didn't understand what the RSCC was, either.

Edited to add.  Sometime between the time I published this on June 5th and June 23d, the staff at the Gazette saw fit to remove the linked item from their internet archives. They also removed a related letter to the editor.

Does anyone recall how dismissive the staff of the Gazette was about blogging ethics and blogs in general two years ago?

Denver Post Admits Hyper-Inflation A Real Possibility

At the end of one of the Denver Post's long series of editorials promoting more government spending, the Denver Post includes this sentence:

 If we experience hyper-inflation because of increased federal spending, Colorado could go bust.

Apparently the Denver Post believes that the way to adjust to, as opposed to combat hyper inflation is to turn on the spending spigots full blast. It is the Obama solution.

This is why this blog has a category "the Denver Post Embarrasses Itself."

Tancredo vs Sotomayor

Do you think that he Republican Party would be much better off if the politician most associated with and responsible for the Hispanic anti-Republican backlash of the last election were not calling Judge Sotomayor a racist?

I fear that many Hispanics think that Tancredo is, himself, a racist, and look on this latest comment in that light.

If the Republican Party wants to push that line, and it is conceivably a legitimate line to push, they need to find a spokesman who doesn't immediately discredit it with his own reputation.

RIP Dr. George Tiller

My sympathies are with his family.  

I also extend my sympathies to the many well meaning social conservatives who recognize that their cause is always hurt and never helped by these kinds of acts of violence.  Ben DeGrow and John Andrews are good examples who spoke out immediately.

Is it in Your Interest?

One office holder at the Beach Party told me he was reading this blog with interest.  He noted that I was free to do some things that others aren't.

I knew that, of course.

I am trying to create a Republican political model that is more independent of religious politics than the one we now have.  I want it to be safe to once again practice big tent politics.  I think it will be good for everyone, including those who want to practice religious politics.

If you think about it, pure fiscal conservatism has different electoral goals than pure social conservatism. Unfortunately, those goals are in direct conflict with each other. 

A pure fiscal conservative can accomplish most of his goals with a passive approach.  All he needs to succeed is a legislative majority in one house of the legislature.  That is all it takes to block the excessive growth of government.  It may not block the growth of government, but it will keep the government from growing beyond the means of the taxpayers to pay for it.

A pure fiscal conservative doesn't care who his friends are.  If he can get to a majority with a few moderate or even liberal Republicans elected in districts that conservative Republicans have no hope of winning, he is happy as a clam.

Fiscal conservatives don't need to pass laws.  They only need to block the more obnoxious laws that Democrats want to pass.

A pure social conservative is much more picky when choosing his legislative friends because his agenda is an active agenda.  Pure social conservatives want to pass laws that outlaw abortion, homosexuality, embryonic stem cell research, etc.

They must elect a majority of pure social conservatives in each house of the legislature to have any chance of enacting their agenda.  

Because there aren't enough districts that can elect a social conservative while leaving the fiscal conservatives and moderates in place, allowing a fiscal conservative or moderate to hold a seat that a social conservative might win becomes an unacceptable luxury to pure social conservatives.

Of course, pure social conservatives can't come out and admit that they are purging Republicans to steal their seats, so they try to use fiscal arguments to justify what they are doing.  They think that they can gather the support of the people whose interests they are trying to damage.

If you are concerned about fiscal conservative issues and you hear someone saying something like "we lost because we talked the talk but didn't walk the walk, look to see who they are trying to marginalize.  

If it is a Republican in a district or state that you are fairly certain won't go Republican again if that Republican loses, politely ask them to stop because they are directly impacting your financial future.

If it is a social moderate and the speaker is a social conservative, start thinking very quickly about the motives of the speaker and if what he is saying is in your financial interest.  

Remember that fiscal interests are served if we can stop legislation we don't like.  A social moderate Republican is far more likely to stop that legislation than the Democrat that will be elected in that seat if the Republican is marginalized into losing the election.

See, the politician was right.  A social conservative politician couldn't possibly say that and be elected. I can.

The El Paso GOP Beach Party

i find it hard to be both a participant at an event and a reporter about that event.  When you are standing in line to give a speech, you are thinking about the things you will say, not so much about what others are saying.

My speech, which received mild applause, was a pitch for a big tent party.

As I expected, no other speaker mentioned the need for a big tent party, and I noted that.

I talked about my experiences as a Beauprez volunteer and how often I had been told "I am a values voter. I didn't vote for Coors and won't work or vote for Beauprez.

Then I told them how much Bill Ritter's governorship had reduced my future earnings, an easy calculation to make given that I am a retiree.  Three years of Bill Ritter has cost my family 5% of its future earnings.

Finally I told them that I had been walking precincts and that the voters were hungry for a big tent party.

Where Did 200,000 Registered Republicans Go?

I keep coming up with new insights as I walk.

Over the past very few years the Republican registration advantage in Colorado has evaporated.  The obvious question is who left the Party, and why?

At least once a day I have to email the voter registration URL to former Republicans now registered as independents.

Most, but not all of them are straight fiscal conservatives.  The one exception I can think of is a Hispanic business owner who told me he was a social conservative but was mostly concerned about fiscal issues.

We have a party that caters to social conservatives to the point that fiscal conservatives feel unwelcome.  We may not always lose their votes but we lose their help, money, and enthusiasm.

About one third of the folks who are volunteering for me are former Republicans who went independent, which is why I am having to help them re-register as Republicans.