Mixed reviews for HB12-1279

HB12-1279 "Public Financing of Legislative Campaigns" has good intentions, it will help take the money  out of politics to a degree. Many who want electoral and campaign finance reform think public financing is the way to make our process cleaner and more representative of constituents instead of special interests, I agree. 

HB-1279 is a step in the right direction. My opinion of the bill is that it sets the threshold for receiving financing too high and unjustly favors major party candidates, if a few relatively minor adjustments were made to the bill I would vote for it in the Senate. Unfortunately the bill is unlikely to appear on the floor of the House or Senate this year, it is headed for death in committee. 

One major problem with the bill is the hypocrisy of its sponsors. Representatives Lee, Court, and Kefalas* all did not accept spending limits for their 2012 legislative campaigns. They seem to be all for electoral reform as long as they don't have to lead by example. 

Their motivations are admirable, their actions are not. Maybe that's part of the reason why the bill will not pass: partisan politics take precedence over good decisions these days. 

*Rep. Kefalas is also a candidate for the State Senate 14th District

HB-1125

I just wanted to write in support of HB-1125. This bill passed House Appropriations and is headed for a vote on the floor. It is a much needed step in modernizing Colorado's animal control policies and will have tremendous benefit for rescue animals. It has been endorsed by the Larimer Humane Society.

With any luck this bill will be on the Senate floor shortly and on the Governor's desk shortly after that.

This is one of those bills that can get lost in the shuffle of more controversial topics, but to me it hits closer to home as the owner of a rescue dog (pictured below).

Read the full text of the bill by clicking here.

Igloo 

On the calendar...

Thursday at 7:00 pm the League of Women Voters of Larimer County is holding a meeting at the Fort Collins City Council chambers (300 LaPorte). The meeting is the rescheduled Cross Currents Fracking Panel. League of Women Voters of Larimer County.

On Saturday former Colorado Senate majority leader Ken Gordon will be discussing money in politics and the Citizens United v. FEC supreme court decision. The meeting will be at 1:00pm at the All Saints Episcopal Church (3448 Taft in Loveland). Though the meeting takes place outside of the 14th Senate District I believe the issues that will be discussed have national, state, and local implications so it is a good opportunity for all of us to get more engaged on the issue.

Finally, the three members of the "Fort Collins Delegation" to the General Assembly are holding a community issues forum on higher education costs. Sen. Bob Bacon, Rep. Fischer, along with Rep. John Kefalas, also a candidate for the 14th Senate District, will be hosting the meeting from 2:00pm-4:00pm this Saturday at the ASCSU senate chambers in the Lory Student Center.

If you have the time these meetings are just some examples of the many conversations in our community that shape our lives. Decisions are made by those who show up.

Four instances of totally unacceptable...

The more frustrating of the four stories, all from the State House of Representatives, is that a bill raising daily pay for legislators outside of the Denver Metro Area was quietly passed last week without debate. The pay increase was not substantial, though it will cost six-figures to the taxpayer in an already strapped state budget. The real issue is that the people of Colorado were not represented because no debate was allowed. The bill passed by only 2 votes in the 65-member house, there was plenty of opposition that was never heard.

There are 31 candidates for the State House of Representatives running unopposed in 2012 thus far. A handful of unopposed races will happen, some districts are so clearly in the column of one of the major parties that finding a sacrificial lamb cannot be easy...but nearly half of the House? That does not bode well for Colorado seeing a balanced, moderate legislature interested in compromise.

Rep. Jones (D-Louisville) is having a hard time getting called on to speak. Jones served on the controversial reapportionment commission and many feel he is getting "payback" from Speaker McNulty. This is obviously a poor time for childish games on the floor of the House, but in fairness I'm not sure there's ever a good time for childish games in either the House or Senate.

Finally, two Democratic-led bills were killed off in the House as a clear preamble to the 2012 elections and to prevent democrats from touting accomplishments. One of the bills was designed to benefit members of the military and another was simply to clarify tourism grant requirements. It's a pretty bad day when supporting veterans and tourism has somehow become divisive in the Colorado legislature.

Partisan politics is not working very well in the General Assembly and we're only just over a month into the 2012 session. The state budget looms ahead.

More Fort Collins voices needed on state boards

Just a short post today.

The recent news of 174 gubernatorial nominations being held up in the Senate caught my eye and as I looked through the list of people whose nominations have yet to be confirmed I realized (too) many were from Denver.

Denver’s metro area obviously holds a great deal of the state’s overall population and so it may always have more representation, but people in Denver should not have the only voices on state boards and commissions.

As vacancies become available you can apply here on the Governor’s website. The 2012 vacancies will be open soon. We need more people from Fort Collins, northern Colorado, and outside the Denver area to apply, serve, and represent the interests of people outside of the capital city.

If elected to the Senate I would make sure Fort Collins is getting its fair share of representation, at the moment it is not. 

Harsher penalties for hit-and-run accidents...

On Thursday, February 16th the House Judiciary Committee will be considering a bipartisan bill (HB12-1084) to raise the penalties associated with hit-and-run accidents. The bill will raise hit-and-runs to be on the same caliber as drunk driving, a class 4 felony.

Right now an unintended consequence...even a loophole...exists where a drunk driver that is involved in an accident has an "incentive" to flee the scene because a hit-and-run is a lesser offense than drunk driving. If the driver waits to become sober, he or she will not face drunk driving charges because no proof will exist to bring those charges forward and they will only receive the lesser charge of fleeing the scene of an accident.

This can mean emergency services do not respond as quickly in some circumstances because victims in another vehicle may be unable to call for help. It also is just a much needed amendment to the criminal code.

I cannot stress enough how much this bill needs to find its way to the Governor's desk.

The contact information for the House Judiciary Committee can be found here, please contact them to show your support of HB12-1084.

The full text of the bill can be found here.

Helping small-business grow in Colorado

Let me start with this: it is not my plan to help create new small-businesses before we help existing ones. However, if we want to create new jobs part of that plan must be to encourage entrepreneurs in Colorado.

We need to do more for all small-businesses and much more to make Colorado the place to do business. That means eliminating redundant or unnecessary regulatory burdens, not the ones that protect consumers but the ones that nobody wants anymore.

One way we can help make Colorado “the place” to be an entrepreneur is to eliminate state income taxes on new small businesses for their first year in operation. Most small businesses are not profitable in their first year of operation anyway and so few would actually pay state income taxes whether my plan was put into effect or not.

What it does help do is encourage businesses to start-up in Colorado by alleviating some of the projected cost of doing business. Existing businesses in the state will benefit from having more customers if there are more jobs in Colorado. One way we can create jobs is to help people take an idea to market and hire people to make it happen.

I think a good counter-argument is, "Can we afford to do that in the already tight state budget?" What we must look at is how much money will we gain over the long-term when more small businesses start, succeed, and grow in Colorado. If given the opportunity we should see more revenue when a small business does pay income tax in the "second year" of operation than we would ever lose in the initial investment.

I would not be in favor of directly cutting spending in order to achieve a theoretical tax incentive. I want our money to go to education and state services more than I want a new frozen yogurt shop in Fort Collins built on the back of the taxpayer. The idea is that after we make an initial investment we will see more revenue for the state and more ability to pay for the many other things we want. 

We must also be careful not to grow too quickly. The impact of an unsustainable surge in growth has unintended consequences for things you would not expect. Even though bringing new companies to Colorado or opening new businesses is considered a victory it actually means more wear and tear on our infrastructure, a drain on school resources, and higher rates of energy consumption. So, not to dampen the mood, but we have to balance our ambitions for growth with our desire for a high quality of living.

Our ambitions and our needs are not contradictory though. We can make it easier to do business and create jobs in Colorado without sacrificing vital service spending. We can grow sustainably without placing a burden on citizens to support every economic development plan we dream up.

All it takes is creativity and hard work. 

Unfortunate failure of HB12-1087 (Animal Abuse Registry)

I supported the short-lived HB12-1087 which would have established a registry for animal abuse offenders in Colorado akin to existing sex offender registries.

The principal counter-arguments that prevailed and killed the bill were that child abusers and drunk drivers are not subjected to such public scrutiny and that alienating people convicted of animal abuse from society might promote more extreme criminal actions.

Cost was not an issue, or at least not a major one, because the registry would be a partnership with a nonprofit agency responsible for cost and maintenance. It is also worth noting that people would only be on the registry for five years and would then be removed by default.

The (aforementioned) major argument against the registry seemed to be that it was an overreaction because what we think are more major offenses  (e.g. child abuse and drunk driving) are not so harshly treated. My response is: that means we should also raise the stakes for punishing child abusers and not shy away from our other public safety obligations in the meantime. 

A registry of those convicted of child abuse is a good idea; it not existing is a poor reason to leave animals more vulnerable too. Why wouldn’t we want to know who in our community might not be safe around children? As to drunk driving, we already suspend driving privileges and deliver appropriate but severe punishments. Knowing where a drunk driver lives is not going to make our roads safer but knowing where child and animal abusers live will make our neighborhoods safer.

As an owner of two dogs, one of which was an abused rescue, I do admit that I am biased... but consider this all you pet owners: earlier this year a neighbor of a dog-owner was arrested for feeding poisoned meatballs to two dogs on the other side of his fence. Click here for that full story. The offender had prior animal abuse history and may well have been on such a registry if one existed. That information being public would have served as a deterrent for the offender and possibly saved not only the lives of two harmless animals but also the time of local police and the unfair loss of the dog-owners.

Public safety and crime prevention are priorities for me. Animal abuse is a crime, preventing it and appropriately punishing those who are convicted of it is a responsible approach to law enforcement policy. We cannot say, “We must raise punishments for more severe crimes before we raise them for what we think are lesser offenses.”

To close I would say this: given the other issues we face in terms of growing our economy, fixing education, making college affordable, and solving our energy problems I would not go into the General Assembly leading on this issue before we work on things affecting humans every day. However, I will always vote for making Colorado the safest place to live, work, and play.

I applaud Rep. Labuda for making an effort and raising the debate. 

Anyone who does not want to punish criminal behavior should be reminded that no one forces people to commit crimes. If they choose to kill someone’s dog or repeatedly kick a cat as hard as they can… I have no problem letting the world know about it.