NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
-
Upload
north-suburban-republican-forum -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 1/27
North Suburban Republican Forum
January, 2011
www.NorthSuburbanRepublicanForum.com www.NorthSuburbanRepublicanForum.org
Our next meeting is from 9:15-10:15 am, Saturday morning, January 15th featuring Penn
Pfiffner of the Independence Institute talking about “The Citizen’s Budget”. This time,
legislative leaders are not “crying wolf” about the State budget. Learn what you need to
understand the crisis, what citizens should do about it and how you can influence the
debate. Come hear former legislator and current Senior Fellow at the Independence
Institute, Penn R. Pfiffner. He will present “The Citizen’s Budget”. You will beenergized, educated and impressed by the opportunities to be involved and to lead.
Remember to invite somebody new to the NSRF as we discuss politics for the Denver North
Metro area. Please forward this newsletter to other like-minded individuals. We need to
be activists to regain our county and country from progressive-minded Liberals.
NSRF upcoming calendar in 2010 /2011 :
February 12 – Adams County Republicans Executive Committee Meeting at the fairgrounds
March 12 – How to be informed and involved in Colorado and local politics
April 9 – Colorado’s transportation issues
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 2/27
May 14 – Colorado legislative session feedback
Citizens’ Budget September 8th, 2010 by jlongo
The report provides an overview of the structure, timing and size of the State budget. We speak to how the
problems originated and how things have gone wrong in recent years. The Citizens’ Budget includes legislative,constitutional, and policy recommendations to close the looming state budget gap – without raising taxes – and
move Colorado towards sustainable government for good.
Please share this important project with fellow concerned Colorado citizens. We must tackle this problem sooner
than later. To achieve sustainable government in our lifetime, we need your help. Trust us, your children and your
children’s children will thank you.
Important Links:
The 170 page full-color web version of the Citizens’ Budget document can be downloaded in PDF form. You can
click and read individual chapters from the table of contents on page 2.
Additionally, the full document can be downloaded and printed in this full black and whiteprinter -friendly version.
Full-color six page Executive Summary: Road Map for Sustainable Government
Citizens’ Budget individual chapters, broken down by topic:
Introduction and Overview: The State’s Budget
State Budget Process
Priority-Based Budgeting
Policy Changes to Make a Difference:Higher Education Policy
K-12 Education Policy
Health Care Policy
Colorado’s Pension Liability
Retirement Health Benefits
Transportation Policy
CDOT Debt
Old Age Pension Plan
Corporate Welfare
Revenues from Tobacco “Master Settlement Agreement” of 1998
The Case for Further Sentencing Reform in Colorado
Lottery Proceeds
Governor’s Energy Office
Topics Needing Further Study
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 3/27
Other Operational Savings
Authors Section
http://tax.i2i.org/citizens-budget/
Independence Institute Event: Sentencing Reform In The 2011 Colorado General Assembly
posted by mike krause on jan 09 2011 |
State spending does not drive the prison population. Rather, just like an entitlement, the prison population drives
state spending. The legislature’s ability to affect the prison caseload, and thus the corrections budget, rests in its
prerogative to write, and when necessary, re-write the state’s criminal sentencing and parole laws and policies.
In 2010, Colorado lawmakers passed and Governor Ritter signed a half-dozen sentencing and other criminal justice-
related bills that were generated out of the work of the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ).
All of these bills were fairly modest in scope (an appropriate enough approach to most criminal justice reform efforts),
but taken together it was the most significant effort at sentencing reform, and thus prison spending reform, in
Colorado in the last twenty-five years. Indeed, the last time the Colorado legislature took this big a swipe at
sentencing was in 1985 with House Bill 1320, which not only increased the minimum sentences for crimes of violence,
but also doubled the maximum penalties for all levels of felony crimes, regardless of the nature of the crime, in
Colorado’s presumptive sentencing range. Colorado taxpayers have been paying the price of runaway prison spending,
with a less-than-clear public safety benefit, ever since.
The CCJJ is still working, and there will be both more recommendations and more sentencing and criminal justice-
related bills in the 2011 Colorado General Assembly. So the Independence Institute is teaming up with the
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 4/27
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 5/27
The Census figures also confirm that America is a nation in constant motion, with tens of millions hopping across state
lines and changing residence since 2000. And more of them are moving into conservative, market-friendly red states
than into progressive, public-sector heavy blue states.
In order the 10 states with the greatest population gains were Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Texas, North Carolina,
Georgia, Florida, Colorado and South Carolina. Their average population gain was 21%. In the fast-growing states, the
average income tax rate is 4% versus 6.9% in the slowest growing states.
The average population gain of the bottom 10 states was 2%. They include most of the states now famous for fiscal
distress: Michigan, Ohio, New York, Illinois. Michigan was the one state that actually had a net loss of population in the
past decade.
Particularly troubling is that three of America's traditionally high-octane states—California, New Jersey and New York—
are in the population and economic doldrums.
New York's population grew only 2%, while New Jersey grew at less than half the U.S. average. California's population,
a source of its rising economic prosperity throughout the 20th century, grew only at the national average. For the first
time since 1920, the not-so-Golden State failed to gain a single new House seat, an astonishing event. The place that
once led the rest of the nation in technology, innovation, venture capital and cultural trend-setting is now reaping the
whirlwind of its profligate political regime in Sacramento.
Meanwhile, the West and South continue to gain strength, while the Northeast, a blue state bastion, stagnates. Only
New Hampshire, with the huge advantage of no income or sales tax, is doing relatively well, with population growth
twice that of the rest of the region.
The Census exercise is also about the rise and fall of political clout, and here the runaway winner is Texas. It gets four
new Congressional seats, followed by Florida with two seats, and Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and
Washington gaining one seat. With the exception of Washington, these are all relatively Republican states.
The losers are states the Democrats traditionally look to for support. New York and Ohio lose two seats. Illinois, Iowa,
Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey and Pennsylvania are all down one seat. When combined
with the impact of redistricting within states, Republicans could be in position to gain more House seats in 2012 on top
of their 63-seat gain this year. You'd expect the blue states to undertake economic reform out of simple political self-
interest.
The Census numbers are one way to judge which public policies are working in the country and which aren't. Texas is
looking like the new California. And California, Michigan, New Jersey and New York need to look deep into themselves
to discover a more promising result 10 years from now.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704851204576034071534144888.html?
KEYWORDS=a+nation+in+motion
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 6/27
WONDER LAND
• JANUARY 6, 2011
Congress's Broken WindowsThe president must have power over the budget to make spending reform work.
Here's something most Republicans don't want to hear: There is no way the born-again, straight and sober
Republicans of the 112th Congress are going to get spending under control unless they involve the fellow at 1600
Pennsylvania Avenue.
The spending reforms that Speaker John Boehner and his counterinsurgency lieutenants have proposed—spendingreductions to offset any mandatory increases or stated budget limits for the current fiscal year—are terrific. But if you
think Congress, by itself, is going to sustain this discipline over time, I have a bridge in Alaska I'd like to sell you.
Congress is a legislative body. Like legislative bodies from ancient Rome till now, its DNA is not to forgo things but to
do stuff. Everyone agrees that Congress holds something called the "power of the purse." And don't they know it.
Nowhere in the Constitution will you find that phrase. Nor in the Constitution that they are reading on the House floor
Thursday will you hear the words "spend," "programs" or "outlays." All this, though, is what Congress has been about
since anyone can remember.
The reform groups and blogosphere are threatening hellfire for any Republicans who cross them on spending, but take
my word for it: Once any Congress makes it to the budgeting "out years," all that hellfire will be just a puff of smoke.
James Buchanan, the father of public choice theory, won a Nobel Prize for unraveling this reality.
It is not hopeless. The locus of hope, however, lies with the Executive, a word at least nominally associated with
responsibility. In an article on these pages recently ("Time for Emergency Economic Reform"), a successful political
executive, Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana, identified the sine-qua-non reform to sustain spending discipline: presidential
impoundment power.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 7/27
However you define the idea—impoundment, rescission, the line-item veto—it is the power of a president or governor
to zero out some of the spending pile that a legislature dumps on the front lawn. It is executive pushback against
wretched legislative excess.
"Presidents once had the authority," Mr. Daniels wrote, "to spend less than Congress made available through
appropriation. On reflection, nothing else makes sense."
Ask New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie about the impoundment power. He has it, and he'll tell you it is indispensable to
what he is trying to do in his hopelessly profligate state. Absent that impoundment power, a lot of the Christie pitch
would be just rhetoric.
Before getting into why 43 governors, but not the U.S. president, have this power, a comment on those who say that
impoundment is a pop-gun, that it can't control entitlements or mega-programs.
The Roman Senate contemplates bankrupting the empire.
Perhaps you have heard of the "broken windows" theory of urban chaos.
It says that in a neighborhood wracked with murder and mayhem, it isimportant to repair broken windows. The idea is that leaving small
matters like broken windows unrepaired tells criminals that no one cares
if they break the neighborhood further, and it tells the people there is no
hope of fixing the big things. In New York City, this worked.
Earmarks, pork, corporate carve-outs and all that are Congress's broken windows.
Every knowing article written on this subject points out what a "small" percentage of spending this stuff is. But the
behavioral incentives for big-time criminals in the Bronx and big-time spenders in a legislature like Congress are thesame. An annual federal budget of $3.5 trillion is a towering monument of broken windows. Federal highway spending
has been on automatic pilot for nearly 20 years. Sen. Tom Coburn has a long list of programs uselessly duplicated
across the government; nine agencies run 69 early-education programs.
Here is a list of U.S. presidents and public figures who have used or supported the impoundment power: Abe Lincoln,
Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, JFK, LBJ, Bill Clinton, the Bushes, John McCain, John Kerry, Al Gore, Pat
Buchanan, Jeb Hensarling, Russ Feingold, Joe Lieberman, Judd Gregg, and not least both Paul Ryan, the new House
Budget chairman, and Barack Obama.
This crucial executive ballast does not exist mainly for two reasons.
In the early 1970s, Richard Nixon tried aggressively to impound spending, touching off a war with Congress's
"prerogatives." Then Watergate broke. In a fury, one of the most liberal Congresses passed the Budget Control Act of
1974 (which should be repealed). It transferred most spending "control" to Congress, which one commentator at the
time called "congressional government—and chaos."
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 8/27
Second, the Constitution is ambiguous on how to divide this authority, and the Supreme Court, in coin-flip decisions,
has sided with Congress.
All the congressional names above, especially Rep. Ryan, have tried to thread this legal needle. But it doesn't exist
because the bipartisan pig-out caucus—in hiding now—won't let it happen.
Yes, this week the GOP Congress is talking about a lollapalooza annual budget cut of $100 billion. Go for it! But let's
hear Barack Obama put the impoundment power back in play in his State of the Union address—for this presidency
and however many presidents are left in the future of our broken-windows capital.
Write to [email protected]
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704723104576062180953503612.html
Four years of Democratic leadership in the House added $3.66billion of debt per day
January 7th, 2011
The national debt as of 10:43am MST on January 7, 2010. (USDebtClock.org/)
The economy and more specifically the national debt was a key factor in this past November’s elections.
The American people have grown weary of a government that refuses to live within its means, something
which we all individually do. Analysis of the national debt since Democrats took over the House o
Representatives in 2007 provides for some interesting reading.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 9/27
According to CNS News, under the leadership of a Democratic controlled Congress (remember – they are
the ones that set spending) the national debt increased $5.3.43 trillion or $3.66 billion per day!
Putting that in perspective, in the 1,461 days Nancy Pelosi served as Speaker of the House the nation
amassed more debt than under all other Speakers in history – COMBINED.
Is it any wonder why people are upset with our government?
Falling in the category of ‘people in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks’ full disclosure mandates that
Republican leadership certainly had their hand in a ballooning national debt as well.Under House Speaker Dennis Hastert the national debt increased over $3 trillion from 1999 to 2007. Prio
to Hastert, the debt increased $812 billion in the four years under Speaker Newt Gingrich.
However, it is worth noting that while Republicans did their fare share previously, under a Democra
controlled House the debt increased more than three times as fast.
Let us hearken back to Nancy Pelosi’s inaugural address:
“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go,
no new deficit spending. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not
burden them with mountains of debt.”
~ Nancy Pelosi, January 4, 2007It would appear the Democrat’s definition of a ‘mountain of debt’ is much different than that of the
American people.
http://www.tonysrants.com/national/four-years-of-democratic-leadership-in-the-house-added-3-66-billion-of-
debt-per-day/
A Quiet Legislative Session For K-12? Transformers Still Must Make Noise by Eddie | 12:13 pm, January 10, 2011 |
Well, it’s that time of year again….
Hey, stop giving me those blank stares!
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 10/27
Time to preview Colorado’s upcoming legislative session and the debates over bills and policies that couldaffect K-12 education in our state. Session starts in two days, and Ed News Colorado has posted
the annual preview by Todd Engdahl — a must-read for local education transformers.
Of course, anyone who has been paying attention or reading what I have to say, knows what the drivingtheme will be. Engdahl’s story hammers it home:
“The budget is the big elephant in the room,” said Vincent Badolato, public affairs vice president for theColorado League of Charter Schools.
He and many others identify budget cuts as the overarching education issue of 2011 – as they were in
2009 and 2010. “It’s budget, budget, budget,” said Moira Cullen of the lobbying firm Capstone Group.State K-12 support and higher education funding consume 55 percent of the state’s $7 billion generafund. Continued budget belt-tightening for education is a given because state revenues remain fragile and
because the legislature must approve a balanced budget, can’t increase taxes without voter approval andalso faces spending demands for Medicaid and other human services programs.
In some ways, it’s not a whole lot different than the prospects facing the opening of last year’s session
But this time around there is no Race to the Top, no big reform bill push, a divided legislature, and agovernor without a focus on significant changes to education. Twenty-eleven also isn’t an election year
(we’re not counting school boards here).
Still, Ed News Colorado reports on a couple intriguing ideas:
Sen. Nancy Spence, R-Centennial, has an administrative idea that likely will make districts nervous. Shesaid in December that she’s planning legislation that would require school districts to seek requests for
proposals from private companies for outsourcing non-instructional services such as transportation
janitorial, food service and similar functions. Districts then would be required to hold public meetings toinform citizens about the comparative costs of outsourcing a service as opposed to providing it with
district employees….
Freshman Rep. Don Beezley, R-Broomfield, said, “You’ll find me pretty focused on charter schools and
parent empowerment. I’m looking at a couple of charter-related bills.” Specifics remain to be fleshed out; “We’re working on it.”
Beezley said he’s interested in the “parent trigger” idea, referring to a California law that allows organizedparents to take over a failing school and have it turned in to a charter, its teachers and principals
replaced.
And we can always hope for a surprise or two that includes broader support for bold, outside-the-boxthinking — like the creation of a cost-saving tuition tax credit program that expands private school choice
That’s what my Education Policy Center friends have researched and proposed in the K-12 educationchapter of the new Citizens’ Budget.
Some lawmakers and interest groups may insist on a quiet session. But no matter what, I’ll still be out
here making noise for some meaningful K-12 policy changes that provide choice and accountabilitychanges that empower families. I hope more of my education transformer friends will join me.
http://www.peoplespresscollective.org/2011/01/a-quiet-legislative-session-for-k-12-transformers-still-must-make-noise/
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 11/27
This newsletter has a Republican viewpoint but may or may not reflect theviews of the NSRF Board of Directors. It is intended to inform and for the
thoughtful consideration of our members and as potential discussionstarters.
Penn Pfiffner is a former state representative, having served eight years in
the legislature. His major bills included the enhanced sentences fordangerous pedophiles and the state’s first full-restitution policy. Heauthored the repeal of the capital gains tax, and wrote the majorderegulation bill of the decade.
He has a financial and managerial consulting practice, ConstructionEconomics, LLC. He taught college Economics at night school, at both the graduate andundergraduate level, for thirteen years. Penn earned a Masters in Financefrom the University of Colorado at Denver.
He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Independence Institute and servedfor six years as the President of the Colorado Union of Taxpayers; hecontinues to serve on the Board.
Penn and Karen are the parents of three adult children. He is a veteran,having served as an officer in the Navy until the end of 1979.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 12/27
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 13/27
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 14/27
Underlying
Causes The demand for government services is
nearly infinite. There is always a handy
explanation for someone who must be
helped by expanding a current program or
instituting a new one. Our elected leaders
and Colorado citizens have not demanded
that difficult decisions be made, choosing
instead to expand State services in a futile
effort to satiate the insatiable.
When one-time or short-term funds
became available, the legislature
applied them to fill holes for
budgeted government services
without looking ahead to meeting
the demand for the services in out-
year budgets.
We cannot place the health and well-
being of government above the health
and well-being of citizens. Coloradans
watched as the recession removed
171,400 jobs in the economy. Citizens’
personal income shrank 3.3 percent over
two years, while combined state and
local government grew. Families
dependent on the private sector for
income tightened their budgets, saw
colleagues furloughed from businesses,
yet watched as an increasingly
unresponsive government sector
continued growing. The burden of public
spending at the federal and state level is
becoming too great for the productive
sector to support.
At the center of the problem lies an unwillingness
to address how, and how much, the State spends.
Colorado state government has lived too close to
the
limit, creating a structure and a process that
cannot be sustained. It is not prudent to design
future budgets based on an unsupported hope
that times once again will be economically
robust.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 15/27
Proposed
SolutionsA range of potential solutions was
considered. No strategy was ruled out based
simply on political ideology. Solutions were
assessed on their potential for placing the
State on the road to regain long-term,
sustainable government.
Elected officials gladly will tell you they have
cut all the fat out of pro-grams and if we cut
back any more, we will be cutting out sinew
and bone. We did not look to close the $1
billion shortfall through focus-ing on “waste,
fraud and abuse,” for that would have been
beyond our means to investigate each
division and each branch office, as the new
governor should do. Further, focusing on
trimming the fat fails to address Colorado’s
systemic budgetary problems.
The answer given so far by the majority of the
General Assembly and the executive branch is that
taxes and fees are simply inadequate to support
necessary State services. The structural changes the
seek are potential new taxes and increases in
existing taxes, coupled with higher fees.
While potentially solving the near-term budget
shortfall, increas-ing revenue fails to address the tru
systemic problem regarding how and how much the
State spends. Adopting this approach will place
Colorado on the same path as California, New York
and New Jersey—states that have repeatedly
addressed budget shortfalls through increased taxes
and fees. Each of these states now faces a budget
crisis significantly greater than that faced byColorado. We have the opportunity to learn from the
mistakes and follow a differ-ent, sustainable path.
Colorado must budget within anticipated revenues,
an approach that will require structural and policy
changes. This report recog-nizes a few broad
spending categories and confronts how we spend
our funds there. Not only can we meet the
challenges for next year, but the legislature could
prepare during the next session for further changes
to be voted on in the 2012 election.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 16/27
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 17/27
education financing model, we see that tax credits to
encourage new switchers would save $21.3 million for the
State in its first three years and would take an additional $53.8
million off local school districts’ burdens during the same span.
Ten-year savings are projected to be even greater on an
annual basis. A bigger annual savings to restrain teachersalary increases by eliminating the ineffective “masters degree
bump” would save $137.6 million every year. A study would
likely illumi-nate why Colorado is far outside other states’
expenditures for “other business services.” Adjustment just
halfway towards the norm would save another $112.3 million
per year.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 18/27
Higher Education Corrections
Colorad
o is one
of the
states
to rely
on
tuition
increas
es to
grow
higher
education
spending.
Better
outcomes
will result
from
expansion
of the
stipend
pro-gram,
phased inover five
years, to
end direct
funding of
state col-
leges and
universities
. Requiring
average
yet realistic
productivit
y
improveme
nts will
make $50
million
available.
Freeing all
state
higher education institutions to
operate as government enterpris-es
under TABOR will introduce market
changes.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 19/27
R
e
d
u
c
e
i
n
c
a
r
c
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
b
u
t
o
n
l
y
f
o
r
n
o
n
-
v
i
o
l
ent
offend-
ers.
Correcti
ons’
portionof 9
percent
of the
budget
would
drop
modest
ly back
in the
directio
n of the
historic
al level
of 3
percent
. A one
percent
savings
would
be $78
million
per
year.
Parole
violations
that do
not
involvecommitti
ng
another
crime
cost the
State
$40.1
million. If
we couldcut that
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 20/27
i
n
h
a
l
f
,
e
v
e
n
i
f
o
t
h
e
r
t
y
p
e
s
o
f
c
o
s
t
s
w
e
r
e
imposed,
Colorado
might
save
about
$20
million
per year.
Healt
h
Spendingwithinthe
Departmen
t of
Healt
h
Care
Polic
y andFinancing
Taxpay
er
suppor
ted
health
covera
ge has
underg
one
vigoro
us
expans
ion
and
enorm
ous
spendi
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 21/27
ng increases
that are
unsustainable.
Returning
Medicaid
eligibility levels
to those
prevailing in FY
2006-07 could
produce savings
on the order of
$218 million.
Reversing
another change
in eligibility,this for adults
qualifying under
the Children’s
Basic Health
Plan,
another $140.5
million by 2012-
13. Correcting
Children’s
Benefit Health
Plan enrollment
fees for inflation
and bringing
them up to the
levels charged
in states like
New Hampshire
would bring in
an
extra
$18
million
a year.
A
system
-wide
change
from
third-
party
payer
to a
program that
resem
bles
health
saving
s
accoun
t
spendi
ng will
save
about
5
percen
t, or
$28
million.
ConclusionCitizens must have a
government that has
pulled back from the
edge. No more growing
as large as possible andthen surviving on
accounting tricks andraiding cash funds. The
servant of the people
must address problems
with difficult, adult
discussions, fully aware
of potential problems. If
the federal
government’s unfunded
liabilities will squeezethe economy a decade
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 22/27
before predicted, if the
federal government’s
massive borrowing dries
up, if we get a double-
dip recession, or
unforeseen problems
arise, we need the
flexibility to respond, not
to be so close to the
fiscal edge that further
adjustment becomes
implausible.
The U.S. Constitution
demands self-
governance by the
states. Just as
families successfully
budget so that they
are not living on the
edge or perennially
dependent on
bailouts, our state
government must, as
well.
The
legislature
must be
prompted
by the
people toend
Colorado’s
habitual
over-
spending.
Our Road Map can place us on a path to
sustainable government.
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 23/27
Legislative Changes for Sustainable Government
Action Savings (millions) Department
Conform half way towards normal admin services cost 112.3 School Finance Act
Tuition tax credits 21.3 K-12
Eliminate teachers’ master’s degree “bump” 137.6 School Finance Act
Return to 2007 eligibility requirements 218.0 Medicaid
Return to 2007 spending levels 25.0 Medicaid mental health
Repeal expansions for population that already can afford privateinsurance 15.0 CHBP
Raise enrollment fees for inflation 18.0 CHBP
Reverse Executive Director’s Office increases 21.0 DHCPF
Modify 3rd party payer to health savings account – like spending(take care not to double count) 28.0 Medicaid, CHBP
Reduce incarceration of non-violent offenders 78.0 Corrections
Cut in half technical parole revocations 20.0 Corrections
Institute defined contribution plan for retirement health benefits 10.1 Other Retirement Benefits
Faculty productivity 50.0 to 67.0 Higher Education
Miscellaneous savings 4.0 various
Policy changes that the Legislature should offer to the people,
who must approve in changes to the constitution:
Savings
Action (millions) Department
Roll the State’s own Social Security System into welfare 105.0 Off-budget
Redirect COGO funds to the General Fund 137.0 Off-budget
Permit managed competition for internal operations that mimic private business System wide
Repeal Amendment 23 School Finance Act
Policy changes that would have long term effects:
Action Savings (millions) Department
Copy other states’ commissions to consider opting out of Med-icaid; let federal health care program pick it up; about 60% isfuture cost avoidance 1,000.0 Medicaid
Institute defined contribution plan would allow the State to fully
fund the Health Care Trust Plan, closing a $1 Billion unfundedliability Other Retirement Benefits
Policy changes that avoid future costs:Action Savings (millions) Department
Reverse eligibility for adults under the Children’s Benefit 140.5 Medicaid
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 24/27
Policy changes that have important budgetary impacts,
although not quantified in this report:
Action Department
Change PERA for new hires to a defined contribution plan PERA
Separate PERA fund balances into new and old PERA
Conform retirement ages for all PERA enrollees to match Social Security guidelines (thesethree moves could contribute as much as $300 million per year to plug the $23.4 billionunfunded liability) PERA
Sunset the AED and SAED payments to make PERA accountable for reaching fully-fundedstatus. PERA
Relieve taxpayers from the responsibility of future bailouts PERA
Move to higher education subsidies through only student stipends; ending direct subsidies tostate colleges and universities Higher Education
Reform the power of higher education institutions to operate as independent entities withnew and flexible funds generating activities Higher Education
Enhance the budget process by adhering to Priority-Based methods System-wide
Enhance the budget process by focusing on outcomes rather than only inputs System-wide
Governor’s Office of Prevent further damage to the economy by corporate welfare Economic Develop-(This will immediately save between $4 million and $18 million per year) ment; others
Reverse the Bridge Enterprise Fund power to incur debt without a vote of the people Department of Revenue
Develop goals for expansion of tolled traffic lanes; consider how to develop separate tolledlanes for trucking Transportation
Fund only mass transit that relieves congestion; re-balance the Denver-metro split betweenhighways and mass transit Transportation
Reform the make-up of the Colorado Transportation Commission TransportationEnhance how highways are funded, through greater privatization Transportation
Public Utilities Com-Deregulate transportation of people to introduce market reforms mission
Consolidate the Governor’s Energy Office into executive agencies GEO
Policy changes that would affect local governments:
Action Savings (millions) Department
Institute defined contribution plan 43.6 Other Retirement Benefits
institute.org
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 25/27
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 26/27
The North Suburban Republican Forum1149 W 102nd Ave
Northglenn, CO 80260
Membership Application
This application is for:Annual Regular Membership (individual)$20.00 feeAnnual Regular Membership (couples)$30.00 fee
Annual Regular Membership + all 2011 monthly meetings cost$56.00 fee
Please Print.
Last Name:_____________________________First:_________________________MI:___ __
Last Name: _______ _____ First:__ __ MI:___ __
Address:___________________________________________________________________
City:___________________________________________Zip Code:____________________
Telephone:(________)____________-_____________________
26
8/8/2019 NSRF January 2011 Newsletter
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nsrf-january-2011-newsletter 27/27
E-Mail Address:_______________________________________@_____________________
Signature
Signature
Payment by: Cash Check Date:__________________________ 2nd VP Treasurer