According to Colorado News Agency reporter Debi Brazzale, Kefalas’s legislation HB 1147 will make it a crime for anyone under the age of 18 to ride a bike, scooter, skateboard and even in-line skates without a helmet.

The proposed new law doesn’t carry any real punishment.  According to Kefalas the purpose of the law is to provide parents with another idol threat with no real consequence.  Brazzale quoted him, “We’re saying ‘It’s the law. You have to have a helmet if you’re a minor, but we’re not going to punish you.”  I’m sure my kids won’t see through that!

The bill passed the House Transportation Committee and is awaiting second reading.

In a press release bragging about the House Health and Human Services Committee passing his “Transparency Trojan Horse” bill, a.k.a. HB 1330 The Health Care Cost Transparency Act, Kefalas said, “You can’t manage what you can’t measure.”  In other words, Kefalas needs to measure the quality of my health care so that he can manage it for me and my family.  Thank Goodness!  I’ve been waiting for someone to take care of me and my children.  What a relief!

HB 1330, the All-Payer Database,  is dangerous because it creates a database with all your personal health care transactions.  It grants unlimited power to the state’s Executive Director of Health Care Policy and Financing to mandate the collection of any health care data, to conduct audits, to give the data to third parties without seeking permission and to impose unlimited fines for refusing to provide data to the database.

Just think…all your personal health care information forced to be made available to the state so it can “manage” it for you!

Independence Institute Health Care Policy Center Director Linda Gorman warns the state may have access to individual information on physical functioning, medical treatment, supposed mental stability, marital problems, family structure, sexual habits, addictions, adherence to government health recommendations, and individual financial arrangements.

Remember it’s for your own good.  How else can the state “manage” your health care for you?

Also troubling, transparency means citizens get to see inside government, and NOT the other way around.  Funny, some Democrat lawmakers were so worried about privacy issues when Rep BJ Nikkel presented her Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act that required the state to provide detailed spending information.  No such concern from them with HB 1330.

Check out Linda Gorman’s excellent analysis of the “Trojan Horse Transparency.”  Also call John Kefalas and thank him for being willing to “manage” your health care.

Regular readers know that I spent a good deal of time last spring in a fierce battle to save the Electoral College in Colorado.  Supporters of National Popular Vote, a.k.a. the Koza Scheme, including Senator Chris Romer and Representative Andy Kerr, almost got legislation through the General Assembly that would have rendered Colorado political impotent in presidential elections. Coloradans got wind of the disastrous plan and swamped lawmakers with phone calls and emails urging them to vote no on HB 09-1299.  Fortunately, good triumphed over paid lobbyists and the Electoral College survived.

So far in 2010, Save Our States has helped defeat National Popular Vote in Maine. Also our experts have visited Wisconsin and plan to testify in Alaska.  We have not seen NPV legislation thus far in Colorado but that doesn’t mean we won’t. Last year, it received late bill status meaning it was introduced after the regular deadline.  Please take time to educate yourself by visiting Save Our States.  Under the “STATES” tab, click on Colorado.  There you will some of my contributions.  This year we will be prepared — with Electoral College warriors.

Markey is a freshman democrat lawmaker from a conservative district (voter registration favors republicans by nearly10 percent) that voted for John McCain in 2008.  She is the first democrat to represent the 4th CD since Wayne Aspinall in 1973.  The Cook Political Report calls the 4th CD a “toss up” for 2010, which is why Markey has tried so hard recently to appear as a fiscal conservative.

Early in 2009 she voted for or supported unpopular legislation such as the stimulus package, card check, and cap and trade.  My friend and fellow blogger Randy Ketner did an excellent job of highlighting Markey’s short legislative tenure.  His lengthy “Colorado Political Analysis 2010” appeared on Red State.

It seems that Markey is reading the tea leaves, which are telling her to move to the right or at least look like she is moving to the right.  Recently Markey has voted “against” her party on both health care and raising the debt limit, but in reality she voted with party leadership on all procedural and amendment votes only voting against leadership on the final vote.  That way she can position herself as independent of the democrat leadership without upsetting them.

Take health care for instance. Markey says she voted against H.R. 3962 Affordable Health Care for America Act because she claimed it did not do enough to “cut health care costs that crushing our businesses and families.”  She claims to support health care reform just not this specific piece of legislation. 

If that is true, then why did she vote no on a motion to recommit the bill?  According to GovTrack, Markey voted no on House Vote #866 which was “a final opportunity to revise” it before passage.  A motion to recommit sends legislation back to committee with instructions on how to fix the bill.  It can be used constructively or can be used to kill a “bill before it moves to a final up-or-down vote in the House.”  If Markey is serious about health care reform but not this bill, why vote to move it along instead of fixing it in such a way that she can support it?

Another example of Markey voting with democrat party leadership on rules and procedures for unpopular legislation then voting against them on the final tally is H.J. Res. 45 to increase the statutory limit on public debt.  This one is interesting because 38 Democrats voted not to raise the debt limit, 22 are freshman lawmakers facing competitive races in the fall, 17 are Blue Dogs.  Of the 17 Blue Dogs, only four enabled party leadership with procedural votes that allowed the debt limit resolution to go to the floor of the House.  Markey was one of those four. 

Markey voted yes on Roll Call Vote #45, which ordered the question: “Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 45) increasing the statutory limit on the public debt.”  She then voted no on Roll Call Vote #46 on “agreeing” to an increase. 

Markey played the same game with H.R. 1106: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, which allows bankruptcy courts to modify mortgage contracts.  She enabled democrat leadership when she voted no to recommit and yes to proceed.  On the final vote she said no. 

These aren’t the only examples.  I’ll highlight more as we get closer to the November vote.

The 4th CD is the heart of Ag country in Colorado.  Weld County is the 8th largest Ag producing county in the United States.  While Congresswoman Markey can claim to be a fiscal conservative, our sensitive olfactory receptors can detect a load of manure when we smell it.

I get it.  Democrats are in charge in Colorado and therefore they can pass or defeat pretty much whatever legislation they want.  They do not need Republicans at all.  But just because they can doesn’t mean they should.

Tonight the Senate State, Veterans and Military Affairs defeated SB 51 along a party line vote.  This bill, sponsored by Senator Scott Renfroe and Representative Jerry Sonnenberg, would have eliminated the Governor’s authority to suspend or limit the sale, distribution and/or transportation of firearms during a time of state disaster emergency.  

This bill was designed to prevent the gun confiscation that occured in New Orleans right after Katrina.  So at a time when Coloradans will be most vulnerable, government can limit our ability to protect ourselves.  You can thank Democrat Senators Rollie Heath, Bob Bacon and Betty Boyd.

Not to be left out, House Democrats killed Representative Glenn Vaad’s excellent bill on priority based budgeting.  HB 1126 would have created a biennial priority-based budgeting process.  One way to kill a bill is to weigh it down with an unrealistic fiscal note.  That’s exactly what happened with Vaad’s bill.  According to legislative council, it would cost taxpayers roughly $350,000 over the next two years for the state to prioritize its budget.  The real question is how much does not prioritizing the budget cost Colorado taxpayers every year?

During the Long Term Fiscal Stability Commission meetings I learned that Colorado state statuted requires a zero-based budgeting process.  I was told by Democrat Representative Mark Ferrandino, a member of the Joint Budget Committee, that the process has been abandoned because it is “too hard.”

Of course, Ferrandino’s bill, HB 1119, which would require performance-based budgeting and strategic planning, has a fiscal note of a mere $25,000.  It passed out of committee just before Vaad’s was defeated.

Also killed, HB 1087 Republican Representative Spencer Swalm’s bill to change employer state income tax withholding from mandatory to voluntary. It was tagged with the most absurb fiscal note of nearly $19 million and over 60 FTEs over three years.  Although that may be cheaper and create more jobs than some stimulus projects. The fiscal note was so bad, Swalm said even some Republicans wouldn’t support his bill.

Barring a miraculous, last minute stay of execution, Representative Amy Stephen’s bill concerning transparency in gifts, grants and donations will be dead tomorrow.   It has NO cost to the state and would allow taxpayers to see what organizations are funding legislation and interim committees.  It is simply a good governance piece of legislation.  And chances are it won’t pass because Stephens is a Republican.

Democrats would be wise to remember that power is cyclical.

State Representative Amy Stephens  is trying to fix that. Her legislation, HB 1178 Transparency in the Use of Grant Moneys, is a simple fix that would require all gifts, grants and donations to be disclosed.  In other words if an organization wants to pay for a state program or an interim committee, taxpayers have a right to know.  It’s just good government.  According to Rep Stephens, the bill has been amended so there is NO cost to the state to provide the information.

Sadly, but predictably the State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee wants to kill the bill.  It’s been laid over until Thursday. If you want to call members and give them you want to know who and what are giving gifts, grants and donations to Colorado, I’ve provided member’s contact information below.   Also, below is a quick summary of Rep Stephen’s bill.

HB 1178

This bill directs any state agency that receives gifts, grants, and donations to make an annual report to the General Assembly. Beginning in 2011, the report will list each gift, grant, or donation received; its source and use; and its impact on the sustainability of certain programs.

Upon receipt of a gift, grant, or donation from a non-governmental entity, a state agency is to request a letter from the donor that specifies the amount, duration, purpose, and bill number, if applicable.

As of January 1, 2011, all bills that rely on gifts, grants, or donations for funding are to include a notice of funding provision. This provision directs a state agency to report to the Legislative Council when sufficient funding is received. Relevant portions of the bill may be repealed if funding is not received within 18 months. The Legislative Council is required to:

• keep a record of all bills passed during each legislative session that rely on gifts, grants,

• or donations;

• track gifts, grants, and donations received for any interim committee dependent on such

• funds to ensure sufficient funds are available; and

• track information from state agencies and make a report as of January 2013 on all bills

• that have not received adequate funding from gifts, grants, or donations, as required

• under the bill

State, Veterans and Military Affairs

Beth McCann, 303-866-2959, beth.mccann,house@state.co.us
Joe Miklosi, 303-866-2910, joe@joemiklosi.com
Carole Murray, 303-866-2948, murrayhouse45@gmail.com
BJ Nikkel, 303-866-2907, rep.nikkel@gmail.com
Mark Waller, 303-866-5525, mark.waller.house@state.co.us
Nancy Todd, 303-866-2919, nancy.todd.house@state.co.us
Jeanne Labuda, 303-866-2966, jeanne.labuda.house@state.co.us
Ed Casso, 303-866-2964, ed.casso.house@state.co.us
Lois Court, 303-866-2967, lois.court.house@state.co.us
Brian DelGrosso, 303-866-2947, brian@briandelgrosso.com
Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, 303-866-2915, dl.hullinghorst.house@state.co.us
Joe Miklosi, 303-866-2910, joe@joemiklosi.com
Carole Murray, 303-866-2948, murrayhouse45@gmail.com
BJ Nikkel, 303-866-2907, rep.nikkel@gmail.com
Mark Waller, 303-866-5525, mark.waller.house@state.co.us

Looks like the Eaton Fightin’ Reds mascot is safe — at least until my University Bulldogs beat the Fightin’ Reds in baseball this spring.

The first debate among Northern Colorado’s four congressional candidates is coming up Feb. 4, and we’re asking voters to submit some of the questions.

The debate will be from 7 to 8:30 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 4, at Windsor High School. The public is welcome to attend but if you can’t make it, the debate will be livestreamed on coloradoan.com and 9News.com.

Is there a question you’d like to see asked in the debate? If so, e-mail it to me at bmoore@coloradoan.com by Tuesday. I’ll forward the questions to Adam Schrager at 9 News, who will be the moderator of the debate.

We have just a couple of guidelines for the questions. Phrase the question so it can be asked of all four candidates, and include your name and hometown in the e-mail. We want to give proper credit to questions submitted by voters.

The four candidates appearing at the debate are Loveland businessman Dean Madere, University of Colorado Regent Tom Lucero, former Fort Collins City Council memberDiggs Brown and state Rep. Cory Gardner.

Also, KFKA will be airing the debate live. 

Typically, I’d simply laugh off SB 107 “Concerning the Use of American Indian Mascots By Public High Schools.”  But this ridiculous bill is dangerous.  It intends to legislate political correctness by requiring any public high school or charter school that

uses an American Indian mascot to either cease using the American Indian mascot or obtain approval for the continued use of the American Indian mascot or another American Indian mascot from the Colorado commission of Indian affairs…

If a public school doesn’t comply, the state will fine the school district $1000 each month.  The money goes into the state education fund.

The bill’s primary sponsor in the Senate is Suzanne Williams, who claims to be one quarter Comanche. Williams told the Denver Post  that 

she’s concerned with American Indian mascots that are caricatures — ‘with a funny nose or something’ — and wants communities to have a ‘healthy dialogue about their heritage.

What Williams and the other misguided legislators sponsoring this bill (see list below) don’t know is that the Fightin’ Reds mascot, described as “an Indian with a misshapen nose, eagle feather and loincloth” is a symbol of pride and instills fear in the hearts of their opponents.  Yes Eaton is that good.

The legislators sponsoring this legislation should be ashamed of themselves.  First, the state faces much more pressing issues such as how to close a billion dollar budget shortfall.  State Senator Scott Renfroe, a former Eaton School Board member and an Eaton Red himself, explained ”It’s such an overreach in a year when we are faced with budget challenges.”

This bill is a classic example of why legislators should not be granted five bill titles.  It’s a waste of time.  Legislators look ridiculous spending time arguing high school mascots when our state unemployment rate just increased six-tenths of one percent to 7.5 percent. 

Second, legislating morality and political correctness are non-starters and divisive.  Third, the school district mascot is something the Eaton community should decide.  SB 107 abuses local control. 

My suspicion is that this ridiculous piece of legislation at least will pass out of the Senate Education committee, where it has been assigned, because four of the Senate sponsors are members of the committee.

As long as legislators threaten one of our own in Northern Colorado, I will be a Fightin’ Red. Consider joining me or join one of the several other rural Colorado high schools – Yuma, Lamar, Montrose — caught up in Denver’s moral righteousness.

But come baseball season, I hope my Bulldogs rip the Reds to pieces!  Go Bulldogs!

Sponsors of SB 107 and their contact information:

Senator Bob Bacon, 303-866-4841, bob.bacon.senate@state.co.us

Senator Rollie Heath, 303-866-4872, rollie.heath.senate@state.co.us

Senator Nancy Spence, 303-866-4883, nancyspence@qwest.net

Senator Pat Steadman, 303-866-4861, sen.steadman@comcast.net

Senator Abel Tapia, 303-866-4878, abel.tapia.senate@state.co.us

Senator Suzanne Williams, 303-866-3432, suzanne.williams.senate@state.co.us

Representative Mike Merrifield, 303-866-2932, michael.merrifield.house@state.co.us

Representative Su Ryden, 303-866-2942, su.ryden.house@state.co.us

Representative Sue Schafer, 303-866-5522, sue.schafer.house@state.co.us

Representative Judy Solano, 303-866-2918, judy.solano.house@state.co.us

Representative Nancy Todd, 303-866-2919, nancy.todd.house@state.co.us

The bad news is that the district provides no context for or description of the expenditures.  When I, as a taxpayer, must spend an entire afternoon trying to figure out why the district wrote hundreds and hundreds of checks, that is only partial transparency.  Then I am left to speculate how all these expenditures improve student achievement and graduation rates.

The district appears to have spent a significant amount of money ranging from thousands to hundreds of thousands on various educational programs, management and IT consultants including Windsor Management Group, Ashlock Consulting, Alpine Achievement, Edison Learning, Didax, Avid, Raising a Reader, Educational Based Services, Dell Marketing, Sage Management, Greeley Dream Team, Pearson Assessments, Gallup Organizations, and Productive Offices and School Environment — just to name a few.

One check of interest was for $21,134.16 to Corporate Environments.  The company’s Web site (if I found the correct one) says it was founded

to meet the growing demand for state-of-the-art workplace furniture that not only enhances our client’s image, but increases efficiency and healthful productivity.

Exactly how does this help student achievement?

UPDATE:  Corporate Environments turned out to be a company out of Lakewood, CO, a division of Office Liquidators, which provides new and used office furniture.

Also discovered: more than $30,000 of taxpayer dollars to Colorado Association of School Boards, $1800 to the Colorado Eagles, and more than $7200 to various pizza establishments (some of this may be for fundraising but there is no way to tell from the information provided).

I give District 6 credit for taking steps towards providing more information.  Taxpayers should review the check registry, ask questions and demand more transparency.  Check out the Jefferson County School District for a fabulous transparency Web site that seems sincere in its attempt to provide taxpayers with information about how Jeffco spends taxpayer dollars.

I am sending a Colorado Opens Records Act (CORA) request to the school district to explain the reasons for some of these expenditures.  I’ll keep you posted.