The following opinion (adjusted for accuracy here) was published in the Denver Herald Dispatch, a weekly newspaper local to Southwest Denver, in the September 27, 2005, issue. Bob Sweeney is the publisher of this newspaper, and posted his opinion the prior week that because Governor Bill Owens was for the referenda, we should be, too. Sweeney reminds us that Owens was State Treasurer for two terms prior to becoming governor. He also stated that "[m]ost of the proposed money will go to schools, health care issues and highways," and that the two GOP contenders for the next term's governorship are against it, but without any solutions to the contrary. ------------

Opinion: No on C & D. Why? CAFR.

Dear editor,

I am afraid I simply must disagree with Mr Sweeney in his support of Amendments C & D, for reasons beside his statement that they don't deserve "heated discussion." I can also give him reasons in support of this position, unlike the conservative posers, Beauprez and Holtzman, whom he states had none.

As a side point, don't forget America was founded on debate and heated discussion. It is among the healthiest and greatest gifts we inherit from our founding fathers. And above all, never let anyone tell you you must never criticize the government or those who support it. To believe that IS un-American. Please just try to be informed about your position.

First of all, let me say that Mr. Sweeney's well-worn yarn of "schools, health and highways" have overstayed their welcome with me as important institutions we all MUST rally behind. Unfortunately, if we were to simplify and turn it to mental pablum as Mr. Sweeney does in his editorial, and as so often is the case with media, we will never learn the real story behind any of these bureaucratic nightmares, either collectively or individually.

I have already written one draft of this letter, and it became obvious that if I addressed schools, health care and highways individually with even a little bit of detail, that this letter was over 2,000 words--much too big for this section. The bottom line is these issues are not sound bytes. In order to have an intelligent discussion, there must be better education, which neither we got nor our children are getting in public school. Therefore, I choose to get to the heart of the issue: money, of course.

Because most people do not have a financial background, or perhaps if they do, no good institutionalized learning about this, we continue to buy in wholeheartedly to the notion that our income taxes, or at least our property taxes, pay for the schools, elder health care, roads and bridges we need for our cultural and physical survival.

Here's a simple example of what I am about to discuss below: imagine you make $100 a week at work, but you only have a $20 per week budget for all the expenses of you and your wife; therefore, you only tell your wife that you make $20 a week. Let's say, then, that suddenly your budget grows to $25 per week. "Oh no," your wife cries, "we can't afford this! I'll have to get a job!" Meanwhile, you still don't tell her about the other $80 per week, so you are doing whatever with the rest, while your wife goes out to get a $5/week job.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are the wife in this example. We are not being told the whole story about what our husband (i.e., any given government entity) really has, let alone what kinds of returns he may have made gambling or investing, or that he's simply blowing, that money.

There is a document out there that we all need to order for FREE from the Colorado State Comptroller's office: the "Comprehensive Annual Financial Report," or "CAFR," as it is known. You can order one for each year you want to compare, if you wish.

"What's the big deal?" you ask? The fact is that what is held within their pages is not required by law to be reported to you or me as part of the "budget." These items include institutional investments, but usually not the return on those investments, or the revenue (or profits) overall.

What this means is that there are TRILLIONS of dollars not being reported to you, the American, Colorado, county, city in which you reside citizen, the rightful owner of this money. Every level of government has these, folks. Every level is snowing you. The budget is only part of the story. There is money tucked away from prying public eyes by every institution you want to name.

Take, for example, the battle a while back between CU and Governor Owens on the need for tuition hikes. Owens, conservative stalwart that he is (he supports C & D, right?) said hikes weren't necessary, while CU Regents argued in favor. What neither "side" discussed, however, was the fact that, according to Colorado's 2004 CAFR, as of June 30, 2004, the University of Colorado Foundation held "$247.9 million of domestic equity securities, $86.6 million of international equity securities, $99.2 million of fixed income securities, and $175.1 million of alternative investments including real estate, private equities, hedge funds, and oil and gas assets."

The way government entities cite budget shortfalls is an accounting trick that most people would not be privy to and that is how they justify tuition and tax hikes. The result of the theater between Owens and CU was that the students lost, though CU held enough assets, never mind the profit on all those investments, to send every Colorado student for the rest of time to school for FREE. This is not some crackpot socialized/socialist jackpot--this money is yours.

The higher the level of government, the larger the "tax base," the bigger the numbers. And these cited numbers were JUST FOR CU. Get the CAFR and see how much your favorite state university or the government itself has in cream that it can use to pay for schools, health care, and paving all streets in the state without having to charge taxes ever again.

Oh, and don't bother going crying to your state representatives, because they already get a copy of it. So do many of the major news media (including NBC, CBS, and ABC), every CEO of every major corporation in the state, and most major newspapers. On second thought, write your own editorials, call up your state, local, and national representatives and scream bloody murder in his/her ear about this. Something might start getting done besides extortion against us.

Which finally brings us to Amendments C and D. Do you really believe, after all this information about CAFR, that you should trust the government to take what pittance they would deign to refund you--the result of a "surplus" (which is only budgetary--there are BILLIONS in reality) and "promise" to give it back to you after 5 or so years? Do you really think that after they have already lied to you that such a surplus is as low as they make it appear?

Let me ask you something else: do you have enough money? The answer is no, you always want more. So does the government, which uses the bully-pulpit in the form of the governorship in our case, to beat us about the head and shoulders with such piteous pleas.

Why do they not just take it without our consent? Because they have to continue to keep up the appearance of government by the People, for the People. That's what TABOR was for; what Amendments C & D seek to dismantle. Vote no on C & D. It's bigger than that, but we'll get our message out, too.