Paul Lundeen: Amendment 66 is Not About the Students

Today the Wall Street Journal editorial board adds its voice to the chorus. As published on October 24, 2013 in Colorado Peak Politics, the Wall Street Journal exposes the rouse behind Amendment 66:

Unions know that money is fungible, so a tax increase earmarked for education means that other revenue can be used to delay reform in the state’s badly underfunded public teacher pension plan. Funding for Medicaid, roads and other state priorities won’t decrease, so earmarking more for education would increase pressure for another tax increase. It’s no accident that Amendment 66 states that “all tax revenues attributable to this measure to be collected and spent without future voter approval.”

ColoradoPeakPolitics listed the points that the Post missed that the Journal understood:

  • Amendment 66 is an end-run around taxation restraint (TABOR).
  • The slippery slope of increased taxes that are sure to follow.
  • This tax makes Colorado less competitive as compared to its tax-friendly neighbors.
  • The negative impact on small businesses, 92% of which are taxed at the individual rate.
  • That this will certainly be a PERA-backfill, at least at the district level.
  • The lack of education reform contained in this dangerous bill.
  • The unfair routing of education funds into Denver to the detriment of the rest of Colorado.
  • The lack of correlation between increased funding and better outcomes.

- See more at:

Posted on October 24, 2013 .