Today Colorado's congressional delegation came to the capitol to meet with state legislators. Markey and Salazar were not there. The senators sent representatives from their offices as the senate is in session. These meetings are a good idea. I'd say essential. I hope we do it more, and I told them as much.
I asked them about their thoughts on proposing amendments to the constitution specifically for the purpose of restraining the expansion of federal power as it relates to the role of the states; to restore the proper balance in our federal system. I explained in so many words my view that many citizens feel the role of the states has been undermined by the federal government, and that the tenth amendment is largely being ignored. I pointed out that this has been happening under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
I suggested states are becoming little more than administrative outposts of the federal government. I went on to make the point that this is not the original intent of the founders who designed the federal system to function with more tension between the states and the federal government, each having its own proper roles and proper powers. The state's role is fading and the fed's is growing. This should not be so.
Reps Coffman and Lamborn both indicated that a convention is fraught with risk (they are certainly right about that), but they both supported a balanced budget amendment to the constitution which would be a major step in putting a check on the expansion of Washington's excessive power.
Rep. DeGette took exception to Coffman and Lamborn's excoriation of the big spending spending habits of the federal government. She seemed to indicate that congress' big spending had more to do with the war than on any inherent spending problem congress may have. Uh, OK.
Rep. Polis didn't respond.
Rep. Perlmutter asked for examples of federal power grabs. The chair didn't give me a chance to respond. So I'll be sending Rep. Permutter a letter. It will be lengthy. To his credit, he'll likely read it and respond. To his great discredit, for him to even make this request implies that examples of this are anything less than self-evident to nearly everyone. To me, his request also insinuates that the majority of people actually believe congress is behaving with fiscal restraint. I'm quite certain this is not the case. But, he is a supporter of Obamacare after all.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
The end of Welfare Reform as we Know it?
The question comes up because Friday I led a floor fight against SB 68, a bill that eliminates the asset test for a program that provides cash assistance to the needy.
There are two key financial tests that case workers apply when processing an application:
1) How much income do you have?
2) What assets do you have?
Makes sense. Why would we we have a policy of giving taxpayer funded benefits to someone who had a high income or assets they could simply convert to cash and thus take care of their own obligations?
But the bill eliminates this asset test. Colorado will be one of just a handful to make this unwise move.
If there is no asset test, then people who are caught in a cash crunch -- but who have other assets like savings accounts, CDs, RVs, homes, etc. that could be made liquid in order to handle their own obligations -- will be able to access taxpayer provided benefits. The asset test that was eliminated in SB 68 was set at $15,000. Now there is no upper limit on assets at all!
The bill's sponsor told me in Appropriations committee that we should encourage people to keep their savings in place and tap into this (using my words now) "free pot of money." After all, if they had school plans in mind, why should they have to use their money when they could use ours? She explained to me that this is an incentive for people to find work and go to school. Oh really? Isn't the incentive just the opposite?
Anyway, let's all keep something in mind: the government can't give benefits to someone without first taking money from someone else.
Doesn't it make sense, then, to insist that the government should only provide a basic safety net to those are truly unable to do so on their own?
We all have compassion for those who are caught in hard times. Many of us have experienced them ourselves. But maybe you believe, like Reagan did and I do, that our compassion must also extend to the taxpayer who is putting his or her dreams on hold to help pay for things that the government wants to provide for people who are perfectly able to provide for on their own.
In the end, the absolute last thing I want to see come out of this tough economy is a generation of people who learn to be less self reliant, and more dependent upon their government. That's not only not good for people's psyches, it's not good for America.
There are two key financial tests that case workers apply when processing an application:
1) How much income do you have?
2) What assets do you have?
Makes sense. Why would we we have a policy of giving taxpayer funded benefits to someone who had a high income or assets they could simply convert to cash and thus take care of their own obligations?
But the bill eliminates this asset test. Colorado will be one of just a handful to make this unwise move.
If there is no asset test, then people who are caught in a cash crunch -- but who have other assets like savings accounts, CDs, RVs, homes, etc. that could be made liquid in order to handle their own obligations -- will be able to access taxpayer provided benefits. The asset test that was eliminated in SB 68 was set at $15,000. Now there is no upper limit on assets at all!
The bill's sponsor told me in Appropriations committee that we should encourage people to keep their savings in place and tap into this (using my words now) "free pot of money." After all, if they had school plans in mind, why should they have to use their money when they could use ours? She explained to me that this is an incentive for people to find work and go to school. Oh really? Isn't the incentive just the opposite?
Anyway, let's all keep something in mind: the government can't give benefits to someone without first taking money from someone else.
Doesn't it make sense, then, to insist that the government should only provide a basic safety net to those are truly unable to do so on their own?
We all have compassion for those who are caught in hard times. Many of us have experienced them ourselves. But maybe you believe, like Reagan did and I do, that our compassion must also extend to the taxpayer who is putting his or her dreams on hold to help pay for things that the government wants to provide for people who are perfectly able to provide for on their own.
In the end, the absolute last thing I want to see come out of this tough economy is a generation of people who learn to be less self reliant, and more dependent upon their government. That's not only not good for people's psyches, it's not good for America.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Nanny Alert
Rep. Kefalas (D-Ft. Collins) and Sen Bacon (D-Ft. Collins) are sponsoring legislation to replace parental decision-making with the prudential wisdom of the state regarding keeping our children safe. Under HB 1147 as introduced, children under 18 would be required to wear a helmet while using any non-motorized wheeled transportation. This could even include your toddler riding in a shopping cart.
But don't worry, parents are given wide discretion. They can choose to let their kids use wagons or trailers (bike trailers?) without helmets as there are never accidents with either of those.
Under the bill, my two-year old, who loves the race car shopping carts at Home Depot, would need a helmet, as it's not pulled, but pushed. No kidding, see the bill language below:
(b) (I) "NONMOTORIZED WHEELED TRANSPORTATION" MEANS ANY
10 VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT INTENDED FOR USE ON PUBLIC STREETS AND
11 PREMISES OPEN TO THE PUBLIC THAT IS DESIGNED TO BE PROPELLED
12 ENTIRELY OR PARTLY BY HUMAN POWER PRIMARILY FOR THE PURPOSE OF
13 TRANSPORTING ONE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS AND THAT ROLLS ON WHEELS
14 INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, A BICYCLE, SCOOTER, SKATEBOARD, OR
15 IN-LINE SKATES. "NONMOTORIZED WHEELED TRANSPORTATION" DOES NOT
16 INCLUDE A WAGON, A TRAILER, OR ANY OTHER VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT
17 THAT IS PRIMARILY DESIGNED TO BE TOWED OR PULLED BY AN INDIVIDUAL
18 OR BY ANY OTHER VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT.
Apparently pulling (except trailers and wagons) is less safe than pushing.
The bill was partially gutted in committee. Now, it just requires the Transportation Department, the Department of Education and the Department of Public Safety to collaborate on a cradle to 12th grade education program to scold kids and parents about helmet use.
Fortunately, their attempts to centrally control the economy by raising taxes and spending more during a recession have proven so successful, that they can now focus the attention of this government on helping you run your household.
But don't worry, parents are given wide discretion. They can choose to let their kids use wagons or trailers (bike trailers?) without helmets as there are never accidents with either of those.
Under the bill, my two-year old, who loves the race car shopping carts at Home Depot, would need a helmet, as it's not pulled, but pushed. No kidding, see the bill language below:
(b) (I) "NONMOTORIZED WHEELED TRANSPORTATION" MEANS ANY
10 VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT INTENDED FOR USE ON PUBLIC STREETS AND
11 PREMISES OPEN TO THE PUBLIC THAT IS DESIGNED TO BE PROPELLED
12 ENTIRELY OR PARTLY BY HUMAN POWER PRIMARILY FOR THE PURPOSE OF
13 TRANSPORTING ONE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS AND THAT ROLLS ON WHEELS
14 INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, A BICYCLE, SCOOTER, SKATEBOARD, OR
15 IN-LINE SKATES. "NONMOTORIZED WHEELED TRANSPORTATION" DOES NOT
16 INCLUDE A WAGON, A TRAILER, OR ANY OTHER VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT
17 THAT IS PRIMARILY DESIGNED TO BE TOWED OR PULLED BY AN INDIVIDUAL
18 OR BY ANY OTHER VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT.
Apparently pulling (except trailers and wagons) is less safe than pushing.
The bill was partially gutted in committee. Now, it just requires the Transportation Department, the Department of Education and the Department of Public Safety to collaborate on a cradle to 12th grade education program to scold kids and parents about helmet use.
Fortunately, their attempts to centrally control the economy by raising taxes and spending more during a recession have proven so successful, that they can now focus the attention of this government on helping you run your household.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
SB- 109 Regulation of Physician-Patient Relationship for Medical Marijuana Patients
Last week, the Senate passed Senate Bill 109, to modify medical marijuana dispensary practices and try to align the current marijuana statutes with the state constitution. This bill regulates the practices of physicians in authorizing individuals for medical marijuana. Physicians are required to have an authentic relationship with their patients, possess a record-keeping system for all qualified patients, provide post-care treatment after prescribing medical marijuana, and must have a doctorate of medicine from an accredited medical school. Physicians are prohibited from accepting payment from medical marijuana dispensaries and cannot give a discount for using a particular dispensary. Additionally, Senate Bill 109 increases the qualification requirements for access to medical marijuana by creating a review board, which determines if those under the age of 21 are eligible to register.
This bill is a step in the right direction for controlling the marijuana mess that has gripped Colorado. However, while Senate Bill 109 brings much-needed regulation to the doctor patient relationship, it did not confront the broader range of much needed marijuana regulation that will help to end the flagrant abuse of the Colorado law. Stay tuned…
This bill is a step in the right direction for controlling the marijuana mess that has gripped Colorado. However, while Senate Bill 109 brings much-needed regulation to the doctor patient relationship, it did not confront the broader range of much needed marijuana regulation that will help to end the flagrant abuse of the Colorado law. Stay tuned…
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Ritter's SOS: Partisan, Shrill, Revisionist
The Governor just delivered his final state of the state address. It was at times, surprisingly shrill and partisan. The whole of it had a revisionist undercurrent. One might think he would presage his forthcoming exit from the mansion this year with more grace, modest acknowledgment of the role Republicans have played in driving good state policies, and a more forthright telling of his fabled Colorado Promise.
At roughly the address' midway point, he went out of his way to bash his predecessor's legacy. He went on to cite what he implied has been a far reaching -- but in truth has been a far fetched -- job creation super nova in his energy policy. In this vein, he made no small pretense that he has been a strong friend and ally of the state's oil and gas industry -- even while his drilling rules have clearly reduced the industry's economic incentive for staying in the state to produce more high paying in the first place.
What took the cake though, was that he feigned regard for leaner government! This on the heels of three years of adding thousands of new state employees to the payroll paid for in part by a multitude of slick budgeting gimmicks. And despite the feel good veneer that he was quick to apply over his party's economic mismanagement, many Coloradans watching today haven't forgotten that he and his party drove the steamroller just last year that crushed our state's spending limitation, while at the same time passing last year's wildly unpopular car tax.
At roughly the address' midway point, he went out of his way to bash his predecessor's legacy. He went on to cite what he implied has been a far reaching -- but in truth has been a far fetched -- job creation super nova in his energy policy. In this vein, he made no small pretense that he has been a strong friend and ally of the state's oil and gas industry -- even while his drilling rules have clearly reduced the industry's economic incentive for staying in the state to produce more high paying in the first place.
What took the cake though, was that he feigned regard for leaner government! This on the heels of three years of adding thousands of new state employees to the payroll paid for in part by a multitude of slick budgeting gimmicks. And despite the feel good veneer that he was quick to apply over his party's economic mismanagement, many Coloradans watching today haven't forgotten that he and his party drove the steamroller just last year that crushed our state's spending limitation, while at the same time passing last year's wildly unpopular car tax.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Ritter 180 on State Budget Problems
Sen Harvey wrote an exceptional op ed on the state of play with Colorado's reluctant-to-lead Governor and his budget bungling the past two years. Here it is:
Bill Ritter 180
The day has come. The numbers are in. With only one week remaining in the 08/09 fiscal year, the Colorado budget is $250 million in the red. Once again Governor Ritter and the Democrat legislative leadership misjudged the depth of our economic downturn.
Despite Republican warnings and objections during the last legislative session, the Democrats chose to approve the largest budget in state history. At a time when small businesses were cutting budgets, reducing expenses, laying off staff or closing their doors altogether, the Democrat legislature grew the Colorado budget by 4% more than the previous year and hired 250 new employees.
While Colorado families were struggling through these tough economic times, the Democrats increased taxes and fees on all Coloradoans by $1 billion, raided the state's trust funds and emergency reserves - and even tried unsuccessfully to seize $500 million in assets from the Pinnacol Assurance Company, Colorado's largest provider of workers compensation insurance. They also took advantage of their majority to remove the 6% spending cap that has controlled government growth for over three decades - a mechanism that has protected Colorado from the kind of out-of-control spending that has pushed states like California to the brink of bankruptcy.
Adding insult to injury, last month the Democrats handed out $30,000 in staff bonuses and spent nearly $4,000 in public funds on a "team-building" retreat. The 2009 legislative session was a prime example of unchecked Democrat power on parade. When actual revenues came in $250 million short of expectations, one would have expected Colorado taxpayers to receive an apology from the Governor and the Democrat leadership for their fiscal mismanagement.
Sadly, there were no apologies. Instead, taxpayers were treated to another serving of the Democrats' brand of faith-based budgeting. On the day the actual budget numbers came out, the Governor held a press conference explaining that the state would balance the $250 million shortfall by utilizing federal stimulus funding and pushing off payment of the state's payroll from June 30 (the last day of 2008-2009 fiscal year), until July 1 (the first day of the new fiscal year). Of course the only thing this did was add $250 million to the already anticipated $140 million shortfall for the new fiscal year-making the state $390 million in the hole from day one!
This was simply Enron bookkeeping to avoid making the tough choices and leaving Colorado taxpayers to pick up the tab. The Governor then rebuffed any media questions regarding an immediate special legislative session to balance our growing deficit. He continued to insist that the problem could wait until the legislature reconvened in January.
Unfortunately, the Governor failed to admit that delaying for another six months until the start of the 2010 session would only magnify the impact any impending cuts would have on the state budget. Sadly, the Democrat legislative response was no better. The only suggestion from the Chairman of the Joint Budget Committee was to extend a property tax increase on senior citizens for another year, and remove tax credits from business owners.
The truth is, on the Day of Reckoning, when the actual budget numbers came out, our Colorado Democrat leadership revealed their true soul and proved once and for all that they were incapable of cutting even one government service or one state employee. Predictably, the public was outraged. The lack of Democrat leadership was undeniable.
Faced with an economic reality and voter rebellion, Governor Ritter quickly realized that it was time for government to tighten its belt.On Thursday, only two days after his initial response, the Governor held another press conference...one that I have dubbed "Bill Ritter 180."
Surprisingly, he announced what Republicans had been demanding for over two years, that he was directing each of his department heads to review their budgets and cut 10% across the board. Hallelujah, the leader of our state finally showed leadership! And may God bless him for it. He may have just saved our great state from following California's lead...straight off the cliff.
Indeed it has been our Republican legislators who have led the charge for fiscal sanity over the last 24 months while pushing for across-the-board cuts...but this week we must give credit to whom credit is due. Bill Ritter has finally taken a stand and come out against many members of his own party. Good for him and good for Colorado!
For more information on Senator Ted Harvey please visit his website at www.tedharvey.com
Bill Ritter 180
The day has come. The numbers are in. With only one week remaining in the 08/09 fiscal year, the Colorado budget is $250 million in the red. Once again Governor Ritter and the Democrat legislative leadership misjudged the depth of our economic downturn.
Despite Republican warnings and objections during the last legislative session, the Democrats chose to approve the largest budget in state history. At a time when small businesses were cutting budgets, reducing expenses, laying off staff or closing their doors altogether, the Democrat legislature grew the Colorado budget by 4% more than the previous year and hired 250 new employees.
While Colorado families were struggling through these tough economic times, the Democrats increased taxes and fees on all Coloradoans by $1 billion, raided the state's trust funds and emergency reserves - and even tried unsuccessfully to seize $500 million in assets from the Pinnacol Assurance Company, Colorado's largest provider of workers compensation insurance. They also took advantage of their majority to remove the 6% spending cap that has controlled government growth for over three decades - a mechanism that has protected Colorado from the kind of out-of-control spending that has pushed states like California to the brink of bankruptcy.
Adding insult to injury, last month the Democrats handed out $30,000 in staff bonuses and spent nearly $4,000 in public funds on a "team-building" retreat. The 2009 legislative session was a prime example of unchecked Democrat power on parade. When actual revenues came in $250 million short of expectations, one would have expected Colorado taxpayers to receive an apology from the Governor and the Democrat leadership for their fiscal mismanagement.
Sadly, there were no apologies. Instead, taxpayers were treated to another serving of the Democrats' brand of faith-based budgeting. On the day the actual budget numbers came out, the Governor held a press conference explaining that the state would balance the $250 million shortfall by utilizing federal stimulus funding and pushing off payment of the state's payroll from June 30 (the last day of 2008-2009 fiscal year), until July 1 (the first day of the new fiscal year). Of course the only thing this did was add $250 million to the already anticipated $140 million shortfall for the new fiscal year-making the state $390 million in the hole from day one!
This was simply Enron bookkeeping to avoid making the tough choices and leaving Colorado taxpayers to pick up the tab. The Governor then rebuffed any media questions regarding an immediate special legislative session to balance our growing deficit. He continued to insist that the problem could wait until the legislature reconvened in January.
Unfortunately, the Governor failed to admit that delaying for another six months until the start of the 2010 session would only magnify the impact any impending cuts would have on the state budget. Sadly, the Democrat legislative response was no better. The only suggestion from the Chairman of the Joint Budget Committee was to extend a property tax increase on senior citizens for another year, and remove tax credits from business owners.
The truth is, on the Day of Reckoning, when the actual budget numbers came out, our Colorado Democrat leadership revealed their true soul and proved once and for all that they were incapable of cutting even one government service or one state employee. Predictably, the public was outraged. The lack of Democrat leadership was undeniable.
Faced with an economic reality and voter rebellion, Governor Ritter quickly realized that it was time for government to tighten its belt.On Thursday, only two days after his initial response, the Governor held another press conference...one that I have dubbed "Bill Ritter 180."
Surprisingly, he announced what Republicans had been demanding for over two years, that he was directing each of his department heads to review their budgets and cut 10% across the board. Hallelujah, the leader of our state finally showed leadership! And may God bless him for it. He may have just saved our great state from following California's lead...straight off the cliff.
Indeed it has been our Republican legislators who have led the charge for fiscal sanity over the last 24 months while pushing for across-the-board cuts...but this week we must give credit to whom credit is due. Bill Ritter has finally taken a stand and come out against many members of his own party. Good for him and good for Colorado!
For more information on Senator Ted Harvey please visit his website at www.tedharvey.com
Friday, May 1, 2009
Nearing the Finish Line
As the session winds down, several things came together in what turned out to be a pretty productive week:
State Checkbook will be online soon! HB1288 on its way: We are one step closer to having the state’s checkbook placed online in a searchable format. The story is here.
SJM 8 on Cap and Trade: On Monday I presented legislation that urged congress to reject a cap and trade scheme for the purpose of minimizing carbon production. The impacts of cap and trade legislation will be staggering if it is adopted. Even by EPA estimates, it will result in millions of lost jobs which will be reflected in a multi-trillion dollar hit to our nation’s GDP by the time of full implementation.
While an incredible and constantly growing body of scientific evidence points away from man-caused global warming, my point of attack was not climate, but economics. And that is where most Americans want elected leaders to focus. According to a Pew survey released earlier in the year, Americans view global warming as the least important issue among 20 major issues including everything from immigration and trade policy to Social Security and crime. Not surprisingly, the economy was their number one issue, and the issue I was highlighting.
The truth is, passing policies that hurt our prosperity in such profound ways would have a nasty ripple effect throughout the whole economy. And limiting the ability of Americans to be prosperous and pursue the American Dream doesn’t just have financial consequences. It would have a chilling effect on the full enjoyment of our unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness.
Outlawing BZP, HB 1157: BZP is a dangerous drug generally considered to be a party drug. The federal government classifies it in the same category as the worst drugs available. Rep. Waller and I are creating a new felony offense for possession of BZP which is often considered as ecstasy light to party goers. The bill will be heard by the full senate Monday. Here’s more: http://www.coloradosenatenews.com/content/view/1018/26/ The Denver Daily News reported on it here.
Eliminating the Electoral College bill is dead: HB 1299
After languishing on the senate calendar for about a month, the bill to dismantle the electoral college and go to a straight popular vote in Colorado -- and to join a gaggle of other states doing the same thing -- died for lack of support. The bill sponsor went to the mic and asked for a no vote. Earlier in the week, this bill caused some real fireworks when I made a procedural motion that would have temporarily killed it. Sometimes the majority just needs to be reminded that we are not giving up ground without a fight. The story is on the Post’s website here.
In short, bills like this strike a blow against federalism and virtually guarantee that smaller states like Colorado would become less meaningful in the national system. In some ways, it could be analogous to taking away two US Senators, and being left with just a state’s house members. It’s an irresponsible move for Colorado lawmakers to make, for it weakens our electoral significance and in all reality, could dampen our ability to secure appropriations when other more influential players are after the same taxpayer funds.
G.I. Promise Act for Colorado Vets Passes the Senate: HB1039
After a very long tortured path, the bill granting in-state tuition to honorably discharged veterans finally passed its final vote in the senate today. Now, once the house agrees to senate amendments (I’m told they will) it will go to the Governor’s desk for action. There’s a great story in today’s Colorado Springs Gazette here.
State Checkbook will be online soon! HB1288 on its way: We are one step closer to having the state’s checkbook placed online in a searchable format. The story is here.
SJM 8 on Cap and Trade: On Monday I presented legislation that urged congress to reject a cap and trade scheme for the purpose of minimizing carbon production. The impacts of cap and trade legislation will be staggering if it is adopted. Even by EPA estimates, it will result in millions of lost jobs which will be reflected in a multi-trillion dollar hit to our nation’s GDP by the time of full implementation.
While an incredible and constantly growing body of scientific evidence points away from man-caused global warming, my point of attack was not climate, but economics. And that is where most Americans want elected leaders to focus. According to a Pew survey released earlier in the year, Americans view global warming as the least important issue among 20 major issues including everything from immigration and trade policy to Social Security and crime. Not surprisingly, the economy was their number one issue, and the issue I was highlighting.
The truth is, passing policies that hurt our prosperity in such profound ways would have a nasty ripple effect throughout the whole economy. And limiting the ability of Americans to be prosperous and pursue the American Dream doesn’t just have financial consequences. It would have a chilling effect on the full enjoyment of our unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness.
Outlawing BZP, HB 1157: BZP is a dangerous drug generally considered to be a party drug. The federal government classifies it in the same category as the worst drugs available. Rep. Waller and I are creating a new felony offense for possession of BZP which is often considered as ecstasy light to party goers. The bill will be heard by the full senate Monday. Here’s more: http://www.coloradosenatenews.com/content/view/1018/26/ The Denver Daily News reported on it here.
Eliminating the Electoral College bill is dead: HB 1299
After languishing on the senate calendar for about a month, the bill to dismantle the electoral college and go to a straight popular vote in Colorado -- and to join a gaggle of other states doing the same thing -- died for lack of support. The bill sponsor went to the mic and asked for a no vote. Earlier in the week, this bill caused some real fireworks when I made a procedural motion that would have temporarily killed it. Sometimes the majority just needs to be reminded that we are not giving up ground without a fight. The story is on the Post’s website here.
In short, bills like this strike a blow against federalism and virtually guarantee that smaller states like Colorado would become less meaningful in the national system. In some ways, it could be analogous to taking away two US Senators, and being left with just a state’s house members. It’s an irresponsible move for Colorado lawmakers to make, for it weakens our electoral significance and in all reality, could dampen our ability to secure appropriations when other more influential players are after the same taxpayer funds.
G.I. Promise Act for Colorado Vets Passes the Senate: HB1039
After a very long tortured path, the bill granting in-state tuition to honorably discharged veterans finally passed its final vote in the senate today. Now, once the house agrees to senate amendments (I’m told they will) it will go to the Governor’s desk for action. There’s a great story in today’s Colorado Springs Gazette here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
