Liberty Tracker commentary and documents

Tools you can use

This analysis was provided by Michael Brown, KHOW AM630 Talk Show Host:
This is a Democrat-produced summary of their legislative objectives for Gun Control:
February 1, 2013

What difference does it make?  Is there a difference?

By Cicero Republicus
Libertarian enthusiasts in Colorado often complain that there is no real difference between Republicans and Democrats. Maybe they should take ten minutes to look at the bills being sponsored and pushed by the two parties in the 2013 session of the General Assembly.
Democrat bills in the 69th General Assembly attempt to pick winner and losers in the economy -- HB1001, HB1002, and HB1003-- and to tell businesses how to hire the best employees--SB018.. Republicans want to reduce regulations and taxes for all businesses -- HB1019 and SB030. Democrats want to control what guns law-abiding citizens can own, and Republicans want to empower citizens to protect themselves and their loved ones. Democrats want to expand Medicaid coverage at add $850 mllion to the sate's expenditures over the next ten years, knowing this will necessitate a huge tax increase. Republicans oppose such irresponsible actions.
Libertarian utopians ought to compare the Colorado United Taxpayers' legislative scorecards for all Republcans in 2011-2012 against the average scores for all Democrats. That paints a picture: Republicans aren't perfect, and there are rogue elephants for sure, but as a group, they are paragons of fiscal retsraint compared to their Democrat colleagues.

February 8, 2013

Does anyone really care about the First Amendment?

by Cicero Republicus


Supposedly, Americans of all political persuasions worship the Bill of Rights and especially the First Amendment. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion—they are sacred pillars of the republic, right?

Well, if we look at Friday’s vote on SB11 on the floor of the Colorado Senate, that pillar seems to be cracking.

Senate Democrats voted unanimously to reject a one-page amendment to the Civil Unions bill that would have exempted religious institutions from following the civil unions mandates where religious conscience prohibits it. According to the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Steadman, religious liberty guaranteed in the First amendment applies only to the activity of religious worship itself, not to any activity sponsored by religious institutions or organizations—like orphanages and adoption agencies.

Thus, Colorado on Friday added something new to the debate over same-sex marriage and civil unions. In every other civil union state legislation enacted to date, a religious liberty exemption was included. But not in Colorado.  

Cicero is wondering if this is a Colorado innovation to be proud of.  

Marty Lich

Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform


Senate Bill 33 (SB 33) 


This bill will have a direct impact on you.


The anticipated Colorado taxpayer burden for these illegal alien students will be approximately $930,000 for  the first year and $1.4 million the following year, to pay the Colorado stipend, known as the 'College Opportunity Fund.'


Currently the University of Colorado and Colorado State University are putting together their 2013-14 budget proposals, stating those budgets will both require an additional 9% tuition increase. This is despite the additional $30 million dollars in added funding intended to halt such tuition increases.


Out of state student tuition offsets instate tuition costs. For every illegal alien admitted, there is one less college class seat available to those full paying out of state students, as well as limiting available class seats for your student.


First, refer to the Delta Cost Project, a study focused on college spending. The study shows that community college students pay about 30 percent of their total Education and Related expenses (E&R) costs. From the report:


Spending and subsidies:


 a) All institutions can still claim that, on average, students pay less than the full cost of their education.


 b) Students who pay the full sticker prices in these institutions, on average, are paying very close to the full cost of their education.


Not-for-profit colleges and universities typically charge students less in tuition than what they spend per student in education and related expenses


Public institutions receive much of their subsidy from state and local appropriations.




The above study shows that out-of-state students fund their fair share and then some of actual college tuition costs. We know that more in-state students in attendance means less college seats are open for lucrative paying out-of-state students.


We also know that as of today, Adams State University (CO) is seeking 16% increase in their tuition rates, while stating the out-of-state students will face a 2% tuition increase.  


The Denver Post also reported that: 


The proposed increase at Adams State comes not long after other state schools floated news of potential tuition increases. Both the University of Colorado and Colorado State University have 9 percent hikes on the table. Metro State University of Denver will begin budget discussions in April, with a vote coming in June. It is limited by law to no more than a 9 percent tuition hike.


Click here to read today's article.


We also know this: the anticipated Colorado taxpayer burden for these illegal alien students will be approximately $930,000 for  the first year and $1.4 million the following year in the costs of the Colorado stipend, known as the "College Opportunity Fund."




Can you afford to support illegal alien students?


What you need to ask yourself is: can you afford the significant costs of enrolling illegal alien students at the in-state rate? These costs to you will be incurred in the form of:


1.  Tuition increases.

2.  Our state tax dollars (COF funds) being doled out to those not lawfully present in the U.S.

3. The loss of classroom seating opportunity for out-of-state paying students. 


School Choice. (Colorado)

by Laura Boggs


HB 13-1047 passed house committee yesterday and is now on to the floor.  This bill seems like a no big deal bill because it covers extracurricular activities - HOWEVER - it is incredibly important because it takes away student and family choice. 


Today if a student goes to a school that does not offer an activity the student gets to choose which school they go to for that activity or sport - HB13-1047 says the district will now get to choose - and it changes an equal chance to play to a fair and equitable chance ---- Parent choice in Athletics will be gone - the district will choose were your child can play


If they take away choice in sports - what is next academic choice? Or as someone said so in Colorado we have academic choice but not athletic choice.


The bill passed in committee 10-2 (go figure!) We need to let our representatives know and start to talk to the Senate Education members –



Millie Hamner, Chair

Cherylin Peniston, Vice-Chair

John Buckner

Chris Holbert

Kevin Priola

Lois Court

Lois Landgraf          

Jim Wilson

Justin Everett

Carole Murray          

Dave Young

Rhonda Fields

Brittany Pettersen   


Staff Contact:  Kristen Johnson (303) 866-4918



Committee Members

Evie Hudak, Chair

Michael Johnston, Vice-Chair

Rollie Heath

Vicki Marble            

Nancy Todd

Owen Hill

Scott Renfroe                      

Andy Kerr

Mark Scheffel                                     


Staff Contact:  Rachel Kurtz-Phelan  (303) 866-3028


HERE IS THE BILL:$FILE/1047_01.pdf



February 15, 2013

The Chickens will come home to roost

By Cicero Republicus

Democrats in the Colorado House of Representatives are celebrating the Friday passage of four gun control bills. Gee, they even received a congratulatory telephone call from Joe Biden. Now, ain't that special!


But it's safe to predict that before the year is out, Colorado Democrats will be contemplating the wisdom of the old adage, be careful what you wish for. It is not self evident that a gunman carrying four 15 round magazines will wreck less mayhem than someone with a single 16 round magazine. But on the other hand, the national debate over "gun violence" has little to do with facts or logic.


Our nation is witnessing -- nay, experiencing-- yet another chapter in the "Never let a crisis go to waste" school of politics. Use children as props for political sloganeering? No problem. Lie about the meaning of the 2nd Amendment? Hey, my pastor made me do it!


Chickens do eventually come home to roost, even in Colorado. Maybe especially in Colorado, where chicks are packin'.  

February 22, 2013




By Cicero Republicus


Even the most ardent and dedicated libertarian often uses the vocabulary of socialism in public debate. Take, for example, the debate over "public school finance" and "public school accountability." 


Would that debate take a different direction if we called government schools by their right name, GOVERNMENT schools? Even Grassroots Radio hosts typically talk about our "public schools" instead of calling them government schools. 


Americans like public parks, public libraries and public roads, and we are high on public decency and public safety. But maybe schools are different. To better understand how they function, maybe we ought to begin by calling them by their right name: government schools.


In general, Americans have low expectations for government agencies. The US Postal Service or the Department of Motor Vehicles comes to mind. Yet, we continue to nourish high expectations for "public schools." Why is that?


We have a common-sense idea of what a good public road or bridge looks like, and a public park is either safe and clean or it isn't.  But what is a good government school? How do we know whether more tax money spent would change the quality of the product?


If we start thinking of "public schools" as government bureaucracies, not run by angels or demons but by government employees, we might better understand their problems and their limitations.  



If you are parent of a child or children in K-12 you need to be aware of HB 13-1081 that was introduced in the Colorado legislature today. It revamps the sex education program in public and charter schools to include K-12 kids. The curriculum will teach kids about alternative sexual practices and abortion options among other things. It also includes teaching kids about gay, lesbian, and transgendered issues and sexual lifestyles. Planned Parenthood and the Gill Foundation are backers of the bill. The Democrat controlled House and Senate will make this law.


Read the bill here


HB 13-1081


Comprehensive Sex Education WARNING! This is explicit and offensive, but, if the Colorado Democrats have their way, the most offensive parts of this will be taught to 9-year-old kids in our schools. Democrats are trying to pass a curriculum that teaches kids (some as young as 9 years old) how to have "safe" sex with other kids. This is not the sex ed you had when you were a kid. The curriculum does not teach kids about their bodies and sexuality in clinical, detached manner. The curriculum teaches kids how to engage in sexual relationships and hide it from their parents! It actually role plays things like obtaining condoms without your parents knowledge and instructs kids to hide evidence of sexual activity from their parents. The curriculum encourages sexual activity by providing instructions on how to do things like arouse your boyfriend/girlfriend. It attempts to diminish the social stigma associated childhood sex. The entire curriculum is intended to ENCOURAGE "safe" sexual activity in kids.