Proposition 109

Summary

This funds a ton of specific projects. Fred gets a bridge, Susan gets a wider highway, Rodrigo gets an off-ramp. And no new taxes. Free stuff! What's not to love.

This bill is similar to taking out a second mortgage on your house, it's really nice to be able to build that addition or put in a swimming pool. But then the bank wants to be paid and you didn't put aside any of your income for the payments.

Colorado's budget is fundamentally 4 items - K-12, Higher Ed, healthcare, and transportation. K-12 & healthcare expenditures are locked in via the constitution. So funding this will come from either new taxes added in 2 years (unlikely) or out of the Higher Ed budget which would mean increased student debt.

The people who put this together were fiscally irresponsible.

Vote No

We shouldn't build our roads on the back of increased debt for our children going to College. That's wrong.

Yes we needs to put more money into our roads. But not this way. When a group puts an initiative on the ballot, it needs to specify how it is going to be funded.

Arguments Against

The big argument against this is it spends money, but doesn't say where we're going to get that money. Not something we would do personally, not something we want our state to do.

Some also argue against floating bonds, but that is not sensible for the same reason we all get a mortgage to buy our homes.

Arguments For

Our transportation infrastructure in the state is on the edge of becoming a giant problem. And at present we not only can't build the new roads we so desperately need, but we can't keep the existing infrastructure in good shape.

The important thing is to start fixing the roads. We can figure out how to pay for it later.