Topeka ? In Colorado, critics say the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights — TABOR for short — has created a budgetary mess.

But the godfather of TABOR and its other supporters say it has worked exactly as planned.

Douglas Bruce, a one-man tax-fighting machine, described opponents as the “usual suspects” of “socialists, communists, collectivists, liberals, politicians, parasites — you can call them ‘those people who want to steal your money.'”

Now it looks like Kansas legislators are lining up behind the TABOR concept, which means Kansas voters may get to decide the matter for themselves. Before the November election, 61 candidates signed a pledge to support such a vote.

In its simplest form, the effort would limit revenue growth in state government to inflation plus population growth, and refund to taxpayers any state revenue collected above that amount. Also, state officials would need approval from voters before imposing a tax or fee increase. It’s a prospect that worries supporters of education and other programs.

Rep. Brenda Landwehr, a Wichita Republican, plans to push for TABOR to be on the ballot as a proposed constitutional amendment in the 2006 general election.

“The Legislature has not been able to maintain control over spending, so the people should,” Landwehr said.

To get on the ballot, the measure would need a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate.

Gov. Kathleen Sebelius opposes the measure.

“This kind of restriction isn’t needed in Kansas, and it could severely hamper efforts to improve our schools, control runaway health-care costs and invest in growing the economy and creating jobs,” Sebelius said.

Colorado example

The Denver-based Bell Policy Center is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research and advocacy group that has studied the effects of TABOR in Colorado since voters there put it in the state constitution in 1992.

“It has achieved its objectives,” said Carol Hedges, Bell’s director of fiscal projects. “The question is, is that an objective that is good?”

Her answer to that question is no.

Hedges, a former Kansan and graduate of the Kansas University law school, said TABOR had reduced the size of government and in so doing sent the Colorado state budget into a tailspin.

When state tax collections soared in the 1990s, there was no problem refunding money to taxpayers, she said.

But after the 2001 recession, state revenue declined steeply and forced spending reductions. In succeeding years, the allowable spending growth under TABOR — inflation plus population — was tied to that lower base.

Candidates pledge to put tax increases to public vote (10-30-04) Americans for Prosperity Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights

It’s called the ratcheting-down effect, and refunds had to be made to taxpayers even though collected revenue remained below pre-2001 levels.

Conflicting amendments

To counter TABOR in one area, Colorado voters in 2000 approved a constitutional amendment that required public school funding to increase by the rate of inflation plus 1 percentage point through 2010.

School funding had been falling behind because teacher health insurance and utility costs at schools were exceeding the inflation rate as limited by TABOR, Hedges said.

The result is that this year, Colorado must cut $263 million from its budget while giving taxpayers a $459 million refund. Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, a supporter of TABOR, has proposed asking voters to give up their refund this year.

Higher education officials in Colorado have called for significant tuition increases to make up for what they say have been budget cuts. Some say higher education in Colorado has been the biggest target of the budget ax because it is seen as a more discretionary expense than public schools and social services.

Colorado state government is hamstrung, Hedges said.

She said TABOR supporters frequently made the analogy that government should control its spending just like a family does, but Hedges said TABOR went further.

If a family were under the TABOR limits, family members would have to return bonuses and merit raises they received above inflation and a family member couldn’t seek a second job or overtime to help bring in more money.

All that means Kansas should steer clear of TABOR, Hedges said.

“My advice to Kansas is figure out what you don’t like about the current system and fix that problem,” she said. “This automatic formula ends up with consequences that you can’t anticipate. If you don’t like the decisions being made, throw the bums out.”

Godfather of TABOR

But Bruce, the man who pushed for years to get TABOR in the Colorado Constitution, said TABOR was about giving people their money and economic freedom. That mission has been accomplished with refunds of $3.4 billion over the past five years.

“If we’re willing to advance the cause of freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan, why not in Kansas?” Bruce said.

If Kansas had enacted a TABOR amendment in 1992, Kansas taxpayers would have received $1.1 billion in refunds since then, according to a pro-TABOR study. Instead, over the past five years, state tax revenue in Kansas has increased by $580 million.

Colorado ranks last in the nation in state taxes as a percent of personal income, while Kansas ranks 27th, according to the Kansas Legislative Research Department.

Instead of anti-government, Bruce, of Colorado Springs, describes himself as “pro-freedom.”

A former prosecutor, the 55-year-old was just elected as a county commissioner. He calls public schools “government” schools and maintains the government’s only function should be law enforcement and highway construction.

If spending limits force policymakers to target higher education or social services, so be it, he said.

“Personally, I don’t think people formed government in order to provide higher education. Higher education is the backstop because of lower education,” he said.

And social services?

“We’ve never had a vote to provide health care for hypochondriacs and poor people,” he said.

Kansas supporters

The rhetoric of supporters in Kansas is not nearly as colorful.

Alan Cobb, Kansas director of the anti-tax group Americans for Prosperity, said he supported TABOR because he thought it would help the Kansas economy.

“When comparing these two state economies, there simply isn’t any doubt that Colorado has benefited from the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights,” Cobb said.

“While Kansas’ economy has been languishing since the early 1980s, Colorado has zoomed past us in almost every way to measure growth,” he said.

Landwehr said there were many aspects of Colorado’s TABOR that Kansas should avoid, such as the ratcheting-down effect. A proposal in the Kansas amendment would hold the growth limit when there is a drop in revenue, then kick the limit back into action once the revenue recovered to pre-recession levels.

Another proposal would set aside funds for emergencies.

Let them vote

Landwehr said TABOR was not about being anti-government.

“Government has a role,” Landwehr said, but added that “government has taken on things that they shouldn’t, things that would have been better left to local communities and faith-based and nonprofit organizations.”

She said requesting voter approval for tax and fee increases was just basic fairness. If politicians can make a sound case that an increase is needed, then voters will follow, she said.

“If the Legislature makes a decision that they want to take more money from the citizens of Kansas’ pockets, they should ask permission to do so,” she said.

But Sebelius said there was no reason to fix something that wasn’t broken.

“For two straight years we’ve balanced the budget without increasing taxes despite some of the steepest revenue declines in state history. The system of checks and balances already in our constitution is adequate protection for Kansas taxpayers,” she said.