Gov. John Hickenlooper and Attorney General John Suthers do their jobs with sincere and honest concern for the people they work for. That's why they received The Gazette's enthusiastic endorsements after each survived a grilling by The Gazette's editorial board last fall.
Explains George Will, in a column on this page, Hickenlooper is "immune to the progressive delusion that citizens cannot function for even a few minutes without guidance" from government.Plaintiffs argue that forcing public servants to ask permission of the governed burdens politicians who should be protected by Article IV, Section 4. Voting on taxes, they claim, is not Republican governance. Rather, it is direct democracy.Friend editorial page editor Wayne Laugesen on Facebook, follow him on Twitter"Several Founders expressed reservations about the wisdom of direct citizen lawmaking and suggested that a purely representative republic might yield superior results," states the brief. "Much of their concern arose from the fact that in prior republics, citizens had voted in mass assemblies subject to sudden mob-like behavior - conditions quite different from those of modern initiative and referendum, in which voting in disparate locations follows lengthy campaigns. But whatever their views on its wisdom, none of the Founders suggested that direct citizen lawmaking was inconsistent with the republican form. On the contrary, they repeatedly labeled governments with direct lawmaking as 'republics.'"They are confused, and the courts will almost certainly teach them a lesson they don't care to learn. Runaway democracy is gruesome, and that's why the founders protected us from it with Article IV, Section 4. In direct or pure democracies, a majority of voters would have authority to forbid churches or mosques in Colorado. They could vote to take guns away from blacks, Latinos or white, middle-aged fat guys. They could vote to silence overbearing editorialists. In a republic, voters cannot violate the legally protected rights of individuals. That's why all states are constitutional republics, that incorporate some democratic process, and not pure democracies.Nothing in the Constitution protects governments, which are agencies of force, from the will of majorities. If Colorado voters want no more funding for roads and bridges, so be it. If they want fewer public school teachers and larger classrooms, so be it. Governments are supposed to have little authority beyond that which is granted by the governed.The plaintiffs claim that TABOR violates Article IV, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution. It says, in part: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this union a Republican Form of Government..."(Does TABOR violate the federal Constitution? Vote to the right. Must vote to see results. Thanks!)Republican governments have gone to the people for permission throughout history, as is masterfully detailed in a 15-page amicus brief filed in federal court in support of Suthers' dismissal motion (see: http://tinyurl.com/4xn49qh).It comes as no surprise to see the Democratic governor and Republican attorney general taking on a radical lawsuit that seeks to cleanse the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights from Colorado's Constitution. Hickenlooper and Suthers believe taxpayers have rights; proponents of the lawsuit would rather see taxpayers live as subjects of politicians, rather than constituents to whom they answer.That's because limitations on citizen lawmaking, in societies served by republican governments, limit the authority of majorities to disenfranchise individuals but not to define the size and scope of their governments.Suthers, on Hickenlooper's behalf, filed a motion in federal court last month asking for dismissal of the suit.The El Paso Board of County Commissioners voted in May to join a long and distinguished list of opponents to the suit, which also includes Colorado's pro-individual Independence Institute.This disgraceful lawsuit insults Coloradans who have voted on taxes or petitioned their government. Sen. Morse thinks it will wind its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. We hope it gets laughed out of federal district court in Denver.The attack on TABOR - spearheaded by a handful of intrusive liberal politicians including our own state Sen. John Morse, D- Colorado Springs, and former State Rep. Michael Merrifield, D- Colorado Springs - argues that TABOR violates the United States Constitution.
Friend editorial page editor Wayne Laugesen on Facebook, follow him on Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment