Posts Tagged ‘Greg Brophy’

Global Warming, and other acts of idiocy…

April 16, 2009

Fresh from the golden dome on Colfax Avenue Greg Brophy keeps us up to date on the shenanigans of the saviors on the left that will “save” Colorado from itself…

Global Warming

A couple weeks ago the Colorado Senate passed a global warming joint resolution. It’s titled “Concerning Recognition of Colorado’s Cool Cities”, but it was really an Al Gore would be proud sop to carbon dioxide caused global warming.

As a side bar, I think Wray, Colorado (my home town) is the “coolest city” in the state. We have our own little stream running through town, nice hills and bluffs surrounding town, a couple of good places to eat, a nice swimming pool and the best coffee shop on the planet.

Back to the farce: Senator Rollie Heath from, you guessed it, Boulder, introduced the resolution.

Apparently he missed the memo from the eco-commies who changed the term “global warming” to “climate change” when it became apparent that while CO2 emissions continue to rise, global temperatures are going down. They have been for ten years.

Senators Renfroe and Lundberg had fun pointing out the facts about global warming. Senator Heath said, “I don’t want to get into an argument about global warming”.

At that point I went up and pointed out that he should at least make the case for his resolution, but I’d be voting against it because “anthropogenic global warming is a farce”.

End of debate: the resolution passed on a straight party line vote.

Blatant Disregard

We see another attempt by the Democrats to exert their will over the will of the people in HB09-1299.

It’s a bill that would lead to tossing out the electoral vote for President in return for a national popular vote.

It’s not that it would happen overnight. First more states would have to pass a similar bill; enough states to reach the magic number of 270 electoral votes have to pass bills to join the movement for it to go into effect.

So far four states have passed bills enacting this agreement into law. Colorado is poised to become a fifth.

I’m not sure if the Democrats are still sore about the 2000 election or what.

For the life of me, I can’t figure out why anyone in Colorado would throw away our swing-state status in favor of a national popular vote. Right now, Presidential candidates come to Colorado because there is some question where our nine electoral votes will go and through most of the election cycle, you can draw a scenario where our nine will make the difference in determining who will win.

Take away our nine and no one will care about our votes; no one will come here to campaign. The candidates will stick to the major population centers on the coasts and ignore “fly-over country”.

It’s really a horrible idea that has so many unintended consequences that everyone on the left seems to ignore.

Just like they ignore the will of the voters. In 2004 Coloradoans roundly rejected a change to our electoral college system 66-34.

That’s the blatant disregard.

Pinnacol Raid

Here’s the problem: state revenues are down, expectations for state spending are up (sounds like my family budget situation too).

So what are we going to do? Rob a bank? No, lets seize the money in an insurance company’s accounts, after all it looks like the insurance company, Pinnacol Assurance has more assets than liabilities.

Pinnacol is a workers compensation insurance company that was originally created by the state and then finally turned loose in 2002. At the time, their liabilities exceeded their assets by about $200 million. Now, their assets exceed their liabilities by about $600 million.

They are paying big dividends and have cut premiums by 42% over the past four years.

So the Democrats in Colorado (and two Republicans) have decided to take their “extra” money. That’ll teach them for being successful.

Two other states have tried the same thing in very similar situations and the courts in those states have sided with the insurance company. No telling what our activist Supreme Court will do, but I am positive the insurance company won’t just write the check because the Governor signs the bill that steals their money.

Expect a long protracted battle so ensue. The majority party has no plan for dealing with the defeat, except to close have of the colleges in the state.

I expected more from them.

The Budget

The Colorado Senate will pass a budget on Monday.

For the first time in my memory, it will be a pure work of fiction.

Colorado’s Constitution requires a balanced budget for each year. This one will be balanced by taking money $500 million from an insurance company. Money that will never show up because the insurance company won’t just hand the loot over.

I won’t bug you with all the details of the budget. It’s really a mess with Constitutionally mandated spending increase requirements in some areas, Constitutionally protected revenues in other areas and everyone wanting more.

The key take away is this: the money from the insurance company (Pinnacol Assurance) is never going to materialize. They aren’t just going to hand it over and I don’t think the court will let the state take it. Ultimately, we’ll have to come back and balance the budget again and this time truly hard choices will have to be made.

The immediate fall back provision is to cut colleges by another $300 million. That’s on top of the $100 million reduction in the rate of growth that they’ve already taken. A $300 million dollar cut would be a real cut and would probably lead to the closure of several schools. That’s completely unacceptable; we offered rational alternatives, but the other side turned them down.

This won’t be over for a while.

I have decided to join the world of FaceBook. I am not the most professional politician in the world, so I am actually using mine as it was intended – almost strictly for social purposes. If you want to “friend” me, search FB for Greg Brophy. I think this link will work:

The Car Tax

February 9, 2009

So what is going on at the Golden Dome in Denver? Here is a small, but important item. Information sent by State senator Greg Brophy.

The Car Tax

What you saw at the Capitol these past couple weeks
was a classic example of concentrated versus
diffused interests.

Mike Rosen gives examples of this all the time on
his show, and speaking of Mike, he should have
taken his own advice and stuck
with Greenburg and Associates; then no one would
have made off with his

The concentrated interests are the contractors and
business communities that benefit from state
expenditures on roads. The diffused interests are
the regular tax
payers who foot the bill for this fee (tax) increase.

The tax increase amounts to a quarter of a billion
dollars a year, so you can see why the contractors
are interested. It means $41 to you for each regular
car and $51 for a pickup or bigger SUV.

It’s probably not worth your coming to the
Capitol to complain about $82 in registration fee
increases a year (two
cars), but for sure the road construction guys are
interested in their share
of an extra quarter billion dollars.
Diffused (tax payers) versus concentrated (tax

The bill also allows for tolling of existing roads
just to raise revenue. We took that
part out on Wednesday morning and after the four
Democrats who sided with the
14 Republicans had their arms twisted all through
lunch, they voted to put it
back in during the afternoon session.

We also took out of the bill the provision that
would allow the state to tax you for every mile
driven by putting a GPS
transponder in your car. I expect them
to try to put that provision back in during
discussion in the House.

For sure, we need to spend more money on roads.
I’ve offered many ideas to do just
that, such as the Plus One idea from last year,
which gradually put
transportation funding into the general budget and
built the amount up to a
billion a year additional spending over ten years.
It would work if given a try.

Remember, we didn’t get to this overall road
condition overnight and we won’t solve the problem
for ever overnight.

And, I think it is really important to note that
only a fool would raise taxes during a recession.

We also need to come up with a fair way to pay for
roads in the future.

One of these days, people may be driving fully
electric cars. They won’t pay
much in fuel taxes will they? Heck, I drive
a Prius, so I don’t pay nearly as much as I used to
pay. During the period of $4 gas, I left my
pickup parked as much as possible.
We’ll see that again, I’m afraid.

I’d trade the gas tax for something else.

Bob Beauprez suggested a sales tax on all items as a
trade for the gas tax. It would work.

I have been thinking about an annual stamp on a
driver’s license; kind of like my elk hunting stamp
on my conservation
certificate. Get away from the car,
after all, a lot of people, especially farmers own
lots of cars, and
concentrate on the individual driver.
You can only drive one vehicle at a time; seems
fairer to me than this
increase on all car registrations.

Then the question comes up, when to collect it?
Happy Birthday, you owe the state $150 for
your road stamp! Maybe the fourth
Monday in October would work, that way if the stamp
costs too much, the
voters would revolt.

I am a rural guy, and I always will be. Any idea
that I support will not harm my

I’ve been blogging at you can get shorter
and more timely stuff

You can donate to my
campaign by clicking the button below.
Don’t click if you are a lobbyist or have business
before the

the above button to pay.

If you can not see the payment button, please click
here .

This email
was generated using the Payment Request Wizard.
to download a free copy from PayPal.

Dems derail Brophy bill to protect homeowners

January 28, 2009

State Senator Greg Brophy has been stabbed in his own home, so to speak. Despite the logic, and indeed inalienable right to properly and effectively defend themselves Democrats stopped this needed legislation.

A Republican effort that would have reinforced Coloradans’ ability to defend their families against home intruders hit a dead end today in a Senate committee.

Assistant Senate GOP leader Greg Brophy, R-Wray, presented Senate Bill 74 before the Senate Committee on State, Veterans, and Military Affairs, calling it a matter of “statewide concern.”

SB 74 would prohibit local governments from passing any law or regulation that requires a person to store their lawfully-owned firearms in a way that renders them inoperable. The Democrat-controlled committee voted to postpone the bill indefinitely, effectively killing it.

Brophy said the bill addresses and recognizes the landmark United States Supreme Court decision made last summer in the District of Columbia v. Heller case.  The Heller decision held that gun ownership is an individual right and that any government in the U.S. cannot put individuals in the position where they would be inadequately prepared to defend themselves against home invasion.

“We need to pass the ban on safe-storage laws in Colorado,” Brophy said in the committee. “I think the Heller case raised this issue to the national spotlight and brought it forward so that everybody is aware of it.”

Research Director of the Independence Institute Dave Kopel, left, tesifies in favor of Sen. Greg Brophy’s Senate Bill 74.

“This would save the citizens of Colorado the trouble of being forced to go the courts and have the courts say, ‘yes indeed the Supreme Court has already ruled on this,'” Brophy said.

Currently, the cities of Denver and Boulder have so-called “safe-storage” laws that require guns be disassembled or secured with a trigger lock while stored in private homes.

In his testimony in favor of the bill, renowned Second Amendment expert and constitutional lawyer Dave Kopel, who is research director at the Golden-based think tank the Independence Institute, offered evidence showing that cities with safe-storage laws actually have higher rates of home intrusion and violence because criminals are all too aware that homeowners are unable to defend themselves.

“Law-abiding gunowners in Denver and the public in general continue to be in danger due to unreasonable laws that prevent families from teaching gun safety in their own homes and make it way too difficult for crime victims in Denver to be able to protect themselves,” Kopel said after the bill was killed.

While ruling Democrats offered few insights to their opposition to the bill, Fort Collins Democrat Bob Bacon rasied concerns about second-guessing local-government policies on the issue of gun ownership.

Brophy countered that such concerns reflect misplaced priorities.

“They’re giving City Hall the right to preempt your own right to defend yourself and your family,” Brophy said. “And I think that’s just wrong.”

Assistant Senate Republican Leader Greg Brophy, of Wray, sits in disappointment after his bill, which would have given homeowners more power to defend themselves, was killed in a Democrat-controlled committee.


If you ever run for office, don’t do this:

October 28, 2008

I received this from Senator Greg Brophy. It’s a laugh, but it is serious… kind of a gotcha!

In the middle of the campaign season, while everyone is tired of the ads and ready for this to just be over, this came to me and I just have to share.

You need a little background information first. I helped a candidate for state senate, Don Ytterberg, put together a comparison piece that shows some votes made by his opponent, Dan Gibbs, that Don thinks are out of line with the people that live in SD16. Two of the votes were amendments to bills that Gibbs ultimately voted for after voting against the key amendments. The first amendment is known as Jessica’s Law, which puts sexual predators away for a minimum of 25 years (something that 99.9% of America thinks is a good idea). Dan Gibbs voted against that amendment on 5-1-2007. The second amendment is one that I ran to mandate a $50,000 bond on illegal alien drug dealers so that they won’t just skip the country when they are released. Gibbs voted against that one last session and then ultimately voted for the final bill. During a televised radio interview, Gibbs brings up the negative mailer (comparison piece) and tries to show that it is inaccurate. Big mistake because Ytterberg has the votes in his briefcase.

You also need to know that the Colorado General Assembly has rules on amendments to bills that say the amendment has to relate to the bill. In this case, I’m not writing about an appropriations Christmas tree project like you see in Washington D.C. I’m talking about crime bills that were being discussed and debated on the floor of the House and the floor of the Senate. Both of the amendments narrowly lost, so every voted mattered.

If you ever run for office, don’t do this:


%d bloggers like this: