Sep 23, 2008 9:52 pm US/Mountain
Oil & Gas Coalition Ad Blasts Ritter, Amendment 58
DENVER (CBS4) ―
-
-
About Reality Check: Raj Chohan focuses on matters of public policy and political persuasion. Online, he features his sources & an outline of his investigative steps on the pathway to his conclusions.
A new attack ad by a coalition of oil and gas companies called Coloradans for a Stable Economy blasts Gov. Bill Ritter over his support of Amendment 58. The ad takes two swipes at the governor before making its case against the ballot measure that would end a decades-long tax credit for oil and gas companies.
The ad states: failed accountability, first, the Ritter inaugural fund scandal The claim is true to the extent that Ritter's former campaign manager was embroiled in a scandal involving about $200,000 in gubernatorial inauguration money. The money was eventually returned and after a criminal investigation, no one was charged with a crime. While the incident reflected poorly on Ritter, he did not duck accountability for his apparent lack of control over his campaign staff.
Ad: then came the Ritter state parks scandal Not exactly. A recent audit of the Colorado Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation revealed a long-standing culture of wasteful spending and irresponsible management going all the way back to 2002. Some of it occurred on Ritter's watch, but some of it also occurred on Gov. Bill Owens' watch. It was a systemic problem that stretched across both administrations. Calling the long running problem "Ritter's state park scandal," doesn't accurately reflect the full nature of the audit.
Ad: now the Ritter diversionary scandal, to cover up his $321 million tax hike, calling a massive tax hike a subsidy. That's a real scandal. Here's the spin. The ad is critical of Ritter for saying Amendment 58 would end a tax benefit rather than raise taxes. In fact, it would do both. Amendment 58 would do away with a tax credit that the oil and gas industry has enjoyed since the late 1970s. When a tax benefit is removed, and it results in the state receiving more tax revenues, it's a tax hike for the companies that have to pay it. In this case, Amendment 58 would raise taxes on the oil and gas industry. Perhaps the more pertinent question for voters is whether such a tax hike on energy companies will pass through to consumers in Colorado. The basic laws of economics say it should have some impact because higher taxes on an industry drives up the cost of doing business, which is typically passed on to consumers. But if we're talking about world oil markets and regional natural gas markets, it's unclear how noticeable the impact would be. It probably wouldn't drive up the cost of gas at the pump, but it's conceivable that it could have some small impact on your heating bill, because a third of the natural gas pumped out of Colorado is used by consumers in Colorado.
Ad: Using taxes to pay for special interest goodies. That's a real scandal.
That's a matter of opinion. Sixty percent of the tax revenue would pay for in-state college scholarships, 15 percent would go to transportation and water quality, 15 percent would go for wildlife habitat and 10 percent to clean energy projects. How much of that constitutes "special interest goodies" is a matter for voters to decide.
Sources
Amendment 58: Yes/No By David Svaldi
Money pours into measures on Colorado ballot
Colorado Initiative 113 (2008)
Ritter is wrong; case isn't closed
Audit scolds state parks division for 'egregious waste'
State Audit of Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Department of Natural Resources
(© MMIX CBS Television Stations, Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Comments