Quote:
Originally Posted by PLANSIT
You lost. Pay up.
|
Dang... I wondered later if you might misunderstand what I was wanting to say. That last statement was vague enough that you might not realize I was referring to the competing political interests and their high stakes poker game. I meant it to mean the Chamber was calling the bluff of the SB1/Caldera crowd and doubling their bet. Fair to say that since I used the personal pronoun "I" you'd have no way of knowing that was a stand-in for the Chamber talking. So any confusion would be on me, my lack of clarity/poor wording. Sorry for that.
Since the last post was interrupted by an important phone call I'll continue...
I do feel sorry for Colorado
having been spoiled by a state where the dedicated flow of transportation revenue for over 30 years has made life so much easier.
The group
Fix Colorado Roads as the
CP article points out is
"a similar coalition of Front Range and mountain business interests, has been working on a legislative remedy to the funding issue at the Capitol." Without their support the Chamber's proposal has little chance of passing. But if the legislature fails to provide a fix then there's no reason why the two groups wouldn't join hands.
Do Republicans know what they want, Buddy?
They want something for nothing, Doobie.
You're referring to the tail then, eh?
Yup, it's been the tail that wags that dog for a decade or longer.
The issue will need substantial Republican support to be successful. The other potential problem is we could end up with a metro versus out of metro controversy depending how the referendum is structured. That may have been the reason behind the Chamber's looking at their wording?