North Suburban Republican Forum

July, 2012
www.NorthSuburbanRepublicanForum.com www.NorthSuburbanRepublicanForum.org

Our next meeting is from 9:30-11:30 am, Saturday, July 14th. Youll be able to hear from your local Board of Education members. They will discuss budgets, issues, unions, bond & mill levys and answer questions from NSRF attendees. Please Bring your checkbook and/or time to volunteer as our candidates need your support to win on November 6th. Admission is only $3 per person and a continental breakfast is included. We meet at the Anythink Huron Street Library community room, 9417 Huron St, Thornton, CO, 80260.

NSRF upcoming calendar in 2012: August 11 -- Colorado State Treasurer Walker Stapleton talking about PERA September 8 RTD members with transportation concerns and FasTracks October 13 Discussion of the November 6 ballot issues November 10 -- Election recap December 8 -- Colorado Senate and House members talking about the bills they will introduce in 2013

If you have a smart phone, use a bar code app for the QR code on the left, it will take you to our web site, www.NorthSuburbanRepublicanForum.com
1

Table of Contents:

July calendar List of north metro candidates Reagan Club of Colorado July 5th meeting Trailblazers Summer BBQ Top 10 Obama Failed Promises Liberal vs. Conservative Policy differences Colorado Supreme Court affirms ballots can be inspected Co Treasurer says pension bill could go up another $1B Taxes coming with ObamaCare Supreme Court graphic Romney/Obama by state Charles Schumer warns Republicans: Pushing for ObamaCare repeal will cost you the election A Strategy to undo ObamaCare Broomfield 9.12 Annual Summer Picnic Free People, Free Markets, Principles of Liberty class Fact Check: Women have fared worse during Obamas Presidency Elected officials NSRF Board of Directors

Heres the list of north metro candidates

Adams County Commissioner District 1: Gary Mikes, 2

Adams County Commissioner District 2: HD-29: Robert Ramirez HD-30: Mike Sheely HD-31: Beth Martinez Humenik HD-32: Paul Reimer HD-33: Dave Pigott HD-34: Jodina Widhalm HD-35: Brian Vande Krol HD-56 Kevin Priola HD-63: Lori Saine SD-21 SD-23 SD-25: CU Regent: CU Regent CD7 CD-2: CD-6: CD-7: Fran Bigelow Vicki Marble John Sampson Brian Davidson Mary Dambman Kevin Lundberg Mike Coffman Joe Coors

Donnia Howell

Join us on Thursday, July 5 from 5-8pm for the Reagan Club of Colorado monthly meeting at CADA with CD-4 Representative Cory Gardner & CD-6 Representative Mike Coffman. Grassroots Radio (AM-560 the Source) will be broadcasting live from our event with hosts Ken Clark and Jason Worley. You'll be able to mingle with local Denver candidates as you hear from our Representatives about what's going on in Washington. Admission is only $10 per person. You can pay at the door or buy your ticket online at www.ReaganClubCO.com/events. Cash bar available. You can also purchase a Ronald Reagan button for a $10 donation. The Colorado Auto Dealers Association (CADA) is located at 290 E Speer Blvd, Denver, CO, 80203. Click the following link to see a location map: http://goo.gl/maps/y7zp PURPOSE: To promote the core principles of conservative Republicans and to support candidates with the same values MISSION: To support and promote candidates who believe in the Constitution, smaller government, lower taxes, and personal freedom and to make available venues for fund raising events and candidate promotions E-mail address: info@ReaganClubCo.com Questions contact Art Foss 303-596-5401

Liberal policy
Tax and spend your money Ban something if we dont like it Lie to influence you Force you to do something Bigger Government is better Socialism More rules and regulations to complicate your life Free markets and profits are bad for America Capitalism ruined America Fewer options as the Government knows best Higher energy prices ObamaCare = highest tax increase in history Solyndra & Abound Solar, failed solar companies Occupy Wall Street Equal outcomes Entitlements Open up our borders Dont enforce existing laws Mandates

Conservative policy
Save and invest your money Change something if we dont like it
Tell you the truth so you can make your own mind up

Option to do or not do something Smaller Government is better Capitalism Fewer rules and regulations are better for your life Free markets and profits are good for America Capitalism saved America More options so you can decide whats best for you Lower energy prices Extending the existing tax rate cuts Energy independence with all energy options Tea Party Equal opportunity Personal responsibility Secure our borders We are a nation of laws Choices

Colorado Supreme Court affirms ballots can be inspected

Writer: Curtis Wackerle Voted ballots are indeed public records open to inspection by any citizen, the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed Thursday, vindicating local resident Marilyn Marks in her three-year-old lawsuit against Aspen City Hall. The court, which in April said it would hear the case of Mark v. Koch, issued a one-page order Thursday announcing that it had reversed itself and would not review the case, meaning a Court of Appeals decision in Marks favor from September 2011 will stand. The city had appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court in November 2011. The brief order stated that the courts initial decision to review the case had been improvidently granted.

Colorado elections once again belong to the people, Marks said in a statement released Thursday. This decision puts to rest a long-standing controversy between the public and election officials across the state who improperly prohibit the public and press from verifying Colorados elections. Marks attorney, Robert McGuire of Denver, said in the statement that the welcome decision ... reconfirms the vitality of the Colorado Open Records Act as a powerful tool that permits ordinary Coloradans to hold their state and local governments accountable. Marks statement noted that the Court of Appeals decision allowed her to recoup attorneys fees from the city. Each party has invested well over $100,000 on the case, she said. I trust that the city will want to put this controversy to rest and that we can come to a reasonable settlement without controversy that would be a further waste of public funds, Marks said in the statement. Marks sued the city and City Clerk Kathryn Koch after the city denied an open records request to review digital copies of ballots from the 2009 municipal election. It was the citys first and only election using instant runoff voting, where voters rank candidates in order of preference, and the information is used to simulate later runoff contests. Aspen voters later repealed instant runoff voting in favor of going back to traditional runoff elections to decide close races. Marks argued that the ballot copies were subject to public review under the Colorado Open Records Act, but the city denied her request to release them, citing the Colorado Constitution, which requires secrecy in voting. The city has maintained throughout the case that a determined individual could figure out how people voted in some cases using ballots and other public records. Judge James Boyd of the 9th Judicial District ruled in the citys favor in March 2010. Marks appealed Boyds decision to a higher court. The 16-page opinion issued by a three-judge panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals found that releasing ballots does not violate the Constitutions secrecy in voting clause, so long as there is no marking on the ballot that could reveal the identity of the voter. [W]e conclude that the phrase secrecy in voting protects from public disclosure the identity of an individual voter and any content of the voters ballot that could identify the voter, the opinion says. The content of a ballot is not protected, however, when the identity of a voter cannot be discerned from the face of that ballot. To the extent the [digital ballot copies] do not reveal a particular voters identity, then, permitting the right to inspect [the ballot images] would not be contrary to the secrecy in voting provision of [the state Constitution]. The ruling gives election clerks the discretion to decide what constitutes a marking that could identify a voter. The state legislature this year passed a law essentially codifying the appellate courts ruling. The city released a statement Thursday saying it was disappointed in the courts decision. However, it should be noted that the only concern of the city regarding this case was the degradation of the citizens right to a secret ballot, the statement from City Attorney Jim True says. With safeguards put in place by the Court of Appeals and state Legislature that concern was lessened. The city added that it will obviously comply with the decision of the court of appeals and allow Marks access to the 2009 ballots. She has also requested to see ballots from the 2011 city election. True said he was confident any review would confirm the validity of election results. True speculated that the Supreme Court may have reversed its decision to hear the case because of the law passed by the legislature. For the city, if there is a positive out of the final disposition of the case, its that we can put the 2009 election behind us, True said. curtis@aspendailynews.com Published on Aspen Daily News Online (http://www.aspendailynews.com)

CO Treasurer says pension bill could go up another $1B

By Todd Shepherd | Colorado Watchdog DENVER The Colorado Public Employee Retirement Associations poor investment performance leaves state taxpayers holding the bill for an additional $1 billion in future obligations, says Colorado State Treasurer Walker Stapleton.

Colorado State Treasurer Walker Stapleton says recent financial returns released by the Colorado Public Employee Retirement Association were so poor, that state taxpayers are now holding the bill for an additional $1 billion in future obligations. (Photo from Greenwich Times) The state treasurers website estimates PERAs unfunded liability at about $21 billion. That number could vary with actuarial and accounting assumptions. Unless we get a handle on this problem, Stapleton said on 850 KOAs Mike Rosen Show, and on the outsized promises and financial myth that were perpetuating both on plan members and on taxpayers, were going to have some serious bloodletting in Colorados future along with the expanding Medicaid roles as a result of the Supreme Courts ruling on health care. The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. On Tuesday, PERA announced its overall return on investment for the previous year was an anemic 1.9 percent. A 2010 law allows PERA to calculate future obligations based on an assumed 8 percent annual rate of return on the pensions investments. PERA insists its on solid financial footing. While the plan earned a 1.9 percent return on investments during the 2011 year, the three-year annualized return was 10.9 percent, nearly three percentage points greater than the 8 percent annual rate of return assumption set by the Board of Trustees. PERA concedes that its 10-year rate of return was a more modest 5.7 percent. Stapleton is an automatic board member of PERA because of his position as state treasurer. Almost immediately after taking office, Stapleton and PERA engaged in a series of minor battles, including a fight over PERAs refusal to divulge some internal information, as well as beneficiary information such as the yearly benefit each retiree earns.

While the treasurer acknowledges he may not be on PERAs Christmas card list, he said that two gubernatorial appointees to the board who do not have a financial stake in the future of the pension were on his side. Im happy and pleased to say that two out of three of Governor Ritters appointees have joined me in calling for a reduced rate of return and (for) PERA to get real and get honest, Stapleton said. But were consistently out-voted. Public pensions have simmered in the background of the recent recession, but became more noteworthy this week, with Stockton, California becoming the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history. One cause of that citys financial collapse: public-sector employee pensions. Additionally, U.S. Census Bureau data released this week show state and local pensions in the first quarter of 2012 continued to fall behind their ability to pay future benefits. Earlier this month, Stapleton told 1310 KFKAs Amy Oliver Show that thefailed June 5 recall of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker shows the public wants reform of public-sector entitlements, like pensions. Theres no magic bullet to redress this situation, Stapleton said Thursday on 850 KOA. Either the taxpayers of the state get soaked with a massive bailout bill, or the (PERA) members themselves get benefits cut and retirement ages increased with the stoke of a legislative pen.

http://watchdog.org/24136/stapleton-peras-bill-to-taxpayers-goes-up-another-1-billion/

Below is a chart on the sneaky tax hikes woven into Obamacare that will crush American middle class families and small businesses. The information was compiled by Americans for Tax Reform, which promises to provide a full analysis of the tax implications today. With Obamacare promising half a trillion dollars in tax hikes over the next ten years, you'd better hold on to your wallets!

http://www.coloradopeakpolitics.com/diary/1425/tax-hikes-yikes-isnt-this-a-health-care-law

10

11

Charles Schumer warns Republicans: Pushing for Obamacare repeal will cost you the election
By Doug Powers July 1, 2012 Bipartisanship is not dead. Its so nice of Charles Schumer to reach across the aisle and graciously advise the Republicans on what they need to do in order to avoid election slaughter in November: Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Sunday warned Republicans that they would suffer at the polls if they continued to push for a repeal of the presidents healthcare reform bill. If Republicans make that their number one issue, the repeal of healthcare, they are certainly going to lose the election, in the House and the Senate and the presidency, said Schumer on CBSs Face the Nation. Bottom line is most Americans are not for repeal. If you look at all the polls, a little more than a third are for repeal,** he said. Forget about Republicans. The first people Schumer should be advising to embrace Obamacare or lose the election are his Senate colleague Claire McCaskill and many other Dems. According to most polls Ive seen lately, even post-SCOTUS decision, more than 50 percent favor repeal of all or at least parts of Obamacare, which of course includes an incredibly high percentage of Republicans and even a quarter of Dems. Nobody with the possible exceptions of select Berkeley sanitariums and motivational meetings for Obamacare still a

12

BFD t-shirt salespeople (Kool Aid is for closers only!) honestly believes Republicans will ruin their chances in November by supporting repeal. President Obama did get a slight bump from the SCOTUS ruling, but theres also this: In some good news for Republicans, the Supreme Court ruling is energizing opposition to the 2010 healthcare law. In the new poll, more than half of all registered voters 53 percent said they were more likely to vote for their member of Congress if he were running on a platform of repealing the law, up from 46 percent before the ruling.

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/07/01/schumer-repeal-obamacare/

A Strategy to Undo ObamaCare

To push through key parts of the Affordable Care Act, Democrats used the 'reconciliation' process. A Republican president, House and Senate can use reconciliation to repeal them.
By KEITH HENNESSEY

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled ObamaCare's individual mandate constitutional, the direction of American health policy is in the hands of voters. So how do we get from here to "repeal and replace"? Step one is electing Mitt Romney as president, along with Republican House and Senate majorities. Without a Republican sweep, the law will remain in place. But a President Romney does not need 60 Republican senators to repeal core elements of ObamaCare. Democrats lost their 60th senate vote in early 2010 after Scott Brown took Edward Kennedy's seat. To bypass a Senate GOP filibuster and enact portions of ObamaCare, they used a special legislative procedure called reconciliation. Reconciliation allows a bill to pass the Senate in a limited time period, with limited amendments, and with only 51 votes; filibusters are not permitted. In 2010, Democrats split their health-policy changes into two bills, one of which they enacted through this fast-track process. In 2013, a Republican majority could use the same reconciliation process to repeal those changes. The reconciliation process, however, applies only to legislative changes to taxes, spending and debt, or the change must be a "necessary term or condition" of another provision that affects taxes or spending. Crucial parts of ObamaCare meet this test. Thus, if a President Romney has cohesive and coordinated majorities in the House and Senate, a reconciliation bill could repeal the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion, insurance premium and drug subsidies, tax increases (all 21 or them), Medicare and Medicaid spending cuts, its longterm care insurance program known as the Class Act, and its Independent Payment Advisory Board, a 15-member central committee with vast powers to control health-care and health markets. Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that the financial penalty enforcing the individual mandate is within Congress's constitutional power to "lay and collect Taxes," and that the mandate and penalty are inextricably linked. This should suffice to enable repeal, through reconciliation, of both the individual and employer mandates, and their respective penalty taxes. The state exchanges and insurance rules"guaranteed issue," which forces an insurer to sell a policy to someone who is already sick, and "community rating," which severely limits the insurer's right to charge that person a higher premiumare procedurally more difficult. Yet both are linked to the individual mandate, which increases taxes. Whether they can be repealed in a reconciliation bill will ultimately be decided by the Senate Parliamentarian.

13

Once the individual mandate is repealed, these popular insurance changes cannot stand by themselves. Without the mandate, people have every incentive to save on premiums and not buy insurance until they fall ill. This will send premiums through the roof for healthy people and, if the government clamps down on increased premiums, destroy private insurance companies. Those Republicans who say they favor legislated guaranteed-issue and community-rating requirements but oppose the mandate will be forced to acknowledge that all three must go. Repealing core parts of ObamaCare cannot take place immediately. The opportunity to use a reconciliation bill requires first passing a budget resolution, something the Senate Democratic majority has not done in three years. This, too can be done with simple majorities, but realistically it would take until April to pass a budget resolution, and to enact a repeal through reconciliation in May. The president and his allies argue that ObamaCare reduced the deficit, and that repealing it would mean a deficit increase. That claim was always laughable. In any event, the Congressional Budget Office is now re-estimating the effect of repeal on spending, taxes and deficits in anticipation of an upcoming House vote, scheduled for next week. Repeal may look fiscally more attractive in coming days than it did two years ago. If the new CBO estimate concludes that repeal would increase the deficit, then those favoring repeal will just have to make more spending cuts. Given the size and rate of growth of government spending, it's not that hard to do. Repeal and replacement should be separate legislative efforts. This will allow more opportunities to create bipartisan center-right coalitions. Future Republican majorities can work with moderate Democrats to enact needed insurance market reforms and the bipartisan Wyden-Ryan Medicare reform plan, which provides a stronger system of competing private health plans as opposed to government-run "fee-for-service" Medicare. Piecemeal reform does not mean incremental reform. The pre-ObamaCare status quo is unsustainable and unacceptable, and a President Romney and his allies must be as bold in their pursuit of consumer-driven health reform as President Obama was in his pursuit of government control. Reform should start by replacing the tax exclusion for employer-provided health insurance with a flat tax deduction or credit. This should be combined with insurance reforms that allow consumers to buy portable health insurance sold anywhere in the nation, through their employer or on their own. That means you'll be able to take your health insurance with you from one job to the next. Tax policy will no longer push Americans toward lower wages in favor of more expensive health insurance. Top it all off with expanded contribution limits for health savings accounts, aggressive national medical liability reform, and structural Medicare and Medicaid reforms that dramatically slow the growth of government and deficits. In 2009 and 2010 the nation took huge steps down a path toward more government control of health care. A shift to the consumer-based reform path is still availableif voters want it. Mr. Hennessey is a fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution. He served as director of the National Economic Council for President George W. Bush. http://on.wsj.com/MSWbpB

14

15

16

FACT CHECK: Women Have Fared Worse During Obama's Presidency

Why should women support Obama, again? On Sunday, Eva Longoria told a crowd of women that "there is no way women can vote Republican". Yesterday, we pointed out that her perspective might be off seeing as she has nothing in common with the average woman. As it turns out, Longorias statement was even more ridiculous than we first pointed out. Weve compiled some facts and figures below showing how women have prospered under Obama. Thats sarcasm for you at home because women in Colorado havent prospered under Obamas regime. At all. Unemployment (CO) The unemployment rate for women in Colorado has increased from 4.3% in 2008 to 7.8% during Obamas reign, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That means that there are 98,000 unemployed female Coloradans now.

Poverty (CO) Since Obama stepped into the Oval Office, women are more impoverished. According to the National Women's Law Center, the poverty rate among Colorados women has risen from 12.5% in 2009 to 13.1% in 2010 (when the organization stopped publishing this data). Perhaps this data was not helpful to our fearless leader? Why should Colorado women support him again? The good news is that more and more women are waking up to the inequalities that the Obama administrations policies have thrust upon them. According to a recent CNN poll, the top issue among women is the economy (51%) and a June Fox News poll showed that 52% of women think the Obama administration has mostly failed at creating jobs. While Obama won 56% percent of the vote among women in 2008, a mid-June Gallup poll shows his approval rating among women at just 48%. Ouch.

http://www.coloradopeakpolitics.com/diary/1438/fact-check-women-have-fared-worse-during-obamaspresidency 17

18

NSRF Board of Directors John Lefebvre Dana West Jan Hurtt Phil Mocon Brian Vande Krol Gary Mikes Leonard Coppes Wanda Barnes Kevin Allen

President Vice President Treasurer Secretary Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership

Email Address john.lefebvre@comcast.net dana.west@live.com jansadvertising@msn.com ph7ss@Q.com flianbrian1@yahoo.com advancedrefrigeration@msn.com fljcoppes@gmail.com WandaLeaBarnes@aol.com penguinflag@gmail.com

Telephone 303-451-5558 303-280-0243 303-451-0934 303-452-4709 303-466-4615 303-252-1645 303-287-9145 303-373-1521 303-319-3011

Join the North Suburban Republican Forum on the Internet and Facebook: http://www.northsuburbanrepublicanforum.org/ http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=95611986640&_fb_noscript=1

Yearly membership dues are $20, while a couple is $30. Make checks payable to NSRF. It only costs $3 per person to attend the monthly meeting. A continental breakfast and beverage (coffee, tea, orange juice or water) is included. A membership application is located on the last page. Fill it out and bring it along with you.

To subscribe or unsubscribe from our monthly newsletter, send an email with your name and subscription instructions in the body to: info@NorthSuburbanRepublicanForum.org

19

The North Suburban Republican Forum

NSRF Membership Application
We meet on the second Saturday of each month to discuss politics from 9:15-10:45am at Gander Mountain (9923 Grant St, Thornton, CO, 80229) in the employee training community room. A continental breakfast is provided with coffee, tea, orange juice and bottled water. Http://www.NorthSuburbanRepublicanForum.com Name: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________________________ City: ____________________________________________________________Zip: _____________________ Best phone number to reach you: H/W/C______________-________________-________________________ Email: __________________________________________________________@_______________________ How did you hear about the NSRF? ____________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________ Signature: ________________________________________________________________________________ ______ New member ______ Current member renewal ______ Individual Membership $20 per calendar year ______ Family Membership $30 per calendar year for couples ______ Deluxe $56 individual/$66 family per year includes 12 monthly fees + yearly dues Paid via __________ cash __________ check #__________ Todays date: _____________________________________________________________________________ Received by NSRF board member: ____________________________________________________________

If you have a smart phone, use a bar code app for this QR code. It will take you to our web site.

20