Nash Herman retweeted
Could Proposition NN put your TABOR refunds at risk?
On the latest TABOR Talk, Jon Caldara and Nash Herman break down how the measure could change Colorado's spending limits and what it could mean for taxpayers.
Should lawmakers have more say over how much of your money the state keeps?
Watch: youtu.be/1hkV4IYPpcU #thinkfreedom #copolitics
Nash Herman retweeted
As Coloradans vote on Amendment 87 and Prop NN, please consider:
1. During COVID, the legislature decided to create annual programs with money they knew would eventually run out.
2. Prior to this, Colorado had an annual budget surplus approaching $1 billion. Now, we have $1 billion deficits for the foreseeable future, resulting in backdoor tax hikes and smoke & mirrors spending "cuts."
3. They spent this money by adding 7,000 new state employees, giving health care to illegal immigrants, drastically increasing spending on higher education. But NOT spending more on highways, roads or bridges.
4. Now they want you to bail them out by increasing taxes (AMD 87) and raising the spending limit by $4 billion a year (PROP NN), so they can impose more "fees" without our vote.
markhillman.com/colorados-bu…
Nash Herman retweeted
NEW: With Amendment 87, this ‘bracket creep’ problem will become familiar to more Coloradans than just the wealthy, despite how it is advertised.
completecolorado.com/2026/10…
Nash Herman retweeted
Prop NN isn’t just about funding schools today. It would PERMANENTLY redirect TABOR refunds that future generations of Coloradans could have received.
And after 10 years, lawmakers could use those funds for purposes other than education.
Should we get to vote away TABOR refunds for future generations who get no say?
VOTE NO ON NN.
“Once Coloradans understand how many government tax policies have conveniently never been indexed for inflation, they will realize how little their decision-makers understand or care about keeping Colorado prosperous.”
Social Security benefits are taxed at thresholds that haven’t been indexed to inflation since 1984. With Amendment 87, this ‘bracket creep’ problem will become familiar to more Coloradans than just the wealthy or retirees.
Read more here: completecolorado.com/2026/10… @CompleteCO
Social Security benefits are taxed at thresholds that haven’t been indexed to inflation since 1984. With Amendment 87, this ‘bracket creep’ problem will become familiar to more Coloradans than just the wealthy or retirees.
Read more here: completecolorado.com/2026/10… @CompleteCO
The Plot To Steal Your Colorado TABOR Refund youtu.be/1hkV4IYPpcU?si=mo88… @i2idotorg
Nash Herman retweeted
Outdated fashion is forgivable. Bad fiscal policy? Not so much.
Before you fill out your ballot, do your homework. Know what's at stake and make an informed decision.
Paid for by Affordable Colorado, Katie Kennedy, Registered Agent
#AffordableColorado #thinkfreedom #copolitics
Nash Herman retweeted
Opinion: Colorado families have plans for their money, but Proposition NN would disrupt their spending
Colorado voters should be skeptical whether today’s good causes justify damaging constitutional taxpayer protections
coloradosun.com/2026/10/14/o…
Nash Herman retweeted
NEW: Proponents are still trying to dismiss or downplay Amendment 87’s big bracket creep problem.
completecolorado.com/2026/10…
Nash Herman retweeted
Time is running out!
Create an ad taking on Proposition NN, Amendment 87, or Issue 7A and enter the Affordable Colorado video contest by October 29.
Details: i2i.org/affordablecolorado
Paid for by Affordable Colorado, Katie Kennedy, Registered Agent
#AffordableColorado #thinkfreedom #copolitics
Nash Herman retweeted
Debating the timeline of bracket creep misses the big picture, which supporters of such bad policy probably prefer. #copolitics
completecolorado.com/2026/10…
Nash Herman retweeted
Colorado Inside Out talks about our AI version of Senator Cathy Kipp. Are we law breakers?
Starts at about 19 minutes in. #coleg #copolitics
video.pbs12.org/video/octobe…
Nash Herman retweeted
GAWD, I hate the rich.
The top hats. The monocles. The dinner jackets. The way they twirl their mustaches while evicting orphans.
Before we drag them into the public square, though, we should probably define “rich.”
Amendment 87, the temporary “graduated” income tax, defines rich as earning $500,000 a year. #copolitics
And yes, it is temporary. Unlike the federal income tax brackets, 87’s brackets aren’t indexed for inflation, meaning over time all of us will creep into the new top 8.4% tax rate.
Clever scam. Con Coloradans who aren’t good at math that they’re getting a tax cut and then let inflation do the mugging.
Sell a tax increase on working families as a tax cut. You can almost hear the maniacal laughter.
Rich bastards
But back to punishing the rich — those trophy-wife-collecting, umbrella-drink-swilling bastards.
Why should they drive Maseratis while I putter around in my 2010 Nissan Altima?
Sure, we use the same roads, sit in the same traffic and can reach the same destinations. But that’s hardly the point. His cup holder has Italian stitching.
Henry Ford democratized the automobile. Before mass production, cars belonged only to the wealthy. Now ordinary people can live where they can afford a home and work where they can earn a living.
Unfortunately, Ford became rich in the process. Would we have been happier if he hadn’t? Of course we would have! We’d still be stuck in tenements, but he would have been poorer. Totally worth it.
The rich get private jets. Why? I mean, I fly private too. We all do. I simply have to share my private plane with 130 strangers.
While trapped in middle seat 34B, I use high-speed internet delivered by satellites launched on private rockets. Elon Musk uses the same service on his plane too, the showoff.
Fine, he puts satellites into orbit. Fine, his rockets have rescued astronauts stranded at the International Space Station. Fine, his satellite internet has connected every remote community around the world, empowering the poorest of the poor and least powerful.
But should he be rewarded for any of that — with money?
The iPhone in Elon’s pocket is the same as the iPhone in mine. Steve Jobs helped put a supercomputer, camera, map, library, newspaper, television studio and argument factory into billions of pockets.
But he became rich, so presumably the whole project was morally suspect.
Sam Walton drove down the price of countless things working families buy. Jeff Bezos built a system that can bring those things to our doors, sometimes in 30 minutes.
But Bezos is easy to dislike because his wife is mostly plastic, or rendered by Pixar or something.
Fine, he’s easy to hate. But does his wealth matter more than the value created for us?
Class envy on the ballot
Amendment 87 has generated plenty of talk about forcing rich people to “pay their fair share.” It has generated considerably less discussion about class envy, which is doing the political heavy lifting.
“Fair share” sounds principled. “I resent that guy’s boat and trophy wife” sounds childish.
Yet the boat is doing more campaigning than the tax tables.
We rarely stop to consider how much of modern life exists because somebody took an absurd risk.
That somebody might be a famous billionaire. It might also be the developer who built your home, the employer who created your job so you can afford it or the real estate agent who found your house.
Their success is part of your higher standard of living.
I am not claiming rich people aren’t douchebags. For efficiency’s sake, let’s stipulate that every last one of them is unbearable.
The question is whether our lives are nevertheless better because of what they created.
And do we want to chase them out of Colorado as progressive income taxes have chased them out of California, New York, Massachusetts and elsewhere? Massachusetts is now dead last in the nation for new business creation. That’s our future.
What have we sacrificed in exchange for the greatest improvement in quality of life throughout all of human history?
Mostly, we have had to endure the sight of successful people having more than us.
That seems like a remarkably small price to pay.
Amendment 87 asks you to treat envy as policy and punish people we dislike, while inflation quietly expands the definition of whom we’re punishing.
The sales pitch is “soak the rich.”
The fine print is “eventually, that means you.”
Nash Herman retweeted
Colorado taxpayers have a bill of rights in our State Constitution!
Of course, greedy politicians are doing everything they can to steal more of our money, but thanks to the Colorado Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), we are able to restrain the growth of government.
TABOR requires voter approval for new taxes, limits the growth of government and refunds our tax money if the government collects too much.
In this video, Brandon discusses TABOR and explains how valuable it is for the people of Colorado.
Nash Herman retweeted
Proposition NN wants to keep your tax refunds forever.
Paid for by Affordable Colorado, Katie Kennedy, Registered Agent
#thinkfreedom #copolitics #AffordableColorado
Nash Herman retweeted
These are three short, 15-second videos about Proposition NN.
The TABOR Committee urges you to share this with your family, friends and colleagues.
Don't forget to vote No No on NN!
thetaborfoundation.org/vote-…
thetaborfoundation.org/vote-…
thetaborfoundation.org/vote-…
Nash Herman retweeted
The political system is becoming increasingly dependent on monetary inflation while the public grows increasingly frustrated with its consequences.
“Amendment 87 will not fix our economy or the state budget; it’s a long-term tax hike that will steadily push ever more filers into higher brackets through no fault of their own, leaving Colorado worse off.”
Debating the timeline of bracket creep misses the big picture, which supporters of such bad policy probably prefer. Read more here: completecolorado.com/2026/10… @CompleteCO










