http://www.backseatbudgeter.com/forums/3.aspxenCommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Debug Build: 40407.4157)http://www.backseatbudgeter.com/forums/thread/6.aspxThu, 17 Feb 2011 15:48:58 GMT01f1ed31-2bc4-4583-bdbd-4a3f947fa0f1:6mhsmith4510http://www.backseatbudgeter.com/forums/thread/6.aspxhttp://www.backseatbudgeter.com/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=3&PostID=6It seems to me that I was able to increase spending moderately in a number of areas, and maintaining the status quo in others with minor to marginal tax increases. However, because of TABOR, even returning revenue to what had been previously approved...e.g. personal income tax to 1999 levels of 5%, as opposed to the 4.86%, has to now be re-approved by the voting public. Also, if we increase the corporate income tax rate to an amount that still puts us in the lower half of the middle of the pack, it has to go to a vote??? While a agree that TABOR is a good thing as it helps to reign in uncontrolled taxation and spending, it sound like there is a real need to re-examine TABOR and correct those parts which seem, from my perspective, to be either wrong or , at the least in need of modernization, to fit the current needs of the people. Protections are good, but only if they don&#39;t impede progress!<div style="clear:both;"></div>