The latest polling data shows a tight race between the proponents and the opponents of Referenda C & D -- the Colorado Legislature and Governor's compromise proposal to address budget pressures facing the State due to the convergence of the recent Recession, the severe limitations of the ratcheting effects of the voter-approved 1992 Taxpayer Bill of Rights, and the passage a decade later of Amendment 23 -- guaranteeing annual increases for public education (Kindergarten through High School) irrespective of whether or not the State has more money to spend.

What TABOR did was reduce the base of government and prevent it from springing back, even when times became good again. State tax coffers will be full next year but the State's budget actually will have to be cut because TABOR prohibits the Government from quickly returning to higher spending levels even in good times. The result will be Colorado will collect the tax dollars it needs but won't be able to spend so many of them it actually will have to cut the budgets of many departments. Referenda C gives the State a five-year time-out and allows it to spend the taxes it collects. Tax rates still are not allowed to rise but the monies collected can be spent -- not refunded. This, in turn, would permanently raise the base of the State's budget permanently -- hence, allowing it to catch up with the dip which occurred during the most recent Recession.

Amendment 23 was passed at a time when everyone blithely assumed Good Times were permanent. When the Recession hit, K-12 education funding continued to increase, almost unabated, while the State's net, disposable revenues actually went down. This, in turn, put pressure on the General Assembly to look for money and cut budgets. If Referendum C fails, Amendment 23 still will remain in force. If Referendum C passes, the pressure to change Amendment 23 will disappear.

Part 2 of 5: What If There's A Bad Surprise?

One of the most interesting parts of the debate about Referenda C & D is whether or not the taxes which will be collected anyway but allowed to be spent rather than refunded will be a total of $3.1 billion or $3.7 billion over the five-year period proposed in Referendum C. What no one is talking about is the answer to the question, "What will happen if the Economy stops improving and actually stumbles?"

There are a number of factors which could sour the U.S. Economy quickly. Interest rates are rising. If the housing boom comes to an end, the Economy likely would be in dire straits. The U.S. dollar has been under pressure for the past three years and is beginning to show signs of wear. If a few foreign national banks decide to stop buying our bucks, the dollar could nosedive -- making all the goods we import expensive and launching an inflationary wave. With Americans' savings rate being nonexistent, few families have the resources to hang on in troubled times. Bankruptcies already are being filed in record numbers and the amount of debt owed by individuals and corporations is at a record level.

Even worse, the Federal Government now is running $300 and $400 billion budget deficits and the National Debt is at an all-time high. As this borrowing makes fewer dollars available for the private sector, once interest rates increase, the Economy could suffer further. With astronomical energy prices added to the mix, consumer confidence could crash and Americans could begin cutting back significantly on their expenditures. Given that our Economy is driven primarily by consumer spending (i.e., two out of three dollars in the Economy are related to consumer spending), it is easy to see the entire Economy slowing down and quickly hitting a zero growth or even negative growth rate.

If this happens, the argument about $3.1 billion versus 3.7 billion becomes moot. Voters could pass Referenda C & D and find the State ends up with only a quarter or a tenth of the dollars expected. If the Economy did go South and it happened quickly, it's even possible there would be no significant amount of additional dollars to spend on high priority needs.

Surprisingly, the proponents of Referendum C have not discussed this possibility and, instead, have walked into the trap of arguing about whether or not the passage of Referenda C means taxpayers won't get refunds totaling $3.1 billion, $3.7 billion or even $5.0 billion, as some opponents claim.

Part 3 of 5: The Polls Are No Help At All

One of the most interesting developments in the upcoming decision regarding Referenda C & D -- the State's attempt to keep and then spend more of the taxes it's already collecting -- is that people were evenly split on the Referenda three months ago and it appears their positions have changed only slight. Originally, the Referenda were ahead by the narrowest of margins -- one poll had them ahead 43% to 42%. This was a statistical dead-heat, given the fact the margin of error was +/-4% (which means either number could go up or down by as much as 4 points).

In recent polls, the Denver Post had the Referenda leading 47% to 44%, with 9% undecided. The Rocky Mountain News/CBS4 poll had them leading 49% to 46%, with 5% undecided. In both cases, the margin was so small that either side could easily win, especially given the +/-4% margin of error for each poll. What this means is that, right up to Election Day on Tuesday, November 1st, no one will truly know the fate of the Referenda.

Both sides are engaged in massive spending efforts on advertising, with the proponents likely to out spend the opponents by a four to one margin. That gives the proponents an edge. But the opponents have the advantage of only needing to confuse voters or convince them the State is taking away money due citizens. It's much easier to say, "Don't let them take your money" than convince someone why he or she should give up a tax rebate. This gives the advantage to the opponents.

The outcome likely will be determined by turnout -- who actually votes. It's likely proponents have a substantial Get Out The Vote ("GOTV") effort while opponents probably are not organized at that level. This gives an advantage to the proponents. With most voters casting mail ballots, however, many people who would not go to the polls will vote. This probably is advantageous for the opponents because many people will vote who otherwise would not take the time to cast a ballot if they had to go to the polls.

For those who do vote, voting booth behavior could present a problem for the proponents. Although many people support the measures in principle, once they're alone in the voting booth or even at home in the kitchen with their ballots, it's easy for "slippage" to occur -- with otherwise likely supporters deciding at the last minute to vote their pocketbooks and mark "No, thank you" when they make a decision about the Referenda. We'll all know either Tuesday evening, November 1st, or the following Wednesday morning what Colorado's decision was. No matter what your position is, please do vote.

Part 4 of 5: Using Numbers To Confuse

One of the most confusing aspects of the Referenda C & D campaign involve all the numbers being tossed around. The proponents made a tactical mistake by talking about the State's annual budget ($15 billion, of which about $7 billion involves General Fund expenditures -- monies directly from Colorado taxpayers and not from the Federal Government) in the same breath as the amount the Referenda would provide cumulatively over a five year period -- $3.1 billion.

The real comparison should be (A) the annual budget ($15 to $19 billion over the five-year period) and the annual amount provided by Referenda C & D ($600 to $700 million annually over the five-year period) or (B) the five-year budget total (probably about $85 billion) and the five-year total from the Referenda ($3.1 billion). In each case, the amount being requested from taxpayers is about 4%. This is far less than the 20 to 25% which appears to be the case when the numbers are mixed.

Similarly, the primary figure which is most misleading is the opponents' use of an estimated $3,200 in tax rebates which taxpayers allegedly will not receive if C & D are approved by voters. The truth is the actual figure likely is less than $500 for the entire five-year period -- an average of about $98 per year rather than the $800 per year being touted by opponents.

This discrepancy is due to the opponents' use of a misleading calculation which fails to take into account the fact the General Assembly and Colorado Governors have redirected the majority of tax rebate dollars from everyday citizens to a whole host of special interests. These organizations and persons siphon off most of the money the average taxpayer otherwise would get back. The proponents should point this out because it means supporting C & D actually has minimal impact on the average voter. The proponents' problem is the issue calls attention to the fact that taxpayers' rebates are not going to them in the first place -- and that could make most taxpayers unhappy with their government.

Another problem is the opponents to C & D use the already erroneous $3,200 figure in a manner which makes it sound as if it is an annual figure rather than a cumulative one. This has made a big impression on voters and helps drive the "No" vote as many voters believe they would lose $3,200 every year for five years or more, if the Referenda pass.

One irony in all this is the proponents' decision to dumb-down their campaign and avoid going into detailed explanations of C & D. Had they taken the time to educate voters -- something political experts almost always recommend against doing -- they would have inoculated voters against an opposition campaign based on misinformation and distortion. Now it's too late and the traditional battle of perception is being waged, with Colorado's future hanging in the balance as far as either side is concerned.

Part 5 of 5: Can Facts Overcome Erroneous Perceptions?

Campaign consultants and political experts always warn candidates and referenda proponents to keep their message simple and consistent. The key, they almost all say, is to focus on and leverage the existing perceptions of voters. They argue it is too costly a task to actually educate voters and change their perceptions -- plus voters will end up confused anyway. Public opinion surveys and focus group tests proved everyone's eyes glazed over once anyone start talking about how the Taxpayer Bill of Rights technically works and what is happening to State government.

I disagree with this one-dimensional view and believe a small but significant percentage of the electorate -- perhaps as much as 20% -- is interested in and actually needs to know the details. Even if their eyes also glaze over at time, by giving them a thorough understanding of the facts, they not only become vaccinated against misinformation and false accusations but are in a better position to "spread the gospel" themselves -- perhaps enlarging their sphere of influence to as much as an additional 10% of the population. This means they could influence almost a third of voters when they are included.

The proponents of Referenda C & D primarily have relied on refuting the false claims of the opposition and showcasing a few major supporters -- Governor Bill Owens and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, in particular. This may not be as effective a strategy as proponents think but the Referenda continue to hold up in the polls, albeit by the statistically narrowest of margins.

The opponents of C & D have been effective by coming to the same initial conclusion as the proponents -- keep the message simple. Opponents have reduced their message to soundbites like "Everyone knows governments waste money and budgets can be cut further," "Politicians are dishonest and want to take your money," "You should be able to keep your money -- after all, it's yours," et cetera. These themes are simple, straightforward, and easy to understand. Unfortunately for the proponents, when they simplify their own message, they play into the hands of the opposition because they fail to give supporters the foundation for explaining why C & D truly are needed. Instead, their on the defensive, at best, and can't match the simplicity of the opposition's emotionally-charged message.

**********************************************

Aaron Harber hosts "The Aaron Harber Show," seen Fridays at 9:00 pm and Sundays at 2:00 pm on PBS Station KBDI-TV Channel 12. Please go to www.HarberTV.com for more information. Send your comments and topic suggestions for both columns and TV shows to Aaron@HarberTV.com. You also may view programs on a 24/7 basis via the "Broadcast Videos" section of the Website. Many of Aaron's columns also are available on the Website on the page entitled "Aaron's Opinions." You often can find them in The Colorado Statesman (www.ColoradoStatesman.com) as well as in The Denver Daily News (www.DenverDailyNews.com).