Analysis of Colorado's Amendment 58
Ending the Oil and Gas Industry Subsidy
In the worst-case scenario if this measure passes, Colorado's approximately 1.6 million households will pay an average of approximately $200 more a year if we end the subsidies to Big Oil. This assumes that energy companies pass on their increased costs to consumers in order to maintain their current high profits. However, being that the government tightly regulates most utility prices, energy companies raising their prices to absorb these costs are not likely to happen. According to Governor Bill Ritter, Colorado's share of the oil and natural gas markets is not large enough to affect the global price of oil or gas, so the claim that the prices at the pump or to heat our homes will rise is unfounded and merely a scare tactic.
There are several positive outcomes of this Amendment as well. A good majority of the estimated $321 million collected by ending this subsidy (about 60%) will go to funding scholarships for low and middle class Colorado residents to attend state universities. With fall tuition at UC Boulder for 12 credits running between $3,000 and $5,000 (depending on the program), this $192,600,000 could prove useful for many Colorado families. In addition, the state would use the remaining funds to clean up environmental damage caused by the energy industry and invest in the development of clean energy projects.
The proponents of this amendment face some tough competition from the energy industry. Big Oil will do whatever it takes to keep their $321 million dollar tax breaks on top of their record profits over the last several years. Voters face a choice of whether to continue providing subsidies to an already highly profitable industry or end these subsidies and devote that revenue towards education, environment, and clean energy project.
Published by Iago
Born and raised in Colorado. Former Air Force, BA in Political Science. Seeking MBA/MS Finance in the near future. Enjoys discussing fitness/health, finance, history, religion, and politics. View profile
- Affirmative Action: The Unstated Target of the Colorado Civil Rights InitiativeUsing deceptive language to trick voters into banning affirmative action, the state-by-state Civil Rights Initiative campaign increases discrimination, instead of eliminating it. Voters in Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska...
- Gas Prices Continue to Rise - How Can You Save Money?In the state of New Jersey gas prices find themselves under the three dollar mark, but in other countries such as Malta, people are paying as much as five to six dollars a gallon. What can we do to help cut back on ou...
- Politicians Deserve Some of the Blame for High Gas PricesThey're at it again-the politicians who want to blame everyone but themselves for the high price of gas at the pump. An inability for politicians to blame themselves is part of the problem causing high gas prices.
- Human Life Amendment on 2008 Colorado Ballot Colorado for Equal Rights is asking voters to support an amendment to the State Constitution defining "personhood" as beginning at the moment of conception. This is definitely a "hot button" campaign issue for the loc...
- Anti-Affirmative Action Ballot Item in Nebraska and ColoradoDespite a great deal of opposition and accusations of fraud there will be ballot items affecting affirmative action in Nebraska and Colorado. In California, Michigan and Washington the new laws have created lawsuits...
- With Amendment 58, Energy Prices on the Ballot in Colorado
- Colorado's Amendment 48 Could Ban Abortion
- Colorado Can Fix School Funding Fiasco
- An Examination of US Energy and Environmental Policies
- Hydrogen: The Future of Energy or a Shiny Diversion
- Wind Energy: Impacts for the Future
- "Personhood" Amendment to Make Colorado Roe V. Wade Battleground
- Colorado Amendment 58
- Colorado Energy Severance Tax Credit
- Colorado Scholarship Fund Initiative
5 Comments
Post a CommentWell I agree to a certain extent, however I don't believe EVERYONE should go to college, only those who can successfully pass without having to lower the standards. My home school education was more stringent than my college experience. Granted I went to a sub-par public school for my undergrad. However being stuck in a room with 400 18 year-olds and taking multiple choice Scantron tests was not my idea of higher education.
if this passes the only hope would be to bring forward an amendment to keep state schools honest. Regardless if this amendment passes the education in America needs to be adressed, so EVERYONE who wants to go to college are not olny allowed but welcomed.The bottom line is education in this country is suffering and the oil industry is NOT.
Actually, living in Texas and going to school there, I can tell you that it's worse to give money directly to the schools than to provide scholarships. If you give money directly to the schools, there is no incentive to reduce costs or offer better programs. If, however, you offer scholarships that students can use at the school of their choice, then schools will be forced to compete for that money by reducing costs in certain areas in order to offer better programs in other areas.
The problem with raising student loans and in this case, scholarships, is that colleges and universities will then raise their tuition prices since students will have more $$ to spend. That is a fact.
Just search for the graph (on Google) that shows how tuition rates rise every time a rise in scholarships and student loan available limits rise.
We complain about helathcare costs and want the prices reduced... When we complain about college costs, we want more money TO PAY THEM! That's backwards?>!>? Why are colleges raising prices so much? We need to lower tuition costs -- not give student more money... because tuition costs will rise the EXACT amount! It always has and always will.
One of the reasons