The Bell Colorado Voters Refuse to Hear

By C. J. Garbo | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice

Colorado is not experiencing a surprise budget crisis, it is experiencing the predictable result of a decade of voter signals.

As a recent exile, I can speak with new objectivity. Your legislature responds to incentives. Always. If you reward expansion of government, it expands. If you tolerate fiscal opacity, it deepens. If you ignore constitutional guardrails, elected officials learn they can ignore them too.

The current 1.2 billion dollar budget shortfall did not appear overnight. It is the logical outcome of a political training program voters themselves created.

Yes. Created.

When voters repeatedly elect candidates who promise new programs without demanding sustainable funding, the legislature learns something very specific. It learns you do not care how the government grows.

When voters tolerate constant pressure campaigns against TABOR, the legislature learns something even more dangerous. It learns you do not care what your constitution says.

TABOR is not symbolic language. It is a binding agreement between citizens and their government. It exists for one purpose: to require your permission before the government takes more of your money.

Yet, for decades, Colorado voters have watched:

– Attempts to weaken TABOR.

– Attempts to reinterpret TABOR.

– Attempts to bypass TABOR.

– Attempts to politically stigmatize TABOR supporters.

– Attempts to normalize permanent revenue retention.

And what signal did that send? Permission.

Legislatures do not drift into fiscal overreach by accident. They move when voters stop enforcing limits. The current shortfall exposes the deeper pattern.

Colorado expanded eligibility programs faster than revenue stability justified. Colorado increased recurring obligations while relying on temporary strength in high growth sectors. Colorado approved structural spending that assumes permanent economic momentum.

That momentum is already shifting.

Technology companies are signaling relocation decisions across the country. Firms respond to regulatory pressure. Firms respond to tax climate signals. Firms respond to political hostility toward their operating flexibility. When they move, they take high income earners with them. They take payroll tax revenue with them. They take capital investment with them.

They take stability with them. And when that revenue disappears, government does not shrink. Government replaces the difference.

From you.

Not through transparent consent. Not through constitutional discipline. Through reinterpretation, reclassification, and procedural maneuvering that avoids direct voter accountability.

This is not speculation. This is the pattern already underway.

A legislature trained to believe voters tolerate expansion will always choose expansion. A legislature trained to believe voters ignore constitutional erosion will always test constitutional limits. A legislature trained to believe voters accept fiscal complexity instead of fiscal clarity will always choose complexity.

That is how representative systems drift away from representation.

Slowly.

Quietly.

Procedurally.

People imagine tyranny arrives dramatically. It does not. It arrives administratively. It arrives through normalization. It arrives when citizens stop enforcing boundaries they already possess.

TABOR is one of those boundaries.

It exists because earlier generations of Coloradans understood something modern voters are forgetting.

Government does not restrain itself.

Citizens restrain government.

Conservatives in Colorado have been warning about this trajectory for years. They warned when spending accelerated faster than population growth. They warned when reserve levels became negotiation tools instead of safeguards. They warned when entitlement style expansions became politically untouchable. They warned when constitutional limits became messaging obstacles instead of governing rules.

Those warnings were not partisan theater, they were fiscal diagnostics.

Now the symptoms are visible. A 1.2 billion dollar gap is not just a number. It is a signal that the structure underneath state budgeting is weakening.

If voters continue signaling indifference to taxation limits, the legislature will respond rationally. It will increase revenue extraction.

If voters continue signaling indifference to constitutional enforcement, the legislature will respond rationally. It will bypass voter approval mechanisms.

If voters continue signaling indifference to program expansion discipline, the legislature will respond rationally. It will expand again.

You are not watching a budget debate, you are watching a civic feedback loop. Government is learning from you and, right now, it is learning the wrong lesson.

Colorado still has tools. Colorado still has constitutional leverage. Colorado still has the ability to correct direction before fiscal instability becomes structural dependency.

But those tools only work if voters use them. Silence trains legislators. Attention restrains them. Accountability redirects them. This moment is not routine budgeting.

This is the bell.

C. J. Garbo is a cybersecurity executive and public policy commentator with leadership experience across technology, law enforcement, and government. He serves as a business leader for a global technology organization and has led enterprise security engineering, compliance alignment, and risk strategy across complex environments governed by frameworks. He is a former peace officer and has served in public governance, where he works directly on land use, infrastructure, and local regulatory oversight affecting Colorado communities. Garbo writes frequently on the intersection of fiscal policy, constitutional limits, public safety, and institutional accountability. His work focuses on how incentives shape government behavior and how citizens can restore responsible stewardship through informed civic engagement.

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.