|
|
Newsletter — Issue 50 — Thursday, September 24, 2026
|
|
This newsletter has been published by Engage Colorado.
|
|
Open Letter #2: An Encouraging Update and an Urgent Call to Action
This Engage Colorado Newsletter reflects the personal opinions of Dan Caruso, written with the support of the Caruso Ventures team. The Ensuring Colorado's Innovation Future Coalition did not review and has not endorsed this Engage Colorado Newsletter.
|
|
|
|
The open letter asking Attorney General Phil Weiser — our presumptive next governor — and other Colorado political leaders to support Proposition 136 and oppose Amendment 87 began with a handful of people willing to attach their names to it. More than 260 have signed — founders, chief executives, investors, and civic leaders, many of them among the most consequential technology and business figures in this state.
260+ signatures is encouraging. However, we need the number of backers to increase dramatically if we are to get the full attention of our political leaders.
|
Amendment 87 Would Be a Catastrophic Setback for Colorado
Those who support Amendment 87 believe that high income earners can and should pay a higher rate. That view is understandable. Advocates also believe Colorado needs more tax revenue to fund programs such as healthcare and education. This might be true.
What advocates choose to deny is the probability that a graduated income tax will mean less tax revenue over time. The risk of this outcome is inconvenient, but it is one supported by objective analysis. And over and above the lower tax revenue is the loss of opportunities for younger Coloradans, and the consequences for everyday businesses that will suffer from a slow or negative growth economy. That is why Amendment 87 would be a catastrophic setback for Colorado.
So the easy path, for the political leaders and advocates behind 87, is to turn a blind eye to these very real risks. The tragedy is that by the time the effects are obvious, it will be too late to course correct.
|
The Evidence Is Undeniable
I tackled this head-on in Tuesday's issue, Correlation Is Not Causation. Across the thirty-one states that actually compete for technology companies and large employers, income tax rates and the choices a state's governing party makes each account for a fifth to a third of what separates the states gaining people, companies, and capital from the states losing them — at odds of roughly one in a hundred or better against chance.
The companies that never start here, the jobs placed in Arizona and Utah and Texas instead, and the tax base that funds our schools and our hospitals leaving with them — that is what a vote for Amendment 87 will mean.
Any political, business, or community leader who reads the analysis and cares about the future of Colorado should be deeply concerned.
|
Are We Making Progress with Our Political Leaders?
As best I can tell, we have not gained sufficient traction with Colorado's political leaders.
The letter is addressed to Attorney General Phil Weiser, Senator Michael Bennet, Senator John Hickenlooper, and Mayor Mike Johnston. Governor Polis has called a graduated income tax devastating to Colorado's economy, and he has added his name to the letter.
I have had direct communication with some of the addressees. Those conversations stay private.
What matters is what they do in public. If Amendment 87 is going to be stopped, these leaders need to publicly weigh in against it.
No signs of that yet.
Phil Weiser in particular has not said where he stands. Once he declares, he will not be able to take it back, which makes every day between here and then critical.
|
How Do We Influence Phil Weiser?
I have known Phil for a long time and worked alongside him on many initiatives. He is intelligent, a clear thinker, entrepreneurial in his instincts, and ambitious. He will make up his own mind and reach his own conclusion on this.
My concern is that the easiest path for him is avoidance — taking no position on Amendment 87, and engaging in no meaningful conversation about it. If this is the path he chooses, Amendment 87 is likely to pass.
No question in my mind that he understands the grave risk Amendment 87 poses to Colorado. And that coming out against it would result in a backlash from influential people in the national Democratic Party.
I hope Phil concludes that this is the matter where Colorado's long-term interest is his priority.
For him to reach that conclusion, he needs to hear from the business, technology, and community leaders who are his closest allies — that they too are deeply concerned about what Amendment 87 would do to the long-term well-being of this state.
If you are one of those allies, your voice carries more weight on this than anything I write here. I thank those of you that have already signed the Open Letter, and encourage more of you to do so.
|
Your Vote and Your Signature
Please join in and protect Colorado's future by voting no on Amendment 87.
Please also sign the Open Letter. And then forward this newsletter to three people and encourage them to add their signature as well.
|
If We Work Together, the Sky's the Limit
Colorado can be the most attractive innovation ecosystem in the world, and every Coloradan will share in the economic and cultural prosperity that results from being the world's leading geography for innovation. This is the Innovation Vision for Colorado.
But to have a realistic chance of achieving this vision, we must defeat Amendment 87.
|
|
|
|
|