You can’t afford your government: The cost of Colorado’s “affordability” agenda

By Dave Kerber | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice

Here we go again. Another crisis has materialized demanding our immediate attention and action. In the 2024 elections, Democrats took to lamenting the unaffordability of stuff in America to sweep to victory.

Absent in those campaigns were any suggestions as to exactly how to make things “affordable” nor was there any mention that it was the Democrats with their massive post-COVID, Inflation Reduction Act spending that crammed money into the economy causing the rapid increase in inflation and economic unhappiness.

Trump initially responded that affordability was a hoax, that the price of gas was down, and that little girls only needed two dolls not thirty-four. After being mocked by those who caused the crisis, he pivoted to declare that he too was for affordability, and he was going to do something about it. Thus, the battle lines have been drawn for the 2026 mid-term elections.

Now, I’m not here to claim that all is okie-dokie as Trump attempted to do. 

The problem is that it is a political fool’s errand to restructure society to come up with a solution to “affordability” to make everyone happy because what is affordable differs from individual to individual based on their material assets and what they, in their subjective minds, value. In other words, you can’t win.

In a recent survey, 37 percent said they can’t take a family of four to a pro sporting event, and 47 said they can’t afford a vacation that requires air travel.

While unhappy for those unable to personally attend the recent Broncos-Patriots conference championship game in a sub-freezing blizzard, it would not appear to rise to the level of societal harm, in my humble opinion, that would cause us to take to the streets. 

In most of our discussions about affordability, after we get past the price of concert tickets and beef, it inevitably goes to housing. 

In this case, we are told by our government what our housing costs should be and urged to be unhappy should we not reach the suggested governmental standard. We are told that we should not spend more than 30 percent of our income on housing, and to prostrate ourselves as victims of the system and the filthy rich should we not be granted the appropriate financial largesse. 

Now this might be good advice from your dad and as valid as his advice to eat your vegetables, but should 30 percent be a societal standard against which housing happiness is measured and if found lacking to be remedied by the State?

This is an unwinnable debate for Republicans as they will inevitably fail to make all parts of society subjectively affordable while the Democrats won’t even try instead focusing on shifting costs from one group to another in order to garner votes.

The Democrats are going to the usual toolbox of “tax the rich” promoting envy and demanding the destruction of the billionaire class, taking and redistributing their property to the rest of us. You know…making sure everyone pays their “fair share” without any agreement as to what fair is—or the realization that if you seize every penny that billionaires have, there isn’t nearly enough to satisfy the redistributionist desires of the Democrats.

As for the specific proposals that have surfaced to steal from those who earn money through their hard-earned labor, there is the continuation of the “temporary” Obamacare subsidies for those who make up to $168,000/yr for a family of four. 

Other proposals coming from New York City include government run grocery stores, free day care, free bus rides and more rent control. We have that here in Colorado too. It’s just called “deed restricted affordable housing”. Should Mamdani be blocked from taxing billionaires, he has threatened to raise property taxes on the backs of everyone, poor and rich alike by 9 percent +.

What all these programs have in common is that none of them reduce the costs of anything. They merely create more programs for government to redistribute money from one group to another while taking a cut off the top for itself and non-profit groups to administer the transfers.

This is not to say that government can’t do anything to reduce financial burdens on its subjects. 

How about, Government quit taking so much money from us so we could use it for, you know, affordability?  

Rather than Government focusing on taking money from one group of people and giving it to other people while at the same time increasing its power and head count, it should instead be laser focused on its own spending schemes and business practices. In other words, the new policy should be: “Look at yourself and quit spending our money on stupid stuff!”

Our own Denver Council of Regional Governments (DRCOG) just received a $200 million Biden era grant from the EPA to: (1) provide heat pumps for lower income households; (2) connect homeowners with energy advisors; (3) help local governments and landlords; and (4) develop a workforce for installing and maintaining these heat pump systems. Looks like this one slipped past DOGE. 

Two hundred million to “connect homeowners with energy advisors and provide heat pumps that are really swell as long as it doesn’t get too cold when they don’t work anymore”? Helping local governments and landlords? 

It would be a better help if DRCOG would just leave us alone. We are never going to get that money back.

We also have a $15 million study to determine whether to expand Peña Blvd, the access road to the Denver International Airport. Not to build anything mind you…just to “study it.” 

DIA is planning to expand its capacity from 80 million passengers to 120 million. The road is currently jammed with traffic. I would provide an answer whether to expand the road or not for say, hmmm… $10,000. By the way, the answer is yes.

Or perhaps we could quit spending $1.2 billion a year to fund empty RTD buses and railcars, which not enough people want to ride because they don’t go anywhere near where people live or want to go. 

These are just a few examples off the top of my head of which I am sure that the readership of this column could supplement to further the innovative policy initiative of “Quit spending money on stupid stuff.”

The effort to achieve affordability through government programs which only spend more of our money has an additional downside apart from the disillusionment and unhappiness it will ultimately create. 

While our representatives waste their time and our money chasing new quixotic programs like affordable housing, rent control and regulating the price of hot dogs at Coors field (no kidding…See HB26-1012), they have little time to work on eliminating their own failed governmental programs previously instituted for favored interest groups. 

My friends in government often say that they can do multiple things at once; you know, like walking and chewing gum. Experience tells us, they cannot. 

As property taxes are due in the next few days, the people suffer from their increasing inability to afford the government that they do not want or deserve. They don’t understand why they’re being taxed so much without getting more in return.

Dave Kerber is an attorney and former business owner who just finished 16 years as a Greenwood Village Council Member and Mayor Pro Tem. He writes on substack at the KERB Appeal, davekerber.substack.com

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.