ECONOMIC PROSPERITY
ENVIRONMENT
FAMILY VALUES
EDUCATION
MEDICAL CARE
CHARACTER
SECOND AMENDMENT
ENERGY POLICIES
TREASURER RESPONSIBILITIES
PERA
THE GENIUS OF THE AMERICAN SPIRIT



CHANGE YOUR WORLD

COLORADO FREEDOM

ANNOUNCEMENT TOUR

ECONOMY

EDUCATION

HEALTH CARE

THE AMERICAN SPIRIT

ENERGY
NEWS RELEASES

May 20
Polis Admits COVID-19 Deaths are Inflated by More than 30%

Polis Admits COVID-19 Deaths are Inflated by More than 30%

The state health department has been overstating the death count from the COVID-19 virus. Polis even said: "...what the people of Colorado want to know is not who died with COVID-19, but who died of COVID-19..." Consequently the official death count from COVID-19 is now almost 300 less than their original number.

Congratulations to Rep. Baisley for requesting a formal investigation that apparently motivated the governor to

...
Read More

Polis Admits COVID-19 Deaths are Inflated by More than 30%

The state health department has been overstating the death count from the COVID-19 virus. Polis even said: “…what the people of Colorado want to know is not who died with COVID-19, but who died of COVID-19…” Consequently the official death count from COVID-19 is now almost 300 less than their original number.

Congratulations to Rep. Baisley for requesting a formal investigation that apparently motivated the governor to admit the numbers have been inflated by more than 30%. This is significant on several levels. These numbers are used to assess the mortality rate of the virus and the effectiveness of treatments and the effectiveness of the lockdown.

Finally they got caught where everyone can see their methods. I hope we can eventually change the laws to reduce their influence on the policies of this state.

However, the story does not end here. if you go to their website they now admit that far fewer people have actually died because of COVID-19, but they still keep reporting the inflated number of those who died with a positive COVID-19 test as well, and that larger number is still what the CDC is reporting for Colorado.

In my investigating further I have found that the inflated number is what CDC is requiring to be reported. Hence the CDC number for the entire nation must also be inflated. This means that if Colorado’s inflation rate (more than 30%) is the same as the nation, the overall number of deaths from COVID-19 in the nation is inflated by more than 26,000!



May 9
Open the Churches Now!
This should be seriously considered before another Sunday passes. The title sums it up, but the Townhall published my commentary on religious freedom and the the complete article can be found online Read More
This should be seriously considered before another Sunday passes. The title sums it up, but the Townhall published my commentary on religious freedom and the the complete article can be found online 
Here.


May 4
One week ago the Colorado governor issued executive order #44 for the pandemic.

He calls it “Safer at Home,” as opposed to his previous “Stay at Home” order. When he discussed it a few days earlier at a press conference it was supposed to be the first step in opening up the state. However, in close examination this order is more like doubling down on the orders to keep Colorado closed, keeping everyone in something that looks a lot like house arrest and overall keeping a tight control on all we do in Colorado for the next 30 days... at least.

George Or

... Read More

He calls it “Safer at Home,” as opposed to his previous “Stay at Home” order. When he discussed it a few days earlier at a press conference it was supposed to be the first step in opening up the state. However, in close examination this order is more like doubling down on the orders to keep Colorado closed, keeping everyone in something that looks a lot like house arrest and overall keeping a tight control on all we do in Colorado for the next 30 days… at least.

George Orwell had a word for this kind of rhetoric. He called it “doublespeak.” This is when the government says one thing, and in fact does the opposite. Another literary example of this manipulation of the public through shrewdly constructed press statements can be found in C.S. Lewis’ book “That Hideous Strength.” In it the protagonist is hired to deceive the public with newspaper articles which made completely repulsive public policies sound reasonable and even desirable.

In “Safer at Home” the governor is actually consolidating his power by ordering the state health department and local health districts to also issue orders that reinforce his orders. He continues to make every order at least 30 days long, even though the law only allows him to declare an emergency for no more than 30 days at a time, and then issue orders within that limited time frame. Counties are required to go through a complex system of approvals if they want to modify the strict standards of his statewide orders. And for those of us older than 65? We are still under the more strict Stay at Home order.

Some businesses are allowed to operate in a very limited fashion, but in all cases we are being treated like subjects rather than free citizens. At this point of controlling the effects of this epidemic and properly managing a collapsing economy the decision making authority should be returned to the citizens. Instead we see a governor who is gathering all of the power to himself and his centralized government system.

This “new normal” cannot be allowed to continue.

IT WILL NOT MAKE THE VIRUS GO AWAY but it will undermine our inalienable, Constitutionally guaranteed rights

I am just giving a brief overview of his six page executive order, which was followed by a 34 page order from the state health department. For a more detailed and much longer description of the governor’s orders I highly recommend Rob Natelson’s article in Complete Colorado. https://pagetwo.completecolorado.com/…/natelson-latest-cov…/

If you read Mr. Natelson’s article be prepared to be frustrated and confused. Not by his writing, for he is clear and concise, but by the complex, controlling and oblique commands the governor has created.



April 18
Thousands Sign Re-Open Colorado Declaration
The Declaration is calling on the governor to remove the stay at home orders. The alternative that I am seeking is letting individuals decide what works best for themselves. The vast majority will chose to continue to social distance and protect those most at risk. But at the same time businesses can start to rebuild. Churches can assemble (as each sees appropriate), people can begin to be productive again and life can start to return to a somewhat more normal pace.

...
Read More The Declaration is calling on the governor to remove the stay at home orders. The alternative that I am seeking is letting individuals decide what works best for themselves. The vast majority will chose to continue to social distance and protect those most at risk. But at the same time businesses can start to rebuild. Churches can assemble (as each sees appropriate), people can begin to be productive again and life can start to return to a somewhat more normal pace.

For more information go to the April 18, 2020 Lundberg Report.


March 3
National Popular Vote Debate
On March 1, 2019, as a part of Centennial Institute's program for CPAC, I was a part of a debate on the National Popular Vote, which the Colorado legislature just passed. Here is a link to the debate and the written comments I prepared for the debate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quKYu2wlVEk&t=1751s

For the sake of brevity I will call the National Popular Vote Compact the NPV.

Senator Gardner and I both oppose this bill. He considered the bill this year and I had the opportu

...
Read More On March 1, 2019, as a part of Centennial Institute’s program for CPAC, I was a part of a debate on the National Popular Vote, which the Colorado legislature just passed. Here is a link to the debate and the written comments I prepared for the debate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quKYu2wlVEk&t=1751s

For the sake of brevity I will call the National Popular Vote Compact the NPV.

Senator Gardner and I both oppose this bill. He considered the bill this year and I had the opportunity to hear this very same issue in 2007 in the House State Affairs Committee. That year it was called Senate Bill 46, which had passed the Senate. However, in the House committee, with seven Democrats and four Republicans we defeated the measure with a vote of 1-10. In 2007 this bill was killed with a strong bi-partisan vote. I wish I could say the same for this year.

The NPV will radically overturn the system we have for electing the President and it has the potential of doing much more damage to our civil government.

It severely upsets the balance of power between the states and the Federal government. It will deny all states not in the compact any meaningful role in selecting the President.

The compact violates several parts of the Constitution and, if it is implemented it may lead to a significant constitutional crisis.

I submit that the NPV could become a grave threat to the union of our republic.

In the current system the states elect the President, with the NPV individual state authority and influence will be severely diminished. Consequently the NPV will concentrate more power into the Federal government.

The NPV also violates several parts of the Constitution: Article I, Section 10, Article II, Section 1, Article V, and the Twelfth Amendment.

The proponents argue that in Article I each state is given the authority to determine how their electors are selected and all the NPV does is direct that state to ignore the will of their own citizens and follow the national vote totals. But, they are using this clause to completely destroy the reason the Electoral College system was created, which is to empower the states to elect the President.

The NPV is designed to become effective if a bare minimum of 270 electoral votes are controlled by the states participating in the compact. This would force at least 20-30 additional states who never adopted the compact to live under this new rule.

Additionally, the NPV does not require the approval of Congress, even though this is a constitutional mandate for all state compacts that affect the balance of powers between the states and the Federal government.

I conclude my opening remarks with bad news and good news.

First the bad: If the NPV is implemented, here is how it will play out. It will be challenged by some states not a part of the compact. I find it hard to believe the court will uphold the compact, but in either case the decision will cast a long, dark shadow of distrust on all succeeding presidential elections. We will have two separate, mutually exclusive mechanisms for electing the President, each endorsed by a large number of individual states. This will further divide the union into two distinct camps. In these times of razor sharp political conflict we cannot afford to fan these flames of disagreement and distrust.

Now the good news: There is a better way. If the proponents of the NPV are so convinced that the President should not be selected by the states, don’t try to work around the Constitution, amend it, as it is established in Article V. Go through Congress or go through the states directly, Article V provides both possibilities. Our Founders wisely knew that such dramatic changes needed to be a high bar, requiring a super majority of agreement.

The NPV Compact is an illegal end run around the principles and the process of our government. Please abandon this foolish and dangerous path. I welcome an honest and healthy debate on refining our civil government, but don’t tear down the authority of our Constitution. Work within that brilliant foundation which has guided our nation for nearly two and a half centuries.






January 29
2018 Election
In this year's election, the people of Colorado soundly rejected all statewide tax and spend measures, and yet they elected politicians who are committed to more taxes and higher spending. This double-minded message is sure to yield some shocking results.

Here is what I expect to see:

The governor-elect is committed to "100% renewable energy." We will never get there, but we may kill off much of the state trying. "100% renewable energy" are code words for driving up the pri

...
Read More In this year’s election, the people of Colorado soundly rejected all statewide tax and spend measures, and yet they elected politicians who are committed to more taxes and higher spending. This double-minded message is sure to yield some shocking results.

Here is what I expect to see:

The governor-elect is committed to “100% renewable energy.” We will never get there, but we may kill off much of the state trying. “100% renewable energy” are code words for driving up the price of energy (gas, oil and electricity) to unsustainable levels and driving the oil and gas industry out of the state (over 100,000 high paying jobs). Utilizing all energy sources in a free market environment is the smart way to go. “100% renewable energy” is currently political, scientific and economic insanity.

Red flag laws will become a reality here in Colorado. This is raw gun confiscation without any due process. Look what it has already done in Maryland.

The government will take over the rest of the medical system and we will be left with taxes we cannot afford and rationed medical care that only works if you don’t get sick. The people of Colorado rejected that idea two years ago, but have now elected its advocates. I expect this will be brought in incrementally, but inevitably, unless we stop it in 2020.

Colorado will adopt the California emission standards and the cost of our personal vehicles will go up and up. The Colorado Auto Dealers Association assures us it will decimate vehicle sales (collapsing one more industry in Colorado). This is also overt manipulation of our freedom to drive the cars we think best for our families. SUVs and trucks will be heavily taxed (directly or indirectly) and tiny cars will be subsidized.

TABOR will be attacked again. The tax and spend politicians hate TABOR (the Constitutional Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights) and will do all they can to eliminate this restraint on out of control government spending.

I could go on, and on, but I think you get the picture. Maybe the next two years will be the shock treatment Colorado voters need to elect more rational leaders in 2020.



April 29
The End of My Campaign
My thanks to the hundreds of people who stepped up to be a part of my campaign for state treasurer. Your sacrificial work was a big encouragement to me. Unfortunately I failed to get the requisite 30% of the vote at the Republican State Assembly to qualify for the primary ballot.

Congratulations to Justin Everett for winning the assembly vote. I also commend Brita Horn and Brett Barkey for running strong campaigns, but like myself, they did not make the ballot.

Two other ca

...
Read More My thanks to the hundreds of people who stepped up to be a part of my campaign for state treasurer. Your sacrificial work was a big encouragement to me. Unfortunately I failed to get the requisite 30% of the vote at the Republican State Assembly to qualify for the primary ballot.

Congratulations to Justin Everett for winning the assembly vote. I also commend Brita Horn and Brett Barkey for running strong campaigns, but like myself, they did not make the ballot.

Two other candidates made the ballot via the petition process; Polly Lawrence and Brian Watson.

Having spent a great deal of time with all of the candidates who did make the ballot, I have a good idea of who is the best candidate and who should be the most effective in this high office. My choice is Brian Watson. I believe Brian has the skills, passion and resources to go the distance in the election and to serve our state with distinction as our next state treasurer.


April 12
My Answer to Attack Ads
In this last week leading up to the Republican State Assembly there have been several pieces generated by a PAC supporting one of my opponents with the primary goal of questioning my commitment to conservative values.

First, let me reiterate, I will not go negative. I never have and I never will. I will, however, attempt to clarify some of the facts.

I appreciate the citizens and organizations outside of the legislature who rate many of the bills upon which we vote

...
Read More In this last week leading up to the Republican State Assembly there have been several pieces generated by a PAC supporting one of my opponents with the primary goal of questioning my commitment to conservative values.

First, let me reiterate, I will not go negative. I never have and I never will. I will, however, attempt to clarify some of the facts.

I appreciate the citizens and organizations outside of the legislature who rate many of the bills upon which we vote. Their observations are very informative and often uncover new information we need. However, I do not use their recommendations as a voting list. Often there is more information that we are working with than just the language of the bill and consequently their analysis is not a very accurate picture of the true conservative perspective of a particular bill.

For example, in 2016 C.U.T. rated a red light camera ban as a no vote because the bill contained a safety clause, which was really not enough reason to reject the very good idea of banning red light cameras.

Additionally, I found it telling that in the letters and online articles that are attacking my voting record they left out the most recent year (2017) of the C.U.T. votes. In 2017 my vote rating jumped up over 25% above the previous year (from 47% to 73%). Their graph of my voting record would look at lot different if it also showed that dramatic upswing in 2017. The year of which they decided to end (2016) rated 12 of my votes for that year. I have not counted it up, but I know I voted hundreds of times in that year and those 12 votes cannot fully capture my voting patterns.

The other vote I feel compelled to defend is for SB13-195, which was concerning online delivery of concealed carry training classes. This was a part of the terrible gun control bills the Democrats rolled out five years ago. We were hopelessly out numbered in both houses. The bill, as introduced, banned any use of the internet or any other electronic means for any part of a training class. As I heard this bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee I saw a small possibility of taking most of the sting out of this bill.

I asked the bill sponsor if she would be open to amending the bill to allow online or electronic teaching tools in a training class if it was not the exclusive way the class was conducted. She agreed, if I would support the bill. So I did and through that managed to defang one of the gun bills that we Republicans were powerless to stop any other way. Without that amendment a concealed carry training class today could not even legally use a power point in the class. With the amendment in place the only classes affected are exclusive online classes without any hands on, face-to-face instruction.


April 8
We must be Ahead!
Some attack pieces have recently been surfacing against my campaign for state treasurer.

Here is my response:

I suspect the good news from all these negative attack pieces is I must be seen as the conservative to beat at the assembly. The group claiming responsibility for these attack pieces is JET PAC, which, as registered with the Secretary of State has the stated purpose of Electing Justin Everett to be state treasurer.

In all of the elections I have c

...
Read More Some attack pieces have recently been surfacing against my campaign for state treasurer.

Here is my response:

I suspect the good news from all these negative attack pieces is I must be seen as the conservative to beat at the assembly. The group claiming responsibility for these attack pieces is JET PAC, which, as registered with the Secretary of State has the stated purpose of Electing Justin Everett to be state treasurer.

In all of the elections I have conducted I have never gone negative and I don’t intend on starting now.

As a founding member of the Republican Study Committee of Colorado (www.RSCC.us) and the current chairman I can hardly be accused of being aligned with the liberal wing of the party. Nor am I guilty of carrying the water for any special interest group, except maybe those citizens who value life, TABOR, liberty, and freedom rather than higher taxes and more control from every government agency.

In the past four years I have been in a slim majority in the Senate, with leadership responsibilities (including Assistant Majority Leader, Chairman of the Appropriations Committee and member of the Joint Budget Committee). In these positions we do not have the luxury of just saying no to everything. We have had to work with the Democrat controlled House and produce a balanced budget every year. This is our Constitutional duty. I stand behind my voting record as the most responsible, conservative record of fighting the creep of government intrusion into our lives. I have held firm as a rock-solid conservative.

What cannot be captured in outside rating systems is the battles we fight with each bill to defend life, TABOR, parental rights, the 2nd Amendment, etc.. Let me be clear on one important point: I applaud Principles of Liberty (POL) and the Colorado Union of Taxpayers (C.U.T.). In fact, POL had its origin within the RSCC several years ago during which I was also the chairman of RSCC. C.U.T. has honored me seven different years with their highest awards of Champion or Guardian of the Taxpayer. These outside rating systems have provided a good touchstone for conservative values and they inform many citizens and legislators. But there is often much more to specific legislation which an outside source cannot fully capture.

For example, on the Joint Budget Committee there are three Democrats and three Republicans. It takes four votes to put anything into the budget, and we do not have the prerogative to change the statutes which direct much of the budget setting. At the end of the day decisions must be made which facilitate the already established laws. I have fought many battles on specific line items and my vote did sometimes make the difference, but we did not always prevail. Often the final line item is much less than what the Left wanted, but it was still not what was our ideal.

Recognizing that we have several Republican candidates for this office I have tried my best to keep the peace among us. I have tried to lead by example because we Republicans are famous for wounding each other in the primary to the extent that we then lose in the general election. We cannot afford to go down that road in 2018. As a part of this strategy I have not actively campaigned for extensive endorsements, not wishing to further divide our party’s loyalties. None-the-less some have stepped up and given me their endorsement, including the author of TABOR, Douglas Bruce, Dr. Barry W. Poulson, Emeritus Professor of Economics at the University of Colorado and Penn Pfiffner, the chairman of the TABOR Committee, all of whom are political veterans who know what it takes to be a rock-solid conservative.

For anyone who really wants to know the difference between the Republican candidates for state treasurer, check out our websites and don’t just look at what is there, look for what isn’t there. In other words, is the candidate fully disclosing their legislative record? My website (www.KevinLundberg.com) is a complete picture of the bills I have carried over the past 15 years and I have an extensive record of the weekly reports I have published for many of those years. The past two years of my Lundberg Report can be found in the archives section at: http://kevinlundberg.iwebc.net/…/1970-01-01-00-0…/Index.html. This is the most thorough information concerning the big issues for which I have fought over the past two years.

Another way for me to respond to these attacks in a positive manner is to ask you and others to pass this information on to others and challenge them to check it out for themselves. I am confident that anyone who digs deep into my record will see I am a rock-solid conservative who is fully prepared to take on the position of state treasurer.
- Kevin Lundberg


March 12
PERA reform
SB-200, was introduced in the Colorado Senate by Senator Jack Tate on March 7. The fund is projected to be $30-80 billion short of the money needed to meet its obligations over the long term. The bill, which has bipartisan support, makes many changes, but probably not enough to actually make PERA fully funded. Changes include increasing the age of retirement, limiting the cost of living increases, increasing the number of years used to calculate actual benefits, and increasing the contribu

...
Read More SB-200, was introduced in the Colorado Senate by Senator Jack Tate on March 7. The fund is projected to be $30-80 billion short of the money needed to meet its obligations over the long term. The bill, which has bipartisan support, makes many changes, but probably not enough to actually make PERA fully funded. Changes include increasing the age of retirement, limiting the cost of living increases, increasing the number of years used to calculate actual benefits, and increasing the contributions from employees and employers. Probably the most controversial change is opening up the opportunity for employees to take a defined contribution plan rather than the defined benefit plan. The bill has a long way to go to become law, and many changes are expected, so it is still too early to know how far SB-200 will go to reform the deficiencies of the current Public Employee Retirement Association in Colorado.



COLORADO NATIVE

kevin@kevinlundberg.com   |   P.O. Box 378, Berthoud, CO 80513

Archives