Independence Institute's Oliver ties state's wine industry funding to having "Democrats in control of the legislature" -- but subsidy dates to GOP majority

Summary: Discussing a "survey" about the 2008-2009 Colorado state budget, radio host Amy Oliver suggested that the reason the document provides funding "to promote Colorado wines" is because "[w]e have the Democrats in control of the legislature, and they tend not to believe in free markets." She omitted that the Colorado Wine Industry Development Act dates to 1990 -- when Republicans controlled both houses of the legislature.

On her April 2 1310 KFKA broadcast, Independence Institute Director of Operations Amy Oliver asked whether the Colorado state budget for the upcoming fiscal year should include "$20,000 to promote Colorado wines." She then said, "Oh, I forgot: We have the Democrats in control of the legislature, and they tend not to believe in free markets. They tend to be more socialist in nature." But the "Colorado Wine Industry Development Act," which "declares that Colorado has a substantial interest in promoting the development of a viable and stable wine industry in this state," was passed in 1990, when Republicans held the majority in both houses of the Colorado General Assembly.

Oliver was discussing an April 1 item from the Republican Senate Minority Office's website, Colorado Senate News.com, about a "street survey" it conducted regarding items in the 2008-2009 Colorado budget, also known as the "Long Bill," which was then pending in the legislature. The Colorado House had approved the budget on March 27; the Senate passed an amended version on April 3. The following day, the House requested a conference to resolve the differences in the two versions.

From the April 2 broadcast of 1310 KFKA's The Amy Oliver Show:

OLIVER: I want to tell you about a couple of fun things before we get to David Kopel. This is from the Colorado Senate News. Now, this is from the Republican senators, so take it through that filter. But this is hysterical. It says, "A street survey shows Democratic budget -- or Dems' budget -- doesn't sit well with the average taxpayer." So remember, the Democrats control the House and the Senate and the governor's mansion in Colorado. And this Democrat-authored 2008-2009 budget -- well, let's just say there were some people who are less than thrilled with it. And you can check out this story that I'm gonna tell you about at the Colorado Senate News.

[...]

OLIVER: And then here's another one. Now, I got to tell you, I don't have any problems promoting wine. But should state -- should taxpayers be paying for $20,000 to promote Colorado wines? Now again, I don't have any problems promoting wines, but that strikes me as something the free market ought to do. Oh, I forgot: We have the Democrats in control of the legislature, and they tend not to believe in free markets. They tend to be more socialist in nature. So they want to promote Colorado wines.

Contrary to Oliver's suggestion that the state spends public funds "to promote Colorado wines" because "[w]e have the Democrats in control of the legislature," the Colorado Wine Industry Development Act (House Bill 90-1068) in fact was enacted in 1990, when the Republicans controlled both houses of the General Assembly. As a Colorado Legislative Council Staff research document notes, the measure "created the wine industry development board to promote and serve as a resource for the wine industry." The act's legislative declaration states:

The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that Colorado has a substantial interest in promoting the development of a viable and stable wine industry in this state. The general assembly further finds, determines, and declares that grape cultivation is closely related to fruit cultivation carried out in various parts of Colorado; that grape cultivation and wine production are a logical supplement to, and development of, existing agricultural business conducted in the state; that wine production has become a significant industry in other states because of the action of state and local governments in those areas to foster development of the industry; that a viable wine industry can enhance Colorado's tourist industry; that some aspects of wine industry development can best be accomplished by an industry-wide approach rather than by individual producers, such as conducting scientific research and disseminating and publishing the results of such research, promoting Colorado wines as distinct from those produced in other regions, and promoting awareness of responsible consumption of wine; and that the state should aid Colorado's wine industry through research and promotion to allow industry to realize its full potential in this state. [emphases added]

The Chronology of Events on the Colorado Wine Industry Development Board website notes in its entry for 1990: "The General Assembly enacts the Colorado Wine Industry Development Act which creates the Colorado Wine Industry Development Board." In the 2000 election, Democrats "regained control of the state Senate [] after 40 years of minority status," as The Denver Post reported in a November 8, 2000 article (accessed via the Nexis database). Four years later, as the Rocky Mountain News reported in a November 4, 2004, article (accessed via Nexis), "Colorado Democrats...[won] their first real legislative power in 44 years" when "what had been the minority party won a one-seat lead in the Colorado Senate on Tuesday and stood to gain at least a two-seat margin in the state House."

—E.B. & J.F.B.