Let the policy fit the problem. If we could just follow that seemingly simple principle, we could solve most of the failures with government. This is as valid as the insight, let the punishment fit the crime.
Colorado ballot measures LL and MM flagrantly violate this basic principle. They do not fit the problem. The problem is some kids don’t have enough food to eat. Around 17% of kids face food insecurity, says the Colorado Children’s Campaign. A policy that fit the problem would ensure that those kids get food. But LL and MM raise net taxes to backfill an existing program to provide food subsidies to all school children, even the children of well-off and wealthy people. That doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t fit the problem.
There’s no ‘free’ lunch
Ah, but what about the “stigma” of giving food only to poor kids, ask proponents of the measures. Again, let the policy fit the problem. Are there good ways to curb any such stigma, short of subsidizing everyone? Yes, obviously. For example, schools can give all the kids meal cards such that the finances are separate from the food distribution.
Compare: We do not ask government to deliver “free” groceries to every household in America just because a fraction of households suffer food insecurity. Instead, we target food subsidies to the people who need the food. And we don’t use bogus arguments about “stigma” as a pretext to blow up the program into a bloated universal welfare scheme.
Unsurprisingly, because general food subsidies do not fit the problem, they are a budget-buster. In a recent report, the Common Sense Institute summarizes, “Proposition MM and Proposition LL . . . would effectively raise taxes for the Healthy School Meals for All program. Previous Common Sense Institute research and the state’s own analysis found that the Healthy School Meals program spends more than projected and, as a result, has run over budget.”
I’ll allow CSI to explain the basics of the measures: “If Proposition LL passes, taxpayers will not be refunded $12.4 million in FY26. If Proposition MM passes, Coloradans who earn $300,000 or more will incur average tax increases of $377 for single filers and $560 for joint filers. In total, Proposition MM would raise $95 million per year for the Healthy Meals program. . . . Proposition MM was revised during the 2025 special legislative session to allow some of that potential surplus to fund SNAP (food stamps).”
The problem with ‘screw the rich’
Obviously a lot of Coloradans are swayed by the thought, “Screw those rich bastards; let them pay for kids’ food.” That’s why we have the program to begin with. But I want to argue that’s a bad idea.
Sure, the estimated $12.4 million under LL for the first fiscal year is not much money considering the size of Colorado and the state budget. But it is precisely such straws on the camel’s back that have, collectively, added up to a budget-busting total. We need to stop adding unnecessary straws and start removing existing ones. Again, we should ensure that the policy fits the problem and that government spends only what is necessary.
Okay, sure, someone making $300K will barely miss $377. But the principle matters. Do we really want to send the message to financially well-off people that Colorado voters have an “eat the rich” mentality? As I’ve pointed out before, states including Texas, Florida, and Wyoming don’t tax income at all. If I were in this wage category looking for a move, I would take a “yes” vote on these measures as a signal that wealthier people are not welcome in Colorado and should seek to relocate to states that don’t punish people for producing a lot of wealth.
What’s more, measure MM and the program it supports stupidly create a “cliff” such that earning a single extra dollar to reach the $300K threshold could result in hundreds of dollars of additional taxes. At the margins, this will encourage people to earn less or to arbitrarily shift earnings or expenses. Any such incentive-distorting measure automatically deserves to fail.
Let the policy fit the problem. Voters who take that insight seriously will vote against LL and MM.
Ari Armstrong writes regularly for Complete Colorado and is the author of books about Ayn Rand, Harry Potter, and classical liberalism. He can be reached at ari at ariarmstrong dot com.
