Notable Links



Denver Internet Marketing by Parallel Path

Knowledge Messenger

Arvada Boutique Clothing Store Stella B's

Kathleen Curry Goes "I"

by: Colorado Pols

Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 14:45:28 PM MST


WEDNESDAY UPDATE #2: As a Pols reader points out in the comments below, Curry may have missed the deadline to run for re-election as an "Unaffiliated" candidate -- meaning she could only run in 2010 as a write-in candidate.

WEDNESDAY UPDATE: No election deals for Rep. Curry, Dems will recruit a candidate, and according to the Glenwood Springs Post-Independent, maybe no caucusing with Dems either?

[T]he chair of the state Democratic Party, Pat Waak, said in an e-mail to the Post Independent, "We have always welcomed diversity in the Democratic party so we are saddened that Rep. Curry has found it necessary to change her party affiliation. In keeping with our general policy, we will recruit a Democrat for each of the seats for the 2010 election."

Curry herself was not so sure she will be caucusing with the Democrats, pointing out that that is where they work out intra-party issues and conflicts and she is no longer in the party.

"I don't know," she said when asked about the caucusing issue. "If they invited me, I might. I can't imagine that they would invite me."

We've learned that Democratic state Rep. Kathleen Curry will shortly announce she is disaffiliating from her party and going independent, the latest example of what might be called the "Western Slope Two-Step" after a similar recent move by La Plata County commissioner Joelle Riddle--not to mention the famous defection of U.S. Senator Ben "Nighthorse" Campbell of Ignacio from the Dems to the GOP in the 1990s.

Relations between Curry and Democratic leadership reportedly broke down over legislation she intends to co-sponsor with GOP Rep. Ellen Roberts next session: a very nasty bill, crafted by the insurance industry, that would impose a moratorium on any new legislated health coverage requirements of the kind that have passed in recent years. Curry's sponsorship was seen as improper bipartisan cover for Roberts on a bill with significant political import, and Roberts is likely to be a major front in the GOP's strategy to recapture the state senate next year.

There does seem to be some pent-up emotion behind the spat, but despite a split with leadership, there is an interest in preserving friendly relations with Curry on the part of many Democrats as she remains a reliable--or at least persuadable--vote on a range of issues.

UPDATE: Denver Post now confirming what you heard first here on Colorado Pols:

State Rep. Kathleen Curry has changed her voter registration from Democrat to unaffiliated, a move that will require the Gunnison lawmaker to relinquish her positions as speaker pro tem and chairwoman of the House Agriculture Committee.

Curry said she made the change Monday after talking to House Speaker Terrance Carroll, who had appointed Curry to the plum pro tem position.

Curry, a rancher and water expert, said her decision was not based on any single bill, action or person.

"It's just a matter of where I fit," she said Tuesday. "But I'm not changing my personality overnight just because I filled out a form. I'm still going to vote my conscience, which the majority of time is with the Democrats."

...Curry registered as an unaffiliated voter too late to run as one in next year's election. Curry said she had already planned to introduce legislation next year making it easier for those who switch to unaffiliated to get on the ballot. The bill would reduce the time a person needs to be unaffiliated to run as one.

But Curry said she probably is going to have to run as a write-in candidate, which she admitted isn't an easy feat.

Colorado Pols :: Kathleen Curry Goes "I"
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Pols Masters,
do you happen to have a link to the insurance industry legislation mentioned above? I'd like to read more about that.  

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

I would too, and I wonder how it relates to the legislation in Wahsington DC


[ Parent ]
Proposed legislation is secret. Drafts can only be distributed
with the sponsoring legislator's permission until it is introduced.  Typically, that might involve key representatives of interested parties (particularly potential backers), committee chairs on relevant committees, and party leadership.  Clearly, someone leaked this issue despite Curry having thought that the person was in a small confidential group of pre-reviewers.

Legislators get five bills of their own per year (plus certain "special" bills), and typically have to have most of them drafted with the help of legislative legal services by December, so it isn't crushed by the last minute rush.


[ Parent ]
Well, there's a link to the background story below
your comment so apparently, it isn't quite as secret as you clearly believed it to be.

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
Secret Until Blabbed
In the legislative case, secret simply means that information is only available with legislative sponsor permission, or via a leak.  

I don't know if the communication to Mook was with permission or a leak.  Either way, he has no guarantee of having received the whole story, and unless he's heard it from the Curry's mouth, there are always source credibility issues involved.

The point I was making was simply that this isn't a public document, and that any copy that anyone does have would simply be a draft, subject to change at any time before the opening day of the legislative session.  The only authoritative source regarding the current draft would be the sponsors.


[ Parent ]
And the point I was making
was simply that you were incorrect that the insurance industry legislation was some huge state secret. It's okay not to always be in the know, ohwilleke. We won't hold it against you here, we promise. :)

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
My fantasy has been shattered.


[ Parent ]
Man, you have some lame fantasties.
Did I just make you feel worse?

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
not to worry..
...I still know that the pope is infallible (even if he can't break tackles).

[ Parent ]
Hehehe.
Apparently the Bishop walking next to him couldn't either.

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
It's actually the bishop's job to pick up a blitz;-)


[ Parent ]
Here you go
http://denver.bizjournals.com/...

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

"Some of the people that wanted to engage me in conversation appeared to have been the losers in the 'Are you smarter than Michele Bachmann contest?'." --Rep. Barney Frank


[ Parent ]
Thanks, Thilly. n/t


"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
Bad political move
Thanks for the link.  It's incredible ... Roberts is going to co-sponsor this bill which seems like a complete sell-out to insurance companies.  She doesn't think those companies should cover mammograms, HPV immunization, autism coverage it would seem from this bill.  Of course, it won't reverse that coverage but prevent any future new mandates.  That seems it would be called a vote in the statehouse.  If new mandates are introduced, they lose on the vote.  Introducing a moratorium (for one year only) seems ineffective showboating for the insurers.  This is stunning to me.  What are Roberts and Curry really thinking?  And how can they be so politically deaf?

[ Parent ]
Will Curry Lose Her Leadership Posts?
Curry is Speaker pro tempore in the House, and serves as the Chair of the Agriculture, Livestock, and Natural Resources Committee.  The posts are both conferred by the party leadership.  And she is a part of the leadership she is purportedly feuding with.

Will she forfeit those posts by reaffiliating as an independent?

Given the Democrats' secure majority in the state house, where parliamentary rules allow a majority to rule, Curry has nowhere near that bargaining position that Lieberman or Ben Nighthorse Campbell did at the federal level.  Similarly, on a county commission, partisan identity doesn't really matter, because it is so small and because so many issues are non-partisan or personal, rather than partisan.

Given the stakes in a party change, and the relative unimportance of the issue (co-sponsorship of a bill that hasn't even been introduced yet), when she could simply vote and speak for the bill without co-sponsoring it and get the same effect.  With or without a co-sponsorship, she isn't on the committees that one would expect to handle the legislation (Business Affairs or Health).  Few legislators are so committed to co-sponsorship of a bill in an area where they aren't even on the relevant committee.

I have real doubts that this party change will happen for the reasons suggested.  If there is a party switch, it will be driven by re-election prospects with a D label, not a co-sponsorship.  Or, perhaps, there are really many matters upon which she has been overruled by leadership and this is just the most recent of them.

The bill content also seems fishy.  No legislature can bind a future legislature, and referrendums require two-third support.  The subject matter also seems likely to be pre-empted by federal health care reforms anyway.

In short, I doubt this rumor and doubt that we have the full story either.


It's not about binding future legislatures
It's a one-year moratorium on the enforcement of coverage mandates that have yet to pass. Basically it's just a big ass bazooka shot at Morgan Carroll's efforts to ban gender rating and other abusive practices.

Non impediti ratione cogitationis.

"Some of the people that wanted to engage me in conversation appeared to have been the losers in the 'Are you smarter than Michele Bachmann contest?'." --Rep. Barney Frank


[ Parent ]
gender-rating is not a mandate
gender-rating is not a mandate - its a rating adjustment factor......maternity coverage bill this session could be affected though.

[ Parent ]
So it would be an effective date rule?
Any way you cut it, this sounds like a matter of legislative procedure, a superbill that would govern what other bills could do.

I had read "one year moritorium" to mean that no new mandates would be passed in the 2010 legislative session, given the context (I suppose that would make it a joint legislative rule, like a federal budget bill, rather than a bill purporting to bind future legislative sessions), but that still seems like an odd approach.


[ Parent ]
I think Curry told me her district actually has a slight "D" edge.
I find this puzzling as she is one of the D's brightest stars.  

[ Parent ]
curry on health insurance policy
has often been hugely problematic, not so much of a star there.

[ Parent ]
Yes, but she has been great on water and energy issues.
A strong voice for Western Colorado and a bridge between her party and moderates across the state.  I don't expect perfection in my legislators, and in Curry's case I'll settle for very good.

[ Parent ]
Excellent analysis
It sounds to me like fear of a Republican sweep.

As a Democrat, I certainly would not want to see this happen. Democrats benefit from Mr.Maes beng in the Republican race. The Governor is tough. Any DA in Denver for the length of time he served knows how to play hardball. The State House is a different beast.  The economy is critical.The Consumer Confidence index hit 53 (50 is neutral)today.The economy may yet rally.

I don't see how an independent could maintain a leadership roll.

Perhaps her tea leaves in her district tell her that she needs to distance herself.

I think that you are correct that we don't have the full story.  

A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.Paul Simon


[ Parent ]
I respectfully disagree, Ray.
.
The Governor is tough. Any DA in Denver for the length of time he served knows how to play hardball.

Ritter was appointed DA in mid-term, and only faced retention elections in a city more than 2-1 Democrat.  He had virtually no opposition for the nomination after bigtger names withdrew.  He beat Bob Beauprez, which is kind of like beating the Detroit Lions.  This is thus his first real test of an election.  I think he has a decent record and intend to support him, but his record of DA in Denver is no test of his ability to win a tough election.    


[ Parent ]
Are you saying that Scott McInnis is not the Detroit Lions?!
....maybe, the Buccaneers?  (wait, do they play football?)

[ Parent ]
A lot of that applies to . . .
AR also, save the appointed part.  Being elected in HD6 is no test of his ability to win a tough election.

Discipline without purpose is tyranny.

[ Parent ]
You could make the argument
That the only candidate from either party for major office in Colorado in 2010 who has actually won a tough election was Scott McInnis in 1992. Even then, he still won CD-3 by 30,000 votes--he replaced Ben Nighthorse Campbell, but didn't have to face him in the election because Campbell ran for (and won) Tim Wirth's US Senate seat.

Other than that, none of the candidates have ever won a tough or close race.

"I'll take incompetence over a business model incentivised to kill me any day." -- DtR(H)


[ Parent ]
Tough election in '92?
I think not. He ran against Mike Callihan, who made Beauprez' campaign look brilliant.

[ Parent ]
Right
But it had been a Democratic seat, and it was much closer than all of his re-election bids where he won by much wider margins.

So that goes to prove my point even more--electoral experience among the candidates for higher office in Colorado this year is full of either easy victories, crushing defeats, or (in the case of Norton and Bennet) never having run on their own merits before.

Nobody in this race has a record of electoral victories in tough races--which is exactly what both the US Senate and Governor races will be.

"I'll take incompetence over a business model incentivised to kill me any day." -- DtR(H)


[ Parent ]
It's hard to call Campbell a Democrat
Even back then.

[ Parent ]
Cary Kennedy
Very well run state-wide race.

My recommendations in the 2010 primary?

[ Parent ]
I'll tell her you said so
Now send her some money.

[ Parent ]
Absolutely
Why win with 65% of the vote when you can run lots of ads and win with 70%!

My recommendations in the 2010 primary?

[ Parent ]
Her margin won't be that big.
The race is going to get ugly and the opposition is going to go hard negative.

[ Parent ]
I was referring to the US Senate and Governor races
Cary has a solid history, and that will help her greatly when she runs for Governor in 4 years.

"I'll take incompetence over a business model incentivised to kill me any day." -- DtR(H)

[ Parent ]
Where do I sign up for that campaign?
Seriously, she's my pick in 2014.  But let;s not pull a Bronco trick and lose to Oakland while looking ahead to Philadelphia!
Cary could have a tough race, the Rs will throw all the mud they can at her precisely because they fear her in 2014.

[ Parent ]
I don't live in Denver
can you do the same kind of office/electoral history on anyone?

[ Parent ]
perhaps, I could be wrong
As you mentioned, he wasn't the party's first choice for Governor. He manuevered well. I'm talking about instincts. I think that he will win this race.The Governor has demonstrated self interest which some people may criticize.

A DA has to put a lot of people away. He has to be mentally tough to do a good job. I think that he did. An example: His introduction of the drug court took some heat, but I think was the right approach.

I believe that Congress may well move to work on a jobs bill ASAP. The Colorado unemployment rate is lower than in other regions.

In the last election, the pendulum swung heavily in the Governors' favor after the Beaprez campaign had problems with inappropriate disclosure of material. The Governodr did move quickly on that, and the momentum stayed with him.

Perhaps we are talking about 2 8-8 teams playing each other rather than the Lions.
I like the latest Coloradopols line.  

A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.Paul Simon


[ Parent ]
Question for Pols
Why do you call the bill "nasty" and why is her co-sponsorship perceived as improper?  A party split over one bill?  Has to be more than that.  I look forward to her explanation.  

proposed bill is really bad policy
Mandates don't drive health insurance costs anywhere near as much as insurance companies claim they do - of course there claims are not verifiable because no one can see their data.

All mandates in CO already have to go to the mandate commission, a separate body, for review, and then back to the legislature.  Proposed legislation has to prove need and cost effectiveness in front of the mandate commission already?

So what's the point of the bill?  To make health insurance companies happy.  


[ Parent ]
On one point, I definitely agree-
there's more going on here than just a disagreement over her sponsorship of the bill.

(HI, by the way and did you see who is back? It's great, isn't it?)

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie


[ Parent ]
Lauren Bacall is back!
As the one who suggested that handle for her, I couldn't be happier.  Okay, if I won the powerball and lost 50 pounds I could be happier.  But within the realm of the possible, nothing makes me happier than having Lauren Bacall back...

[ Parent ]
Agreed.
Welcome back, Lauren.

"Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"  

[ Parent ]
Thanks LB
Are you still holding down the fort?

The other LB.


[ Parent ]
Hmmm....
I checked the lovely Ms. Bacall's record, and there was a long gap from December '08 until November '09 between her comments.  Can we infer that there was another non-compete agreement in play here?

[ Parent ]
Winning the Powerball would make you happier?
That really hurts:)  Great to see you again Voyageur.  Have you been keeping out of trouble?

[ Parent ]
Its been too long Ms. Bacall
Glad to see you're back...

[ Parent ]
Thanks Car 31
I check in from time to time.  I hope you are doing well.

[ Parent ]
The bill is objectively very bad
Pols can speak for itself, but what I know about this bill is it's petty and punitive and tries to nullify other bills even if they pass. From a good government standpoint it's horribly cynical. Roberts is clearly doing it to buy chits with the industry, but Curry? Dunno.

And you're damn right, sponsoring it is a big problem. This Bartels report is funny! Yeah, she just up and decided on a lark Monday to switch parties! Yeah right. It wasn't Curry's first blowout, and this bill is a symbolic assault on very important progress that has been made in the last few years re: health care reform and will continue to be made by the Democratic majority, and for the speaker pro tempore to sponsor it was unacceptable.

Good luck with that write-in campaign.

Sorry, but as much as you try, I just can't buy in to the idea that every Democrat is evil except for Andrew Romanoff.


[ Parent ]
Welcome back!
First we get more Voyageur, now you!  Yeay!

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878

[ Parent ]
Thank you Phoenix
You haven't switched parties yet, have you?:)

[ Parent ]
To what, Green?
Still a Dem, though retired for now from any leadership positions.

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878

[ Parent ]
How does she run as an I?
That is the problem Riddle has.  You can't run for a party unless you've been a member for a year or the party waives the requirement.  Independent is not a party so to get on the ballot you have to have been an independent for a year or more.  Riddle is going to have to run a write-in campaign to be re-elected.  I'm not familiar with it, but it seems that the same rules apply for state legislative elections.
Si?

This is often referred to, in the scientific parlance, as cutting off your nose to spite your face.


According to the post, Riddle became an I last August.
Or, more accurately, unaffiliated.  She can thus meet the one year requirement to petition on the ballot, dmindgo.  But your point is very well taken for Curry.

[ Parent ]
Riddle can't though
I'll see if I can find the latest Durango Herald story about it but it seems that she has to conduct a write-in campaign.  Stay tuned.

[ Parent ]
here's the link
she can't get on the ballot because the deadline was June 15.

Riddle misses ballot, tries to sue county clerk


[ Parent ]
Thanks, that was very informative. n/t


[ Parent ]
Pols: Did you ``learn'' that Curry will switch
From the same ``sources'' who told you Penry would be the lite gov?

Pols, you were right.
n/t

[ Parent ]
Not so bad.
She could have switched altogether.  Actually, this probably helps the Dems by making the party look like it is a big tent, that it will even include I or U or however that will work with Curry's new affiliation since there is no Independent Party.

not....following....you...
Curry felt so unconnected with, or unwelcome in, the Democratic Party that she changed her party affiliation.  That will show others that the Dems have a "big tent"??

[ Parent ]
Theoretically
If Curry continues to caucus with the Dems and maintains her leadership positions on the various committees, it shows that Democrats are more open to all viewpoints because Republicans would have stripped her of her titles and asked that she not caucus with them.

However, in practice, I tend to agree with you more Jamba. Your point is well taken.

"I'll take incompetence over a business model incentivised to kill me any day." -- DtR(H)


[ Parent ]
Yeah, that answer made zero sense to me, either.
If we are the big tent party, why leave?

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
Didn't Dear Abby always advise that when someone's unfaithful...
they ought to be dropped like a hot potato?

[ Parent ]
I'm shocked! Shocked!
Someone must have misheard a women's washroom conversation between flushes, because it's inconceivable that anyone would want to purposely damage Rep. Curry's reputation through rumors.

Although Curry is THAT kind of woman - you know, those outspoken, sharp and tenacious types who think they know a thing or two, the 2010 election is still a long ways off, so it can't be the Republicans who want to pick on her right now.

Hello, like who cares about a woman from Nowhere, Western Slope anyway? Curry's titles hold little legislative power, so no political adversary is going to bother with a silly innuendo.

And all those new oil and gas regulations that Curry sponsored, why, it really didn't mean a thing to the oil and gas industry. They wouldn't stoop to spreading gossip about Curry. No siree.

Yep, the more I think about it, the more I believe there was a bad echo in that restroom.


No echo
this is teed up as a top line issue by your buddies at the chamber.  it actually puts the representative in a power position for the speakership; the pubs pick up 6-8 seats and this rep. has a shot at the speaker position.

r u cringing yet?


[ Parent ]
Don't worry Lib
Nothing could ever match the size of the echo chamber between your ears.

"I'll take incompetence over a business model incentivised to kill me any day." -- DtR(H)

[ Parent ]
That's probably worthy of someone's sig line...


I knew a stripper named Skyler once.  --TaxCheatGeithner

[ Parent ]
There has to be more to this than
"It's just a matter of where I fit".  That is as shallow an excuse as they come.  Why couldn't she "fit" right where she was?  And what are her chances as a write-in candidate?  Will D's mount a run for her seat?  Or was there some deal made?  There are too many unanswered questions at this point for me to make a personal judgement.

I have respect for Curry.  Or, at least I did.  But if she turns out to be another Joe Lieberman, she'll be right up there with Josh Penry as the most despised politician in Colorado.


the most despised politician in Colorado
You mean that isn't Tom Tancredo?

[ Parent ]
I probably have about as much like
for TT as he currently does for The Agile Group and Bernie Madoff.  But he is south Denver's past shame.  We have a greater active shame here in Happy Valley to deal with now.  For how long, who knows?

Staying with the thread here, does anyone know if Curry has endorsed Governor Ritter?


[ Parent ]
It should be, it should be, it should be
Tancredo!

[ Parent ]
I'm still shocked
But I guess I'll have to eat my words.

Needless to say, District 61 Democrats need to call Curry and Dem leadership to ask "WTF happened?"


Timing is everything
   Did everyone notice when she changed her affiliation?  Less than a year before Nov. '10 election.  As the Post article noted, she can't run as an unaffiliated and will be stuck running for re-election (assuming she chooses to run) as a write-in candidate.
  As Peggy Lamm found out the hard way, spelling counts when running as a write-in candidate.  Is it Curry?  Or Currey?  Or Currie?

OQ Dude
I just read this whole thing - 57 comments so far.
I must have read her name twenty times.

And I'm not sure how it's spelled.

She's done.


[ Parent ]
Not cool
Technically, as a Republican, I should be celebrating this move as this district is definitely in play now, with Curry potentially fracturing the vote

And for what it's worth, Rep Curry has my respect, as she has deep convictions and has really taken it strong against the oil companies (sheesh, do they hate her....)

That said... this is really wrong

Curry's district partially touches Eagle and I know a lot of Democratic activists here who really did a lot to put Curry into office - I feel deeply sorry for them - this is the biggest slap in the face you can have as an activist

TABOR4LIFE


Never thought I would say this
But I agree with you completely.

Here's another thing I never thought I would say: thank God for Pat Waak! I don't know what's up with the House leadership but they should have had the fortitude to call this for what it is, their euphemisms to the Post sound really weak by comparison.

Pols, can we get more information about this "anti Morgan Carroll" act? I think Democrats need to understand that bill in more detail, and I also want an explanation from Curry for why she would cosponsor it. What I know of it suggests that it is written to electorally antagonize Democrats for our recent success re: health care coverage in Colorado and has zero chance of passage - and that's reason enough, IMO, to draw a line in the sand with the Democratic speaker pro tempore.

Sorry, but as much as you try, I just can't buy in to the idea that every Democrat is evil except for Andrew Romanoff.


[ Parent ]
Really?!
Your concern for the activists is touching, I guess. You really feel that if the activists who went out and knocked on doors for Curry would abandon her like fickle teenagers just because she went "I"?

Let the volunteers fight for someone who knows how to get things done instead of a new freshman handpicked by party leaders.

Let 'em figure out that fighting for Curry would be better than supporting a D candidate that will lose and then they have nothing.


[ Parent ]
well...
...as far as I'm concerned, Curry abandoned them (activists) like a 'fickle' teenager

two sides to every coin, dude....

TABOR4LIFE


[ Parent ]
I have to agree with Ali here.
People who work on campaigns have a whole bagful of their own reasons for doing so, but they are typically fighting for partisan reasons, at least is part.

If my representative were to change party after volunteers from his old party worked hard to get him elected, I would be really hacked at him. Maybe even enough to run against him in the next election.

(It's OK Joe, I know you're not leaving us!)

Want my vote? Put in some time with your party first!


[ Parent ]
Could this merely be step one?
And the next step is she is the Republican candidate for that seat? If that is her plan, then this all makes sense including the "oh my, as it's under a year I have to go Republican."

My recommendations in the 2010 primary?

Too late to go GOP, David.
See Dmindgo's thoughtful links.  It would seem that the one year requirement (the deadline was actually about June 15) leaves only the write-in option.  Don't worry about whether they spell the name right, as long as you can discern voter intent.   But a write-in is damn near impossible.   I'm putting this seat in the R column in 2010.

[ Parent ]
she has until February
and according to the Herald article, the Dems can change their rules and reinstate her.  That's the deal with Riddle and I think the same or similar will be true for Curry / Currie / Curie / Curia / Curious / Clamorous.

This is a very weird response by her to whatever is going on.  Riddle did those actions with no forethought and it looks the same for Curry.  Plus, riddle's pique seems to have been stirred by insider conversations, not by any Central Committee actions or such.  For both of them, this is probably a politically suicidal act; too bad because they have so much to offer the party and the state.


[ Parent ]
Lookd like you're right again, dmindgo
Riddle, who disaffiliated from the Democratic Party on Aug. 21, learned too late that Colorado law requires candidates to be affiliated, or nonaffiliated, for at least a year before they can petition to be on the ballot. The deadline Riddle missed was June 15, leaving her only the option of being a write-in candidate.

Apparently the June 15 deadline is only for unafiliateds who want to petition onto the ballot.  Parties, of course, don't petition on.  So Curry has until mid Feb. to reaffiliate as a D so she can go to the caucus and work up to her renomination.  But if she tries to petition on as an independent, she can't because of the   one year deadline.  So its back to the Ds or write-in, which is suicidal.  Here's hoping she reaffiliates with Ds and continues to serve.    

[ Parent ]
Why hoping that?
If she's too ...something to understand how it works, why do we need her in the Legislature?

Let her be a U. Or a D who missed the deadline and may request exception. Or something.


[ Parent ]
Western Colorado needs her
She's been the star on energy and water.  A very good advocate for us.

[ Parent ]
Are you saying she's irreplaceable?
Sorry, I don't believe that for a second.  

I do believe she's been a good advocate, but no one is irreplaceable.

Discipline without purpose is tyranny.


[ Parent ]
I said we need her
I need coffee in the morning.  If it gets cold I pour a new cup--a replacement.

I'm not saying anyone or anything is irreplaceable.  Just that she's done a great job for us.  She will be missed; I don't think she can win as a write-in.


[ Parent ]
Or...
to become the Republican candidate - either party can put her on the ballot.

My recommendations in the 2010 primary?

[ Parent ]
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!
Either party would have to change their state party rules to allow Curry on the ballot now (or Riddle, for that matter).  The rules are clear: she has missed the registration deadline now for both the Democratic and the Republican parties.  The rules have to be changed no later than mid-February, I think.  Neither party is going to call a central committee meeting to change those rules between now and then.

The ONLY option now for Curry is to write-in.  And that is an impossible option.  This district will likely stay Dem, based on the numbers.  Just a new Dem, not Curry.


[ Parent ]
Actually not true. It's governed by law, not party rules.
Per statute, [CRS 1-4-101(3)] partisan candidates must be affiliated with the party no less than 12 months prior to the general election.

Therefore, for Curry to run as a D or R, she would have had to have that affiliation by early Nov. 2009

Want my vote? Put in some time with your party first!


[ Parent ]
Major kudos to Pat Waak & our party!
You switch to unaffiliated - you're out. Get someone really good and fight like crazy to take that seat back.

My recommendations in the 2010 primary?

Screw Pat Waak
Based on your logic it makes more sense to replace a legislator who knows the issues, is willing to fight for the issues and who is able to reach across the aisle to get things done, with someone who will do what Waak wants.

Waak doesn't represent Colorado. She's a political operative. She's no different than Wadhams.  

Curry is the one who has taken the hits and fought the battles, not Waak.


[ Parent ]
The problem is that . . .
Waak is nowhere near as effective as Wadhams.

Discipline without purpose is tyranny.

[ Parent ]
I'll take ineffective if effective is Wadhams
He's done a real bang-up job.  What's the Republican record on statewide races?

[ Parent ]
No shit
Pat Waak is quietly competent. Dick Wadhams is a noisy train wreck. Wadhams is more fun to watch, but Waak gets the job done.

My recommendations in the 2010 primary?

[ Parent ]
Thank you.
Perfect comparison.  I would only say further that if Wadhams is effective, please let him keep on rolling--and wrecking.

[ Parent ]
Man, no kidding.
And he's been super with Governor and Senatorial races, too. Just ask Macaca Allen or Bob Schaffer.  

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
$.02
Curry is a good legislator who advocates well for rural Colorado. Good on her for going independent (even if the timing is strange). IMHO, this state's political parties look like spoiled brats with ADHD fighting for toys in the sandbox.

I welcome an Independent and sincerely hope that she and Riddle are successful in their futures. I hope and pray this will inspire others to get out from under the yoke of the parties.

Even though I'm old enough to know better, it would be nice to see actual representation of independents in the statehouse, instead of D's or R's trying to be independent and shot down by their party.


I think we may see more of this happen on a local level.
With dissatisfaction at an all time high with both parties in Congress, more and more folks are unwilling or uninterested in being affiliated with a political party, particularly when folks like Landrieu and Nelson (just two of the latest examples) are beginning to look more and more like Republicans who can't vote without the vote being paid for with give aways.

Carroll had a nice quote in the Post article:

Carroll, D-Denver, said he was surprised by Curry's decision and unsuccessfully tried to talk her out of it.

"But it's who Kathleen is. She really is an independent thinker. She believes that political parties aren't her thing and I understand and respect her for that," he said. "She made a decision that was best for her.



"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

[ Parent ]
I like Rep. Curry
Does she always vote my way: no. But she's smart and very knowledgeable on the competing land/water use priorities.

Insurance doesn't seem like her normal issue and I was curious when I read Mook's article.

As to the "purity" issue, I'm opposed to it, but I believe D's in safe seats should represent the party's express positions as voted on through the caucus to the state level.  I also believe that D's in more competitive seats should hold the core values of the party even if individual votes needed to reflect the views of their particular constituents.

I sort of use an informal MVP system like Nate Silvers analysis of the house.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...


[ Parent ]
advocates well for rural Colorado
How does this insurance thingy do that advocacy for rural Colorado?

[ Parent ]
I'd bet you have problems finding 25 percent of the populace
on this side of the hill who support reforming the health care system.

So, even if the Ellen Roberts bill is draconian, like it or not, Curry is probably still representing her constituents.

Maybe not people from safe districts in Denver who make Dem policy, but definitely the people who live over here.


[ Parent ]
Ok- fair point
And I'll quibble over the difference between representing constituents and advocating another day.

[ Parent ]
Strange
the west slope would benefit the most from healthcare reform.

[ Parent ]
The western slope would benefit from a lot of things
that the people here don't want.

People here continually vote for ideology and against their own self interest.


[ Parent ]
Confusing to me as well, MADCO.
Not knowing the details of the bill, and not having spoken with Rep. Curry, I don't know why she would sponsor the insurance bill.

I can assume, which we are all good at here, that Curry's independent minded approach to solving problems rubbed the Front Range 'D' establishment the wrong way and over the years the 'D' establishment has tried to muscle Curry into doing things or taking positions she wasn't comfortable with.

I've heard from state and local electeds that the national and state parties interfere/stick their noses in campaigns and complicate things, sometimes needlessly. All in the name of furthering a national agenda that seems to be based on talking points rather than merits.

So, with all that said, Curry is a good advocate for her district and in a legislature that is dominated by urban, Front Range legislators, her strong voice will be sorely missed if she is unable to continue serving as an Independent.


[ Parent ]
Not surprised...
Both major political parties are so fractured they are quickly becoming an endangered mechanism in the way we elect our leaders.

Without real reform, it will remain
The major parties have a virtual lock under the current system.  Independents can win individual races, but it's an uphill battle.

Without voting reform (instant runoff voting), no matter how fractured things seem, major parties (be they called Democratic and Republican or Green and Whig) will retain their overall control of the system.

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878


[ Parent ]
Yes- and in CO it will be two but only two parties that run the show.


[ Parent ]
Interesting but not surprising
I am a BIG fan of Kathleen Curry. She is a passionate legislator and truly reflects her constituents. She has impeccable integrity and remains true to her convictions. About 1/3 of the Colorado electorate is Unaffiliated... the legislature would do well to reflect that! Perhaps there would be less bickering in Congress if they were 1/3, 1/3, 1/3... I say "good on her" if she felt it was the move she wanted to take to better reflect her political views. And congrats for having the courage of your convictions Kathleen. It was an honor to serve with you!

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Advertise Here!
ads@coloradopols.com


Active Users
Currently 29 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Colorado Pols Network


Jeffco Pols
  More >

Denver Pols
  More >

















RSS 2.0



Pols Gets Mobile: ColoradoPols.com/mobile/

Colorado Pols is on Twitter: twitter.com/coloradopols

Email Pols


How to Write a Diary That Will Make the Front Page



Terms of Use/Privacy Policy



Pols Posting Policies



The Pols "Mailbag"

Mailbag #1



Relevant Links

The Big Media Blog

Blog It Right

Blog For Growth

Blogometer

Colorado Capitol Journal

Colorado Center on Law and Policy

Colorado Democratic Party

Colorado Ethics Watch

Colorado Independent

Colorado Veterans for America

Colorado Legislature

Colorado Lib

Colorado Libertarian Blog

Colorado Media Matters

Colorado Progressive Coalition

Colorado Republican Party

Colorado Secretary of State

Colorado Senate

Colorado Young Democrats

Commentary Today

Coyote Gulch

CU Democrats

Curious Stranger

Daily Kos

Dan Willis-Rumors

Dem Notes

Democracy for Colorado

Denver Politics

East Boulder County Politics

Ed Stein Ink

Election Neutrality Now

George in Denver

Great Education Colorado

Head First Colorado

The Hotline Political Network

Left in the West

Liberal and Loving It

Maintain Educational Standards in Colorado

Mount Virtus

MyDD

National Journal

On Call

Peak Dems

Political State Report

Progress Now

Prometheus

Project Vote Smart

Radio Free Denver

Senate Guru

Slapstick Politics

Steam Powered Opinions

Square State

Stygius

TalkLeft

The Thicket

The Bell Policy Center

The Hypothetical Wren

ThomasMC.com

Toilet Paper Online

Ultimate Politics

View From a Height

Walter in Denver

Wash Park Prophet

Western Democrat



Colorado Pols is wholly owned by www.ColoradoPols.com, LLC
webmaster-at-coloradopols.com
Powered by: SoapBlox