CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 16, 2011 09:43 PM UTC

Assessing Hickenlooper's First Session

  • 54 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the dust settles on the first session of the 68th Colorado General Assembly, one of the more discussable points seems to be the role of Colorado’s new Gov. John Hickenlooper in legislative battles–both his interventions, and the moments where he chose not to. As the Pueblo Chieftain’s Patrick Malone reported Saturday:

“He’s a shrewd cat, no doubt about it,” said Senate Minority Leader Mike Kopp, R-Littleton. ”I think the ‘aw shucks’ is genuine, but behind that ‘aw shucks’ is a very smooth political actor.”

Even Senate President Brandon Shaffer and House Speaker Frank McNulty, who have been able to agree only on their distaste for each other in recent weeks, found common ground in their admiration for Hickenlooper and the work he did this legislative session.

“I have no complaints against the governor,” said McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch. “The governor has always been straight-forward in his dealings with us, and I’ve never had to worry about him keeping his word.”

…Hickenlooper’s sway with lawmakers was most evident Wednesday, the final day of the legislative session, when he demanded that Democrats and Republicans find a solution to their differences over payday lending. Otherwise Hickenlooper threatened to order an immediate special session that would have kept the Legislature at the state Capitol for at least three more days. His stance prompted House Republicans to back down in order for the session close on time.

Last Wednesday’s payday lending showdown, and anticlimactic resolution, was definitely an example of Hickenlooper stepping decisively into a legislative fight that was spinning out of control–we still haven’t heard what it was that motivated Speaker Frank McNulty to pull that stunt, but it seems clear he didn’t expect Hickenlooper to call his bluff. Perhaps the other major example of Hickenlooper intervention was his rare flash of public anger at Majority Leader Amy Stephens, after her foolish anti-“Obamacare” amendment to the health care exchange bill threatened to undo months of bipartisan negotiations. In both cases, pretty much only Hickenlooper’s rarely used clout could have produced the quick resolution seen.

Which is a very good reason to rarely use your clout.

On the other hand, Gov. Hickenlooper’s main contribution to the budget debate–the proposing of huge and painful cuts to, in his words, “start a conversation”–had mixed results. Hickenlooper’s proposed budget might have started a conversation about real solutions, but Hickenlooper’s own repeated assertions that there was “no appetite” for any such measure helped deflate momentum as fast as it could build. As the budget debate in the legislature unfolded, Republicans often hid behind Hickenlooper’s budget proposals, using them as excuses for continued cuts even as revenue forecasts improved. Because Hickenlooper allowed this, and also because the cuts were ultimately lessened by (modestly) recovering revenue, at least part of the “teachable moment” Hickenlooper’s stark budget proposal offered was not realized.

We’re working on our larger analysis of winners, losers, and key players from this year’s legislative session for later in the week, wherein Hickenlooper’s role will factor heavily. In the meantime, we’ll throw the question open for debate: had you been Gov. Hickenlooper, and had this been the divided legislature you were dealt to work with in your first year as governor, what might you have done differently?

Tweet
Share

Comments

54 thoughts on “Assessing Hickenlooper’s First Session”

  1. Hickenlooper did a good job being realistic about revenue. His assessment that there is no appetite for a tax increase is completely accurate. He deserves credit for understanding what other liberals can’t or won’t.

    2. …a majority of voters won’t support a tax increase until after the train wreck happens. That’s what it takes to convince a majority of people.

      You? Conservatives will never support a tax increase, no matter what. I suspect that Hick understands that, too.

      1. But opening yourself to being at the helm before and during the train wreck is dangerous. Hick will have to address some core matters such as Rep Paul Ryan has done in his proposals to cure the federal spending disease gripping our nation.

        These same clarions for fiscal sanity have been rung by Colorado’s McNulty, Stapleton, Kopp, Mitchell, Gerou, Lambert, Becker, and the 50 or so other state GOP leaders at the Capitol. Yet the Democrat response has been to regulate, tax and mandate. Hick risks dividing the Democrats on accountability.

        The daily impacts are very tough now and will only be tougher to navigate in the next 12-36 months. The cost of Obamacare and other federal mandates that are crushing CO is obvious. Why you support/supported them is a tough question to answer too and he won’t want to blame Obama.

        Denver’s place as a leading national center for low property taxes, a lack of jobs, an abundant food stamp payroll, and a plethora of recent business departures will need to be addressed. Why should other Colorado citizens (Douglas Co, Arap Co, or Broomfiled Co) pay to backfill Denver’s elite low paying tax scheme?

        The damaging effects of a decade + of failed Democrat policies are hung around the neck of our good governor.

        1. You’re never good for realistic analysis or respectable opinions (don’t let Dave’s comments to the contrary trick you into thinking otherwise), but you’ll never be boring, either.

        3. CO is near the bottom of the states re: percent of population utilizing food stamps; well below the national average.  Or so Mr. Murdoch’s boys say over at the WSJ:

          http://blogs.wsj.com/economics…

          It is above the national average for year-over-year increase, but below such find radical leftist states as:

          Idaho

          New Jersey

          Texas

          Utah

          And, from what I can tell, Denver is not one of the higher areas in the state for percent of the population that relies on Food Stamps.

          http://www.nytimes.com/interac…

          Here is a graph that would appear to indicate that El Paso County has an equal, if not higher, percentage of its population relying on Food Stamps, from 2009:

          http://datageek.freedombloggin…

          I do not post this thinking that any fact, however obvious, might be of concern to the Tadpole.  Either due to to Libernut’s sheer mendacity or complete lack of any integrity (it could very well be a particularly potent combination of the two), I have learned long ago that such things as facts, credible sources, or sound reasoning techniques are irrelevant to the little fella.  

          Just to point out, again, how far up his butt his head truly is.

        1. Sorry to be the one who blows your assumption.

          I would support a tax increase, finite in scope, that is 100 percent dedicated to education without being so fungible that it reduces education dollars that come from the General Fund.

          1. i know there are plenty of people here who will eagerly answer such a question.  

            Also, in your answer, you support a tax increase for education.  I think we, as a state, need to first decide where we wish to fund education, locally or statewide.  Both have advantages and challenges.  Theoretically, we still prefer local funding, but fiscally it is now statewide.  That is part of the reason why the state has gotten more and more involved in testing and standards, IMO.  (The golden rule.)

            I’m a bit cynical about creating a tax source dedicated solely to education that won’t be raided or abused at some time in the future.  I would prefer for us to return to the tax structure of the late 90’s, with a 5% income tax and then work from there.

          2. Amendment 23 proved that cannot be done without modifying the Colorado School Finance Act language in the CO Constitution.  

            There are  lawsuits that could still let the courts do it, but without that kind of alteration, we would need at least two “single subject” amendments to make it workable.

    4. Nothing?

      DOes that mean never?

      Or

      does that mean your’e too dumb to answer the question?

      You know we have plenty of posters here, well not plenty but their stink noticeability makes up for their like of size, who can go on and on with ant D or pro GO(T)P talking points.  But when it comes to answering real questions, about real legislative issues, it can’t be done. Or at least they don’t do it (wilson…oh, wilson)

      Look, you answer the question and I’ll stop insinuating you owe me $50.  Hell, I’ll even publicly lift the onus if you admit what I suspect makes it true.

      Or you can hide.  Read Atlas Shrugged another time and when you do ask why the Ayn Rand found it necessary to get Medicare benefits that she neither paid for nor supported philosophically.  Know too, that when all you Galtians quit, the rest of us will just go back to work, not glad to be rid of you, not missing you – indifferent.

      Oh, also ask why Hayek, the economist most claimed to be the source of modern “conservatism” was a) so personally devoid of character and b) found it ok to retire on a publicly funded Brit pension that he neither paid for nor supported philosophically.

      Meanwhile- quit whining.  We need solutions – no simpering.  ANd here at CoPols, we want engaged, thoughtful discussion. Or comedy.  Or something worthwile.  Your score so far on that is not D.

          1. And I already answered that question. For the umpteenth time…

            Reagan’s three-legged stool: socially conservative values, fiscally conservative economic policies, and a strong national defense*

            * defense does not necessarily mean offense**

            **especially when we have no clue just what the heck it is that we’re doing, like in Libya

            1. Forget everyone else- under what circumstances would you support a CO tax increase?

              Reagan raised taxes 11 times to reduce the deficit saying “it was good for America” – though the percentage of debt to GDP was only approaching 50% at the end of his second term.  

              It continued to ncrease during Bush 1, so he raised taxes.

              It rose dramatically during Bush 2 – but he cut taxes, while also increasing spending.

              Percentage of debt to GDP now is much higher- close to 100%.

              SO Reagan would raise taxes, while also cutting spending and stabilizing Social Security and Medicare by increasing the FICA tax.  So that’s what you think we should do?

              1. Perhaps is a tax increase actually went to pay off the debt, or even just went to what it was supposed to instead of being raided by money-grubbing Dems, people would be more supportive.

                1. So if we elected a Reagan – like  R president and he said, hey we gotta raise taxes 11 times because deficit reduction is  good – you’d be ok with it?

                  Who was the last president to produce a balanced budget?

                  Btw-

                  You’re mean.

    1. for lack of effective communication with his Dem Assembly, such as springing vetoes on Dem leg, pissing people off in ways that could have been avoided before stuff got to his desk. Ritter was no pol. Hick is.

    3. I’m baffled by the meme that Hick won because nothing controversial came to his desk due to the divided houses.

      He could have fought for fewer education cuts by vetoing reinstatement of business tax exemptions, removing even more tax exemptions, and closing certain personal exemptions for the wealthy.

      I don’t know why someone would want to devote their life to public service and merely rubber stamp what comes out of the legislative process.

      Is Hickenlooper proud of the draconian cuts to education???  What, if anything, did he fight for?

      1. what did he fight for?  And I agree with Pols – the Governor’s repeated assertions that there’s no appetite among voters around the state to do anything but cut had a chilling effect on any real dialogue that might have happened.  The outcomes might not have been different, but the Dems don’t need the Dem Governor handing ammunition to the anti-tax, anti-government crowd.  

        Once again, we’re short on leadership.  Colorado does not achieve progress and move out of stagnation and recession without strong leadership helping to navigate the way forward.  The state House majority leadership provides a terrific opportunity for the Dems to contrast themselves with those who want to regress to a bad place we’ve really never been.

        Leadership and message.  Leadership and message.

        1. Ritter may not have been a great politician, but he was a really good leader. Hick seems to be focused on Hick’s future, not the state’s. As to waiting until eduction funding has become so awful that people will take notice – we’re at that point and continuing down.

          1. You’ve ascertained that in the whopping four months Hickenlooper has been in office?

            How soon you forget that in Ritter’s first year he fucked up royally with major miscommunications with his own party leaders in the State House and practically had the whole party and his base ready to tar and feather him.  

              1. Where people view a difference of opinion as proof that someone is an idiot? We all have different taste in music. Doesn’t mean one person’s taste is awful – it’s just different. I don’t like country music – but I don’t think people that do have bad taste in music.

                1. your taste in music IS terrible. That there is terrible country music and a lot of it doesn’t make yours acceptable.

                  But, I can accept your different ideas, They often stimulate discussion of significant topics.

      2. Hick was, is and will be a moderate. I get that.

        However, coasting down hill for four years to re-election because he is well liked and then doing it again because by 2016 he starts looing ahead – how does that help me?

        1. Two big gripes against his term so far:

          1) fought for draconian education cuts;

          2) won’t support tax increases, or at least continues to signal there is no appetite for them,

          And a third, smaller one, his environmental record is unknown and he tends to favor the oil and gas industry over increasing regulation/environmental controls.

          Concerning the first, Hickenlooper didn’t have much room to do much of anything else except cut education. Other options included cutting social services, cutting state departments (i.e. increasing unemployment), or cutting the department of corrections’ budget.

          In all cases, the state is worse off for the budget cuts. Education effects are short and long term, but the others result in significant short term effects that do more harm to the state.

          The second, well, it is too soon to cry about this. Hickenlooper asked for more taxes while Mayor and I personally believe he will wait a year or so until he begins convincing those less eager that additional tax revenue is needed to sustain the quality of life Coloradans want. He’s smart and will watch closely how the debate on Heath’s Initiative 25 goes. IMHO, that doesn’t make him a weak leader, it makes him a smart leader.

          Hickenlooper’s friendship with the oil and gas industry in the state obviously comes from his business and education background. This is the big unknown on how he will act when it comes to finding the balance between industry and the environment.

          He didn’t have to deal with the CCOGC reorg bill, or the oil and gas permitting bill (that never saw the light of day), or a number of other bills that would have clarified many things for us. Instead, he gets the luxery of watching the two Houses beat eachother up for awhile longer.

          Long reply, but I don’t think he’s coasting anywhere.  

          1. Good point about timing for tax increases, Car. (Are we related somehow?)  Perhaps it was smarter to pound the crap out of the education system and let the public see the effects before proposing tax increases as a solution.

            I’m willing to see if Hick fights for a more progressive CO tax system in the next year or so.  I hope I don’t turn too blue holding my breath.

            1. but not from holding their breath.

              Yes, we are related.

              You mom’s sister’s brother married a gal that was related to my aunt’s brother’s father’s son.

              Small world!

      3. I’m sure he’s proud of that. It was cute that this site was trying to promote the “11-dimensional chess” notion that Hickenlooper had some long-term goal in mind for fixing the education funding issue. What ever happened to that, Pols?

  3. Hick will serve the state well if he can get a gas tax passed that will respond to state needs in the long run.  The ideal response would include a way for the rural portions of the state to thrive even in a high-cost-of-gas environment.

    1. The gov could find that guy working on the motor powered by atmospheric pressure.  Rumored to want to quit his current gig and come to Colorado anyway, that would be perfect.

      Otherwise, you got to find a way where transportation costs are a net neutral to the rural economy of Colorado.    the last time anyone did that I’m pretty sure there were unicorns involved. And people riding dinosaurs.

      1. Really, really big ones.  Instead of the Eisenhower Tunnel, we just shoot the trucks right on over.  Yeah, the physics don’t look good, but it’d be a lot of fun to watch.

  5. He’s a businessman who understands the fiscal impacts of legislation on the economy. He started out, quite appropriately, by calling for even more cuts than the GOP wanted. I’m pretty sure he would have been a Republican had he come from anywhere in the state but Denver (Boulder excluded, of course).

    1. I hear he was a bidnessman too!

      Did you know that Denver and Boulder are not the only Democratic strongholds in the state?  Have you ever been out and about in the state much?  Are you afraid of bears?

      1. I switched to Tancredo. Nice try. Yes, I know that Denver and Boulder are not the only Democratic strongholds in the state. I stand by my statement.

              1. I just said, I was pleasantly surprised by Hickenlooper. I feel no sense of loss whatsoever. I mean I’m just so broken up that the GOP just pulled off the biggest electoral swing in decades in the House, and is poised to win the Senate too. Boo hoo. I just feel sorry for Obama.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

188 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!