(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(D) Julie Gonzales
(R) Mark Baisley
80%
20%↓
10%
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Hetal Doshi
40%
30%
30%
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
80%↑
20%↓
(D) Diana DeGette*
(D) Milat Kiros
(D) Wanda James
70%
20%
10%↓
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Dwayne Romero(D) Alex Kelloff
(R) Ron Hanks
50%↓
35%↑
30%↓
20%
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) E. Laubacher
80%
20%
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Jessica Killin
53%↓
48%↑
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Mel Tewahade
90%
2%
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Shannon Bird
(D) Manny Rutinel
45%↓
30%↑
30%↑
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
( – promoted by Colorado Pols)
The Colorado Court of Appeals has held that “Clear the Bench Colorado” – the tea-party aligned group claiming to be “grassroots” in nature but able to receive unlimited contributions from fatcats due to its so-called “issue committee” status – is in fact not an “issue committee” at all but a political committee subject to campaign contribution limits.
You can read Ethics Watch’s summary of this common-sense ruling, which also contains a link to the court decision, here: https://www.coloradoforethics.o…
(I’m in no way affiliated with Colorado Ethics Watch. I just can’t stand that a political group which very selectively decides which judges they feel should be “cleared” depending on whether the judges happen to support CTBC’s tea-party, radical right-wing viewpoints, and which campaigns for the specific judges it doesn’t like to be voted down, has been hiding behind “issue committee” status.)
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Comments