Category Archives: Scott Gessler

Election-Day Registration Means “Voter Fraud?” Prove It

13
  by: Colorado Pols Wed April 10, 2013 at 9:39 AM MDT

Excellent story today from the Durango Herald's Joe Hanel on the introduction of the comprehensive election modernization bill from Democrats, set to be introduced this week in the Colorado Senate:

Even before it has been introduced, the bill has touched off a partisan fight.

But La Plata County Clerk Tiffany Lee Parker, a Republican, supports the bill and says it’s not a partisan issue.

“To me, this is really bipartisan. This makes sense. This is not Republican versus Democrat,” Parker said. [Pols emphasis]

La Plata County's Republican Clerk Tiffany Parker is not alone in supporting this bill from the right as a practical measure to make it easier to vote in Colorado. As Hanel reports, much of the bill was initiated by the Colorado County Clerks Association, and much of the bill is very much uncontroversial–with the exception of legislative Republicans and Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler.

The divide between Gessler and the county clerks, who have never enjoyed particularly good relations, seems wider now than ever before as this bill comes up for debate. As we noted yesterday, Gessler is upset that he was not consulted though the county clerks were–in the Colorado Statesman story we cited:

“How the hell can they rewrite the state election code in such as way that it excludes half of the entire legislature, the people who have expertise from a secretary of state’s standpoint?” he asked. “These people are just crazy. They have no interest in creating a good system. They are interested in shoving through an agenda.”

The truth is, Secretary of State Gessler has not been considered an honest player in Colorado's election system for quite a while–and this is a feeling held by county clerks on both sides of the aisle. It's important to remember that in the last two years, Gessler has done more to menace Colorado elections than constructively work to improve them. At some point, unproductive viewpoints just don't help the process, and they get excluded.

The biggest bone of contention in the bill, by far, is the provision allowing voters to register all the way through Election Day. In much the same manner as the recent gun safety legislation debate, Republicans insist that this would have disastrous consequences–instead of "banning gun ownership," the story this time, as Hanel continues:

Same-day registration opens the door to voter fraud, said Colorado Republican Committee Chairman Ryan Call.

“This is nothing more than a partisan power-grab by Democrats, taken at the expense of integrity in our elections,” Call said in a news release. “The last thing Coloradans want is the legitimacy of our elections cast into doubt because of the serious potential for voter fraud.”

And much like the gun debate, your next reasonable question is, "what's your evidence for that?" 

(more…)


Full story: Election-Day Registration Means “Voter Fraud?” Prove It

Republicans Wage Pre-Emptive War on Election Bill

10
  by: Colorado Pols Tue April 9, 2013 at 9:30 AM MDT

AP's Ivan Moreno:

[An election reform] bill of more than 100 pages is expected to be introduced this week, likely sparking a big partisan fight over whether the changes benefit one party over the other.

Supporters of the changes, which also include eliminating the so-called "inactive voter" status, say the goal is to make voting more accessible.

"I think people are like me, they just want people engaged in the Democratic process," said Democratic Sen. Angela Giron, one of the bill sponsors. She insisted they didn't exclude Republicans from the process.

Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler, who oversees elections and has butted heads with Democrats on a range of issues, said the bill was "written in complete secrecy excluding anyone who may have a different point of view."

What we know about the legislation in question, expected to drop tomorrow, is that it makes a number of changes to Colorado's election system, with an eye toward resolving unintended barriers to voting, and modernizing procedures to reflect the fact that voting registration is no longer paper-based. With the ability to instantly verify a voter's status and voting history, many longstanding practices, like a deadline for voter registration weeks before the actual election, no longer make sense–and actually create impediments to perfectly legal, eligible voters.

So naturally, Republicans led by Secretary of State Scott Gessler are screaming bloody murder. 

(more…)


Full story: Republicans Wage Pre-Emptive War on Election Bill

Gessler vs. Democracy

11
  by: Jason Salzman Mon April 8, 2013 at 12:09 PM MDT
Scott Gessler.

Scott Gessler.

Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler made the rounds on conservative talk radio last week to stir up opposition to expected legislation that would give us more options when it comes to voting, stuff like providing a mail-in ballot for every eligible voter.

Basically, the legislation would make sure Colorado uses modern technology and election procedures to give people more ways to cast a ballot and to participate in our elections. And Gessler wants to stop it.

Colorado already has "really good elections," Gessler said conservatives in talk-radio land, bragging about Colorado's higher turnout than other states.

But why not do better? Even in a good year, over one-third of the voting-age population in Colorado doesn't go to the polls.

And even if everyone voted, what's wrong with giving people safe and easy voting choices? The bill in the State Legislature not only mandates the mail-in option, but also allows us to drop off our ballots at service centers and, if pushing buttons is your thing, to vote in person on election day or prior to it.

Not to sound all high-minded, but isn't America about giving everyone a chance to have their voice heard at the ballot box? Isn't offering the most best voting options and voter registration a baseline manifestation of that ideal?

Obviously, it is, so it was supremely ironic to hear our state's top election official, who's in charge of encouraging people to vote, arguing against basic improvements in our election system. 

(more…)


Full story: Gessler vs. Democracy

Scott Gessler Announces “Honey Badges” for Volunteers

5
  by: ProgressiveCowgirl Mon April 1, 2013 at 1:56 PM MDT

4/2 POLS UPDATE: For future reference, please note the posted date of this story. Thank you.

—–

Honey BadgeColorado's controversial Secretary of State, Scott Gessler, today launched a volunteer drive for his reelection campaign by announcing what he's calling "Honey Badges," wearable tokens of Gessler's esteem to be presented for volunteer-hour milestones. Not satisfied with autographing his "Honey Badger" Westword cover for campaign donors, the SoS will offer Honey Badges as rewards for volunteer tasks throughout his reelection campaign. Volunteers who collect Honey Badges can redeem them for prizes at various levels. 

(more…)


Full story: Scott Gessler Announces “Honey Badges” for Volunteers

Gessler Doesn’t Support Recalling Sen. Giron (Wink, Nod)

13
  by: Colorado Pols Wed March 13, 2013 at 11:31 AM MDT

The Pueblo Chieftain's Peter Roper reports, with much of the story behind a paywall:

Secretary of State Scott Gessler gave a crowd of about 100 local Republicans a quick lesson Tuesday on how to recall state Sen. Angela Giron, D-Pueblo, over her support for gun-control legislation earlier this week.

Gessler reminded the crowd he is running for reelection but he also addressed the obvious sentiment in the room that Giron should be recalled over the gun issue. He was speaking to the monthly meeting of the Pueblo County Republican Party.

“A recall election is brutal so you need to get all your ducks in a row,” he advised. “You don’t want to wait until the clock’s started to get organized.”

Roper says, and he's probably right, that Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler wasn't "advocating" a recall against Sen. Angela Giron–especially since the logistics of recalling any of the lawmakers threatened with that during the gun safety legislation debate are difficult enough to render it a fool's errand. Given the Pueblo Chieftain's oddly personal dust-up with Sen. Giron over this legislation, though, it's not really a surprise that Roper omitted that the logistics of recalling a state legislator are virtually impossible: everyone knows that this will be about challenging her in 2014. Roper does a great job giving the names of the recall organizers, though, and a great quote vilifying Sen. Giron. It should go without saying that after the recent flap with the Chieftain's general manager that every story about Giron should be evaluated for bias. This story doesn't exactly resolve in their favor.

In the case of Scott Gessler, of course, no such evaluation is necessary.


Full story: Gessler Doesn’t Support Recalling Sen. Giron (Wink, Nod)

Lest There Was Any Doubt, Scott Gessler Will Say and Do…Anything

6
  by: Colorado Pols Thu February 7, 2013 at 11:54 AM MDT

You can say this for Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler: at least he's been consistent in the hubris department.

Readers of Colorado Pols are well familiar with the many lawsuits, unethical actions and attempts at reducing voter turnout tied to Gessler. In fact, it was just a few weeks ago that a district judge blocked Gessler's attempts at limiting mail ballots.Here's an excerpt from what we wrote on January 22:

Gessler had his stated reasons, namely to ensure "uniformity" across the state, but as two judges have now ruled, his prescribed remedy would have the effect of making it harder for a large number of otherwise legal, registered Colorado voters to exercise their voting rights. That's the wrong kind of "uniformity." Gessler, put simply, sought to resolve ambiguity in the law in a way that penalized certain voters, creating an artificial barrier to the franchise with clear partisan implications–and would have reduced the number of otherwise perfectly legitimate votes cast.

You might then be as surprised as we were to see a press release touting Colorado's great work in ensuring fair elections and strong voter turnout. From the release (full text after the jump):

The Pew Charitable Trusts released its report showing Colorado in the top four states for election administration…

…"Colorado can take great pride in this report, which recognizes our state as a national leader," Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler said. "For the 2012 election, we added to these successes, with initiatives that pushed domestic and overseas turnout even higher and improved overall election integrity."

Yes, this really happened. This is the same Scott Gessler who sued the city and county of Denver for sending out what he thought were too many absentee mail ballots. Here's what Gessler had to say back in October 2011 when he was denied a request for a preliminary injunction to stop those "illegal" absentee ballots from being sent:

“Coloradans can continue to expect my office to enforce the laws on the books, preserve statewide uniformity, and ensure election integrity,” Gessler said. “Unfortunately, the judge’s decision today allows counties to operate this election differently based on how much money they have. We’ve seen constant erosion of personal responsibility and this decision continues that erosion."

Had Gessler been victorious in his lawsuit and other attempts to limit turnout, it's safe to say that the Pew Charitable Trust would have been less enthusiastic about Colorado's election administration. This isn't Gessler taking credit for something he didn't do; this is Gessler taking credit for something he actively tried to prevent.

(more…)


Full story: Lest There Was Any Doubt, Scott Gessler Will Say and Do…Anything

“Honey Badger” Doesn’t Care, He’s On The Cover!

12
  by: Colorado Pols Wed February 6, 2013 at 8:22 AM MDT

honeybadgermoneybomb​We got the tip a couple of days ago about an upcoming fundraiser for embattled Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler. Apparently for $50 donated to his re-election campaign–we assume it's his re-election campaign and not his legal defense fund–he's giving out signed copies of the recent Westword issue featuring himself on the cover done up as the "Honey Badger." We've been meaning to get to this for the appropriate good-natured ribbing.

Westword's Patricia Calhoun, however, isn't quite as pleased–and for a pretty understandable reason. 

(more…)


Full story: “Honey Badger” Doesn’t Care, He’s On The Cover!

Gessler reportedly agrees to measure that would eliminate “inactive-failed-to-vote” designation in CO election law

4
  by: Jason Salzman Mon February 4, 2013 at 12:49 PM MDT

(The "Honey Badger" lays down with the lamb?  - promoted by Colorado Pols)

I reported last week that Secretary of State Scott Gessler was in Glenwood Springs recently telling a local reporter that he'd been working with Denver County Clerk and Recorder Debra Johnson to solve their disagreement about whether voters who've missed just one general election should be sent mail-in ballots like other registered voters.

Carbondale-based radio station KDNK quoted Gessler saying that if the State Legislature approves a "solution" that Gessler claimed to have hammered out with Johnson, then "the issue will probably ultimately go away."

This seemed like a strange statement, given that Gessler is in the midst of suing Johnson to stop her from mailing ballots to voters who've missed just one election.

So I called Johnson's office to get its reaction. 

(more…)


Full story: Gessler reportedly agrees to measure that would eliminate “inactive-failed-to-vote” designation in CO election law

Scott Gessler is a Weird Dude

11
  by: Colorado Pols Fri February 1, 2013 at 1:53 PM MDT

Readers of Colorado Pols are familiar with the many controversies and bizarre behaviors of Secretary of State Scott Gessler. Why, it was just two days ago that we learned Gessler was suing the state's Independent Ethics Commission for investigating him over charges that he uses the office petty cash drawer like his own private wallet. Gessler has been embroiled in one controversy after another, many of his own creation, since he first took office in January 2011 and promptly announced that he wanted to keep working for his law firm because his state-funded $68,500 salary wasn't enough money for his lifestyle. 

(more…)


Full story: Scott Gessler is a Weird Dude

Away from “people who are paid to be angry,” Gessler says he’s got an agreement on mail ballots, but is it true?

0
  by: Jason Salzman Fri February 1, 2013 at 1:51 PM MDT

Aspen's <a href="http://www.kdnk.org/story.cfm?id=1359581730222" target="_blank">KDNK radio</a> reported this week on a visit from Secretary of State Scott Gessler to Glenwood Springs where Gessler hoped to get feedback from locals on how the last election went for them.

KDNK reported that Gessler was "getting away from the usual talking points and what he called 'people who are paid to be angry.'"

KDNK didn't ask Gessler if he was also getting away from people who are unpaid and angry, but maybe a reporter can put that question to our Secretary of State once he returns to Denver.

Trouble is, Gessler probably lumps reporters into the "paid-to-be-angry" category of people, given that he thinks <em>The Denver Post</em> has been on a <a href="http://bigmedia.org/2012/10/19/with-radio-host-raising-nary-a-peep-of-objection-gesser-says-stories-about-his-reimbursements-are-petty-stuff-and-post-is-on-a-jihad/" target="_blank">"jihad"</a> against him, and Gessler is a <a href="http://bigmedia.org/2012/02/21/catch-your-breath-mainstream-media-gessler-doesnt-like-you/" target="_blank">frequent critic</a> of <a href="http://bigmedia.org/2011/10/24/gessler-apparently-thinks-mainstream-media-and-the-left-are-one-and-the-same/" target="_blank">professional journalists</a> (but talk radio hosts, not so much).

KDNK reporter Erik Skalak reported Gessler's comments on a 2011 lawsuit Gessler filed against Denver County Clerk and Recorder Debra Johnson. A judge ruled against Gessler, allowing Johnson to send election ballots to voters who had skipped the last general election.  <a href="http://www.kdnk.org/story.cfm?id=1359581730222" target="_blank">KDNK reported:</a>
<blockquote>"I  think the judge was just wrong in his analysis," Gessler told KDNK. "I really do. That said, you know, so the Clerk and Recorder in Denver and I have sort of  been the two people opposing one another. And I've been in conversations with her for a long time, ever since the lawsuit, even before the lawsuit, on how we can sort of find a way to move forward on that. <strong>And I think we've hammered out a solution. So even though we're still at the District Court Trial, if we're able to get this solution through the State Legislature, the issue will probably ultimately go away."</strong></blockquote>
KDNK didn't get a comment from Johnson, and I'm hoping reporters will join me in finding out if this solution is real–or just more Gessler loose mouth.


Full story: Away from “people who are paid to be angry,” Gessler says he’s got an agreement on mail ballots, but is it true?

Gessler Reaches New Heights of Absurdity

17
  by: Colorado Pols Thu January 31, 2013 at 10:23 AM MDT

UPDATE: Statement from Colorado Ethics Watch on Secretary of State Scott Gessler's lawsuit:

Yesterday, the team of lawyers who have been representing Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler at the public’s expense filed suit in Denver District Court, seeking a temporary restraining order that would prevent the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission (IEC) from finishing its ethics investigation of Gessler.  Ethics Watch filed a complaint in October 2012, and the IEC began investigating Gessler’s use of public funds to travel to Florida for the Republican National Convention and a gathering of Republican lawyers as well as a 2012 fiscal year-end “reimbursement” to Gessler of all remaining funds in the Department of State discretionary account.  Gessler is also under criminal investigation by the Denver District Attorney.

“Secretary Gessler is obviously desperate to prevent the release on Monday of an investigative report that would likely confirm not only the truth of Ethics Watch’s allegations, but that his conduct violated standards of conduct that prohibit the use of public funds for personal or political purposes,” said Ethics Watch Director Luis Toro. “We hope the Ethics Commission will not be intimidated by Secretary Gessler’s continued bullying tactics.”

As reported last night by Tim Hoover at the Denver Post, Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler is suing Colorado's Independent Ethics Commission over their investigation into misuse of state funds by Gessler himself. Gessler, you'll recall, is also under investigation by the Denver District Attorney's office for allegedly using state money to reimburse himself for political expenses.

Attorneys for Gessler charge that the Independent Ethics Commission's investigation is "injuring his reputation," which is as silly as it sounds. Nobody has done more to hurt Scott Gessler's reputation than, well Scott Gessler.


Full story: Gessler Reaches New Heights of Absurdity

Gessler Loses. Again.

2
  by: Colorado Pols Tue January 22, 2013 at 8:33 AM MDT

AP reports via the Fort Collins Coloradoan:

A Colorado district court judge has blocked Secretary of State Scott Gessler’s rules on mail ballots.

The judge in Denver ruled Monday that state law allows county clerks the authority to send ballots to inactive voters in mail-in-only elections…

Gessler sued Denver County Clerk and Recorder Debra Johnson in 2011 for sending mail ballots to people who had not voted in previous elections.

The Pueblo Chieftain’s Peter Roper gets to the heart of the matter:

District Judge Brian Whitney ruled that if the counties had not sent the mail ballots, they would have been punishing and disenfranchising inactive voters simply for not having voted in the previous election.

Which was, of course, the argument made by Denver County Clerk Debra Johnson all along, resulting in GOP Secretary of State’s lawsuit in 2011 to halt to delivery of ballots to so-called “inactive-failed to vote” voters. In a mail ballot election, as most counties in the state conducted for the 2011 off-year election, the distinction between so-called “active” versus “inactive” voters threatened to create a disadvantaged class of voters, whose only offense was failing to have voted in the (as you know) GOP-wave 2010 elections. A law that had previously mandated delivery of these ballots in previous elections had lapsed, and Gessler took that opportunity to try to ratchet down mail ballot deliveries.

Gessler had his stated reasons, namely to ensure “uniformity” across the state, but as two judges have now ruled, his prescribed remedy would have the effect of making it harder for a large number of otherwise legal, registered Colorado voters to exercise their voting rights. That’s the wrong kind of “uniformity.” Gessler, put simply, sought to resolve ambiguity in the law in a way that penalized certain voters, creating an artificial barrier to the franchise with clear partisan implications–and would have reduced the number of otherwise perfectly legitimate votes cast.

And although trying to is all the rage these days, the state’s chief elections officer shouldn’t do that.


Full story: Gessler Loses. Again.

Suthers Has Gessler’s Back, Perfect Timing Edition

5
  by: Colorado Pols Mon January 14, 2013 at 1:59 PM MDT

As the Colorado Independent’s John Tomasic reported Friday evening:

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers’ office this week made what’s sure to be a controversial decision to officially support Secretary of State Scott Gessler’s effort to establish a legal defense fund. The fund would host contributions from private donors willing to cover costs tied to a Denver District Attorney criminal investigation into reimbursements Gessler charged to his office for alleged unofficial expenses…

“In the Attorney General’s view,” Grove wrote, “the propriety of a legal defense fund is governed by conflict of interest principles… The Attorney General submits that an arrangement that: (1) places appropriate limits on the public official’s solicitation of contributions, and (2) either ensures transparency or establishes a blind trust would be consistent with [constitutional] concerns…”

Suthers and Gessler are both high-profile Republican figures in the state, and the letter, which Attorney General Spokesperson Carolyn Tyler told the Independent was approved by Suthers, is sure to fuel complaints about backscratching among top state Republican officials. It will also likely renew questions about the power of the state’s understaffed Ethics Commission, which is tasked with investigating official misconduct but hobbled by a tiny budget and no staff attorneys to turn to for advice on legal questions. Indeed, the Grove letter underlines the way the story of Gessler’s alleged misuse of a relative small amount of public money seems to grow into a larger story about government ethical standards and oversight each month as new chapters pile onto the narrative.

Basically, Attorney General John Suthers’ office argues that Secretary of State Scott Gessler would not violate Amendment 41, the Colorado law barring “private gain” by state employees that could in turn influence an official action, by setting up a legal defense fund. The AG’s office says that if appropriate safeguards restricting Gessler’s ability to solicit contributions are defined, and the arrangement “either ensures transparency or establishes a blind trust,” it would be permissible under Amendment 41. Read the very brief memo here.

The thing is, whether or not that opinion is correct, the role of the Attorney General’s office as both counsel for state employees and the Independent Ethics Commission investigating Gessler is turning into a conflict all by itself. Tomasic of the Independent continues:

Ethics Commission Director Jane Feldman believes the Commission’s consideration of the matter has been complicated by the Attorney General’s official position in support of the fund. She told the Independent that Grove’s letter raises conflict-of-interest concerns because the Attorney General is tasked by the state constitution with providing counsel to the Ethics Commission in its deliberations.

“It’s disappointing that the AG’s office weighed in on this without discussing it with us,” Feldman said. “Now we effectively lose the services of the attorney general’s office in considering the legality of the fund. If we need advice, we’ll have to hire outside counsel.”

…Ethics Watch Director Luis Toro told the Independent he thought the attorney general’s office had crossed a line in taking a position in favor of the Gessler defense fund and that the move bolsters an argument his organization has been making for years that the state’s Ethics Commission should have its own counsel on staff, independent from any of the government agencies or offices it might have to investigate.

“The AG’s office said it wouldn’t be involved in Gessler’s criminal defense, yet here it’s involved, isn’t it?” Toro said. “In fact the AG went out of its way, tripping over itself, to get involved. Whose hat is the AG wearing? Is it counsel for the Ethics Commission or for Scott Gessler? Now they’ve handicapped the Commission by leaving the members without its usual counsel.”

Given the obvious partisan political relationship between Republican Attorney General Suthers and Secretary of State Gessler, this situation reveals the folly of using the AG’s office as counsel for the ethics commission at all–since the AG’s role as counsel for state employees arguably makes the conflict the IEC is complaining about in this case inevitable.

Says Colorado Ethics Watch, this problem would be best solved by properly funding the IEC, which would allow it to retain its own legal counsel. For that to happen, of course, lawmakers in Colorado would need to start treating the IEC, and for that matter Amendment 41 as a whole, as something more than a bastard stepchild they would really prefer just go away.

As it stands now, our GOP Attorney General has demonstrated a clever way to subvert it.


Full story: Suthers Has Gessler’s Back, Perfect Timing Edition

Presenting The Scott Gessler Legal Defense Fund!

15
  by: Colorado Pols Tue January 8, 2013 at 8:38 AM MDT

UPDATE: The Colorado Independent’s John Tomasic with more IEC coverage:

The travel expenses charged by Gessler come from attendance at the Republican Party convention in Florida and to a Republican National Lawyers Association meeting this past summer. Gessler was not a delegate to the Republican convention, a fact confirmed for the Independent by Spokesman for the state Republican Party Justin Miller. On his reimbursement forms, Gessler said he was conducting state business.

Peg Perl, staff counsel at Ethics Watch, told the Independent it was gratifying to see the commission stay focused on the substance of the case.

“We’re happy the commission members are taking their responsibility seriously,” she said in a phone interview. “They voted unanimously that this complaint was not frivolous when they took it up and they decided unanimously today to investigate it on the merits. Gessler’s attorneys cast aspersions on Ethics Watch, calling our motives into question, and they attacked the way the Ethics Commission conducts business. But the fact remains that these are questionable transactions with public funds and Coloradans have a right to know what happened.”

Perl added that the complaint filed by her organization was based on published news reports and documents from the secretary of state’s office obtained through an Open Records Act request. She said the commission will have greater investigative power to look into the spending through its subpoena powers.

—–

It’s been a long time coming, reports the Fort Collins Coloradoan’s Patrick Malone:

Colorado’s Independent Ethics Commission on Monday denied Secretary of State Scott Gessler’s request to end its investigation of his use of public funds. Gessler’s deputy, in turn, asked the commission for permission to accept monetary donations outside of the constitutional gift limit to defend him against criminal allegations.

Democratically aligned Colorado Ethics Watch filed complaints against Gessler with the Independent Ethics Commission and the Denver district attorney’s office over his use of public funds to pay for part of a trip in August to Florida where Gessler attended a GOP lawyers’ function and the Republican National Convention.

Colorado Ethics Watch also asked the ethics commission and prosecutors to investigate Gessler’s acceptance of personal payments to empty the balance of his office’s discretionary fund.

Malone reports that embattled Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler’s three high-powered defense lawyers, David Lane, Robert Bruce, and Michael Davis, are being paid by the state to defend Gessler in the Independent Ethics Commission proceedings against him. Not so with Denver District Attorney Mitch Morrissey’s criminal investigation of Gessler over essentially the same dubious reimbursements, and cleaning out his discretionary account of remaining funds. In a criminal case, even related to his duties, Gessler has to pick up the tab for his own legal defense–unless he can carve out a fresh loophole in Amendment 41:

In the request for an advisory opinion from the ethics commission, Deputy Secretary of State Suzanne Staiert advocates allowing donations to a legal defense fund for Gessler. In the document, Staiert argues that political rivals can financially harm public officials whose policies they oppose.

She states that donors to the fund would not curry the influence of a public official, because the public official would not directly benefit from the donations that are paid to his lawyers.

We would be more sympathetic to Gessler’s plight, recognizing that legal harassment is at least hypothetically possible against public officials. Unlike most frivolous legal harassment, though, this isn’t getting dismissed out of hand. In fact, the IEC has decided that the case has merit. That’s not proof of guilt, of course, but citizens must pay for their own criminal defense in most cases–even when they are eventually found not guilty. A criminal investigation (and prosecution, if any) has a much higher standard than, say, a frivolous civil lawsuit. Is Gessler implying that the Denver DA is a “political rival” seeking to “financially harm” him?

Also, it’s not like we’re talking about a policy issue or consequential official action being defended. Although related to his office, the underlying charge boils down to essentially misuse of funds–whatever descriptive term you want to use for that, we’ve heard several.

Either way, how would a donation to Gessler’s legal defense fund not be of “direct benefit” to Gessler, when the alternative is him paying out of pocket? And how then would that be permissible under Amendment 41? That would be awfully hard to swallow even if the circumstances surrounding this alleged malfeasance did inspire much sympathy.

Which, if you haven’t been paying attention, they don’t.


Full story: Presenting The Scott Gessler Legal Defense Fund!

Gordon Files 2014 Secretary of State Bid; Nicolais For AG?

44
  by: Colorado Pols Mon January 7, 2013 at 11:42 AM MDT

UPDATE: GOP attorney Mario Nicolais responds that it was “a fun thought to mull over,” but he will not be running for Attorney General in 2014.

—–

Late last month, for Colorado Sen. Ken Gordon filed to run in 2014 for Colorado Secretary of State–against incumbent Scott Gessler, or another Republican in the entirely plausible event Gessler decides not to run again. Gordon ran for Secretary of State in 2006, losing to Mike Coffman by a fairly narrow margin. Gordon is not the only Democrat feeling out a possible run for SoS in 2014, however, another name making the rounds being CU Regent Joe Neguse.

In other campaign scuttlebutt, we’ve heard that Republican attorney Mario Nicolais, of reapportionment and Coloradans for Freedom fame, is looking at a run for Attorney General in 2014 to replace the term-limited incumbent John Suthers. After Suthers’ strident activism from his office against things like marriage equality, the avowedly pro-civil unions Nicolais would be an interesting curveball–and potentially quite controversial in a GOP primary.


Full story: Gordon Files 2014 Secretary of State Bid; Nicolais For AG?