U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

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

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

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
February 24, 2010 04:28 PM UTC

Wednesday Open Thread

  • 68 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“No image is as compelling as the one which exists only in the mind’s eye.”

–Shana Alexander

Tweet
Share

Comments

68 thoughts on “Wednesday Open Thread”

  1. Oh noes!  One of the candidates running for Steve ‘Well-Coiffed’ King’s House seat apparently considered voting Democratic at least once in his life!!!!

    http://www.gjsentinel.com/news…

    District 54 candidate blasts charge that he’s not really a conservative

    Robert Hislop had to defend his GOP credentials this week amid a barrage of criticism that he might not be as conservative as he says.

    The candidate for House District 54 has been the subject of recent speculation on local blogs and in e-mails that he’s not the conservative candidate he’s claimed to be on the campaign trail, but a left-leaning Republican at best or a moderate Democrat at worst.

    It started when Grand Junction resident Kevin King, director of global sales and marketing at Aston Evaporative Services, searched the Internet and found a posting Hislop made on http://www.mydncphotos.com, a Web site that wanted to publish a book of photos commemorating the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver.

    King described himself as a simple voter who wanted to learn more about the candidates.

    On the site, Hislop, an amateur photographer, wrote:

    “I’ve been around politics for over 30 years and consider myself an RID (Republican Independent Democrat),” he wrote. “I voted for all of them, don’t drink any of their Kool-aid make my own choices and know that living in the USA is the best.”

      2. the name of your blog, David.

        And from your picture, I’d swear I knew you as a kid.  But then I realize, I never lived on an island.

        “The polls are taken in stoney Denver where” Hicky” is the champ of an out of control pot epidemic. Take polls with real people outside of the city and they will see that real Coloradans are sick of the Californification of Colorado. Let’s turn Colorado Red again!!!!! Enough potheads and socialism!!!!”  -Mark, from the McInnis facebook page

    2. I have had the opportunity to set down with Bob and discuss his campaign and the issues.  It is unfortunate that this “simple voter” finds it beyond comprehension that a Republican could split their ticket and think independently.

      Unfortunately this isn’t the first time I’ve seen a top notch candidate be used as target practice this close to caucus, assembly and primary season.  

      2. I’m new to this caucus/primary thing and I’m not sure I understand the politics of it. Bash your caucus opposition hard enough to do well at caucus, but not so hard they become unelectable in the general, and then do it again in the primary if necessary.

        2. Just a reminder for those in need.  Mesa County D caucus training will be held tomorrow night and again Saturday morning at the Union Hall on E Road.

          “Three or four years from now, we’re not going to have a conversation about jobs and all of that kind of stuff.”  -Scott McInnis

  2. Wallace Stevens might disagree:


    Not Ideas About the Thing But the Thing Itself    

    by Wallace Stevens

    At the earliest ending of winter,

    In March, a scrawny cry from outside

    Seemed like a sound in his mind.

    He knew that he heard it,

    A bird’s cry at daylight or before,

    In the early March wind.

    The sun was rising at six,

    No longer a battered panache above snow . . .

    It would have been outside.

    It was not from the vast ventriloquism

    Of sleep’s faded papier mГўchГ© . . .

    The sun was coming from outside.

    That scrawny cry-it was

    A chorister whose c preceded the choir.

    It was part of the colossal sun,

    Surrounded by its choral rings,

    Still far away. It was like

    A new knowledge of reality.

  4. If the Public Option was intended to provide competition for private insurance, why do the current bills have mandates and regulations for private insurers?

    Wouldn’t it make more sense just to let them continue to charge exorbitant premiums if you wanted to bring people to the Public Option?

    1. The issue appears to be that treating the industry like a “regulated utility” appears to have broader support than the public option.

      I don’t understand that preferance, perhaps because it’s more complicated and therefore harder to message against?

      But the public option is so easy to mischaracterize as a “gov’t takeover” that will “cost trillions”, neither of which is the intent and neither of which is necessary.

      But that said, are you saying you’d support a public option, phased in over two or three years? That way, everyone who hates it could vote out the incumbents and vote in only those who want the system we have now, with more “tort reform,” less state regulation, and double digit premium increases every year.

      1. If the stated point of this attempt at reform is to get people insured who currently are not, why does there need to be mandates that will affect my insurance if I’m happy with it?

        An “option” shouldn’t have anything to do with meddling in pre-existing private options, right?

        1. If I udnerstand what you are asking, it goes to establishing and maintaining the pool of covered and premium payers.

          As long as we have a rule that says no one can be denied care, the pool should include everyone, because everyone is “covered” but not everyone pays. If we can’t do single payer, the only other way to have the pool include everyone is mandated coverage and/or fees for “no coverage,” even though they are still covered.

          So how does the contemplated mandate affect your insurance?  

          1. By requiring private insurers to cover everyone, and not to drop people from coverage, it raises my rates.

            I think there has to be an option for the uninsurable, and I think it could be done inexpensively.  Let the government option be the one that’s not allowed to drop coverage and must insure everyone, and let the private companies offer boutique coverage and portability.  I am willing to pay more in taxes to make sure that folks with tough situations are covered, but I don’t see why the government has to mess with private insurers to accomplish this.

            1. It appears to be th eonly deal our elected officials can sell.

              Seriously- if we were starting from scratch, no health care insurance industry, no medical insurance, no universal accessiblity – would we invent anything like we have now?

              By increasing the pool of payers to everyone it should decrease premiums. Everyone pays, everyone has access with portabilty and no exclusion for prexisting conditions – sounds like single payer.  

            2. A lot of young people go uninsured because they don’t think they’re going to get sick (and most of them won’t–till later).

              The mandate forces younger, healthier people into the risk pool.

              It’s a real boondoggle for the insurance companies.  Guaranteed business, lower risk, government subisdy.  Perfect corporate welfare.

              That’s why I hate the Senate bill.

              Let’s take the same money and do a public option.  If private companies can’t compete, let them get more efficient.

        2. for reasonably priced Health care… Checkups and what not.

          Then Hop the southern border for reasonably priced Dental.

          If I have an emergency I will .go local then have to sell all my properties and become homeless like hundreds of tousands of fellow countrymen.

          That’s A-OK with you eh?

          1. What are you talking about?  Of course it’s not ok for you to have to sell your “properties”.  My question is related to the best way to avoid that, and why it’s so important, if the public ‘option’ is really that, why there needs to be anything done to private insurers?

            If they’re so evil and make such a killing gouging people and dropping people and not offering coverage, then offer a better alternative and let them collapse under their own weight,

            eh?  

      2. How does someone have five heart attacks between his thirties and late sixties and live to tell the tale?  Is he some kind of top secret bionic government project?  Is that what all that time in an undisclosed location was about?  Is he  some kind of chubby Borg?  Does he really have a heart at all? If not, that would explain a lot.

        And I know this dates me but seeing Shana Alexander’s name in the quote, I could see the SNL team of Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin doing the Point-Counterpoint sketch and hear Aykroyd saying “Jane, you ignorant slut”.  

    3. 1. Without mandates, you can’t really require insurance companies to ignore pre-existing conditions. Otherwise, people won’t buy insurance until they get sick. That’s not a viable business model for either public or private plans.

      2. Regulations: In order to have true competition, you need to be selling the same basket of goods. Having baseline requirements allows buyers to get bids that are comparable.

      I’ve seen both of these issues discussed extensively, so I expect that you already knew this, no?

      1. I was thinking about it this morning.  Couldn’t the government create a true option that isn’t weighed down by admin. costs, subsidizes pooled high-risk folks, but leaves mandates and regulations for private insurers off the table?

        Tort reform is a must, even if it’s only the ridiculous 2% number that gets tossed around.  You can’t expect moderates to buy into something when you give as your reason for not including it that you’re afraid to take on the trial lawyers.

        2. doesn’t make it ridiculous.  Every reputable study puts the number in the same place.  We have states with no tort reform right next to states with tort reform and it doesn’t effect the cost of health insurance.

          Personal favorite example:  North Carolina has no caps on non economic damages–average cost of family health insurance-$10,950.  South Carolina $350K cap on non economic damages–average cost of family health insurance-$10,950 its a crazy coincidence, but health insurance costs vary regionally, independently of the tort environment.

          Colorado has some of the most aggressive tort reform in the entire country and because of it health insurance is cheap.  No wait!  My health insurance isn’t cheap! In fact despite having one of the healthiest populations (based on age, smoking and obesity rates) our health insurance is right in the middle of the pack.  

        3. Are you suggesting that we

          1. Set up an insurance pool of last resort, kind of like Pinnocol, but for health care?

          2. Enact Texas-style tort reform, and

          3. Leave everything else alone?

          I don’t see much benefit in that approach.

          If I can always get subsidized insurance from the govt, why bother to get insurance if I’m young and healthy?

        4. Asking the government to insure high-risk people is a cheap out for the insurance companies while not significantly helping high-risk insured.

          We actually have a high-risk pool here in Colorado.  It costs a fortune to join it, and you have to have failed to get coverage under other plans, but if you’re reasonably well off it is an option.  Going national with such a plan doesn’t really address cost issues – it just transfers the costs from private insurers to government.

          Just imagine that scenario…  I’m a low-risk insured, self-employed guy.  I pay a private insurer for my insurance; there’s no real regulations because the government provides a backup plan.  So I go to the doctor and am diagnosed Diabetic.  My insurer raises my rates or just kicks me off the plan…  I never really get my money’s worth from the private insurer because they kicked me off before they paid out what I’d contributed to the plan.  Now I go to the high-risk pool of the public plan; I pay a lot more, and because the legislators were smart when they created the plan, it’s not like the government is subsidizing me – I’m paying my fair share into the pool to cover the plan’s expenses.

          It’s a huge win for private insurers.  It might lower the cost of private insurance, but it won’t do a thing for folks with medical conditions (except likely get them pissed off at the government for charging them so much for insurance that used to cost so little while they were in a private plan).

            1. I thought the idea was not to fund this with more taxes or increased government debt, at least to the extent that we can.  Having the government front subsidies for what will wind up being almost every high-risk insured seems insane, especially for someone in a party that hates taxes and government.

            2. provide a “public option”?

              That’s socialism, dude.

              All snark aside, it works for me, but I’m a Boulder Liberal. I don’t think the teabaggers will go along….

  8. the new TV ad exposing Jane Norton as a tax and spend liberal?  It was aired on our local news tonight but I was cooking dinner and didn’t catch who paid for it.  Anyone know who is behind it?  I can’t find any info about it on the nets.  Great ad.

    “Same old, same old isn’t going to bring us victory.”   -Mike May

          2. the screw, to answer your question from the other thread, the ad was aired on KJCT’s evening news tonight.  First time I’ve (partially) seen it.

            1. but I don’t have the energy.

              So who benefits if the true conservatives (and avid caucus-goers) sour on Norton? Wiens is still a mystery to almost everyone, so is it Buck?

              1. I’d think Buck is their protagonist.  Especially seeing how this comes on the heels of the pro-Buck ads which have been airing here over the past couple of weeks.  Think they are trying to tell Penry and McInnis that they are not as important or influential as those two think they are.

  9. http://www.latimes.com/news/na…

    During regular emergency drills at Deer Creek Middle School in suburban Denver, math teacher David Benke always told himself and his students that, should something dire occur, he would try to protect them.

    So when he spotted a rifleman shooting at students who were leaving school Tuesday, Benke didn’t hesitate. “I made a promise,” he said.

    The 57-year-old teacher charged the gunman and knocked him to the ground. While an assistant principal grabbed the rifle, Benke and another teacher kept the shooter pinned until police arrived.

    On Wednesday, a judge ordered the accused gunman, 32-year-old Bruco Strong Eagle Eastwood, held on $1-million bail on suspicion of two counts of attempted murder. Two students were wounded — one in the arm, the other in the rib and lung.

    1. The word “hero” gets tossed around a bit much in my opinion, but in this guy’s case, it’s absolutely well earned. He literally risked his own life and God only knows how many lives he saved. He’s being named “hero teacher” on ABC News as I type this.

  10. By a vote of 406-19, the House passed the Health Insurance Industry Fair Competition Act (HR 4626), introduced by Reps. Tom Perriello (D-VA) and Betsy Markey (D-CO). This bill is designed to restore competition and transparency to the health insurance market – by repealing the blanket antitrust exemption afforded to health insurance companies by the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945. Under this legislation, health insurers will no longer be shielded from legal accountability for price fixing, dividing up territories among themselves, sabotaging their competitors in order to gain monopoly power, and other such anti-competitive practices.  

  11. I just got a fundraising call from the Mitt Romney campaign.

    And when I replied that I had been a delegate for Obama the caller gave it the old college try and asked me what I thought of the economy now.

    I replied that while we were in bad shape because of the mess the Republicans got us in, I thought Obama was doing a good job digging us out.

    He hung up 🙂

    1. In even number years I shift a lot of my giving from charitable to political causes, and I told her that.  But I do it at the end of the month, looking at all my bills, expenses and requests.

      I said I would ‘strongly consider’ a $50 contribution, but she wouldn’t accept it.  Said I had to commit on the phone to a certain amount.  I said–“I am telling you I contribute to political causes.  I want to keep the CO Senate in Dem hands.  I will put your request at the very top of my pile.”

      She wouldn’t accept that, and basically told me goodbye.  Which is fine.  I hate telephone solicitations, personally.  But seriously, WTF?  I’ll send my money elsewhere.

        1. any idiot can call me up based on publicly available voter registration data and ask me for money, claiming to be from the Democratic party. I haven’t actually had a problem, but telephone solicitations in my opinion are less secure than online solicitations. I can read a web address and see if it’s from Russia or something, but phone salespeople frequently block their number, so I’ve got nothing at all to go on.  

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

291 readers online now

Newsletter

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