President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
January 03, 2011 07:34 PM UTC
13 Comments
last week in a different thread when he suggested that the Rs were going to focus on getting perceived enviros off the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.
They don’t have have both houses, so it’s unlikely that they can overturn the regs. But they can do a whole lot of horsetrading with a new Governor to get people they like appointed to the Commission.
Implementation is where the fight will be now, not overturning. The R’s probably knew this–and cynically manipulated truth in an attempt to seize power. Given the serious issues our state faces, the pitfalls of relying too much on the most volatile of sectors, and the need to safeguard public health, water, etc., it would be nice if they showed leadership, but I guess lust for power will have to do.
I also think there is a significant split among the producers–with larger companies just wanting ‘certainty’ (i.e. let’s move on) and the smaller ‘Mom and Pop’ shops (i.e. Independents) still pushing for overturning the regs. One thing they will agree on, as Duke and Ralphie note, is stacking the COGCC with pro-industry rubber-stampers. Hopefully our new Governor will stay strong, but he needs to hear from people.
I think that’s the point of this post.
And I agree 150% re: Hickenlooper needing to hear the facts. He could be the reason the Rs felt comfortable to back off?
I hope not. But we’d better nail the Rs good for their two years of lies so there’s no confusion.
that they are relentlessly working to unseat Mr. Alward, and as you say, hammering Hickenloopers’ office with demands about who he will appoint to the seats held by the directors of the DNR and the CDPHE.
Governor Hickenlooper has some good people on his staff who know full well the depth of mendacity that defines the O&G lobby and their puppets, the Colorado Republican Caucus. It is my fervent hope that these people (and you know who you are) will stick to their guns on these rules.
Practically everything the lobby and the aforementioned liars in the legislature say is untrue. CT and ardy, just to name a couple, have on many occasions provided an immense amount of data that refutes almost every claim these people have made. It is particularly enlightening when you compare the rhetoric the O&G boys use in the press, versus the stuff they tell their investors.
I was personally involved in the legislation and the rule making process for a total of six years or so. There are some good people working for the O&G industry, but if they have a habit of telling the truth, they seldom rise to the top. By the time they get to the legislature, they are thoroughly immersed in fantasy and denial.
Didn’t their mommies ever tell them that lying was bad?
Gagliardi’s loss wasn’t nearly as narrow as Rice’s, but I concur that it was in large part due to Szabo’s promises to repeal laws like FASTER and curb the government’s involvement with industry like the O&G rules.
The Republican House candidates are going to have a tough time explaining their quick and unexpected flip flops on these issues. Honestly, I’m surprised and I appreciate their willingness to keep some of the policies that Democrats worked so hard to enact, but the voters might not see it like that in 2012.
The bigger question if and when some of these Republicans who ran on limited government are going to make McNulty’s job harder by vocalizing their displeasure with how things are being handled on the policy front so far. I can’t believe that all of them are pleased with how many Democratic policies he’s willing to “let slide”.
Still a race we might have won if the GOP, and Szabo, didn’t bear false witness against their neighbor (NOT WJWD). And it’s no easier on those of us who must now listen to Szabo talk for two years! Have you ever had the pleasure?
It seems like other issues that will not be supported by Democrats in the Senate or the Governor Speaker McNulty will let the Republicans run bills on and grandstand about in committee hearings and on the House floor because it makes good campaign fodder. For example, “we tried to fix immigration, if it weren’t for those Democrats…”
Other issues like FASTER that people actually ran on that he won’t let bills appear for because the logical conclusion of what would happen if the did repeal FASTER (you know, more roads and bridges falling apart) just make them look stupid.
I’m expecting a lot of grandstanding when session actually starts, but so far they’ve been eerily reasonable. “If it wasn’t for ___” sounds pretty similar to the Democratic platform in 2010, so we’ll see how that works out for them if they decide to go that route when they run for re-election in 2012.
is going to play a fundamental role–keeping Republican campaign promises versus Republican reneging at the forefront of the public’s mind for the next two years. The media isn’t going to do it and it really is part of the state party’s job to take the lead on getting the word out.
And keep an eye on the OGCC because that’s where they are going to attempt to pull a fast one, as others have pointed out.
Thank you.
This should be a common election campaign strategy if it isn’t already:
CAUTION: Use this strategy only if you’re fairly certain that your party won’t have a majority or that you won’t have the power or influence to make big changes anyways.
1. Find an issue your base hates about the opposition.
2. Fire up your base with half-truths and hyperbole.
3. Get elected.
4. Make a futile effort to make a change to the issue your base hates about the opposition.
5. Blame the opposition for getting in the way.
6. Wait until the next election year.
7. Repeat.
so I will mention it here:
I just heard that incoming House Oversight Committee Chairman, Darrel Issa (R-CA), has sent a letter asking businesses and industry to help him identify the specific rules and regulations that industry thinks are getting in the way of creating jobs.
I am not complaining about it, it’s normal, but usually done in private. Now that he has grandstanded by makiing this a public venue, doesn’t that mean that they will now have to actually PROVE something?
When challenged on their bullshit fearmongering, Colorados’ O&G industry has always relied on generalities, lies, and information manipulation instead of providing actual specifics. I am very interested in seeing what the boys at COGA come up with to answer Mr. Issa.
I am sure there must be some way that revealing the content of “Fraccing fluid” will cost America thousands of jobs.