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%
April 12, 2006 08:00 AM UTC
19 Comments
That strikes the right note, I think. Now we need to get the House to follow through and make those rules.
I could claim a lot more hours if checking in with my e-mail counted as a day’s work. Heck, for that kind of extra cash I’d tie myself to a Blackberry most of the time…
The ethics committee should have given the entire house a spanking for not re-writing those rules a long time ago. Why would the rules be so vague in the first place?
So why did the Dems go so easy on Stengel? The committee vote was 3-2, with Weissman voting with the R’s to give Stengel an ethical pass. Surely Weissman was told by leadership how to they wanted the initial hearing stage to go. Why did they decide to let him off the hook so easy when it’s an election year and the R’s had already claimed the scalp of Hanna (deservedly so)?
Why take the high road with a guy like Stengel? Why in an election year?
So why did the Dems go so easy on Stengel?
…………….
Remember Romanoff’s comments in the first day or two?
I’d say it’s because they’re ALL prone to doing it. I doubt that Stengel’s the only one to have done this – only he’s been pretty egregious about it.
That’s not it, the official record is pretty clear – Stengel is the only one doing this. They refernced in that committee just how egregious Stengel’s actions were. His actions are literally without precedent.
Because Andrew “Al Gore” Romanoff is a goddamn pussy with no stomach to battle Republicans.
Please, Alice, take him out this December.
I don’t see a need for a new law – this experience will cause them all to be very careful about what they bill…
The rule or policy was vague because it was intended to allow some flexibility you simply can’t design into more explictly written processes. Secondly, these are ladies and gentlemen who want to believe they can trust each other to do the rihgt thing even if they disagree over issues and look at the word through different lenses. The system worked fine.
Then along came Joe. I don’t know why he did what he did. Other people I’ve known in the past who have done similar dumb things usually did so because they felt the “people ” owed them something extra for doing what they aspired to do. Maybe Joe thought that. Nobody knows.
Whatever. He should resign his seat.
David – you might have missed this point, but the only reason Stengel got in any trouble whatsoever is the novelty of it. It probably won’t be a law (laws require a Governor’s signature, and that violates the principle of independent branches of government), but we do need rules to deal with this kind of thing.
Cliff – maybe it wasn’t a rule prior to this because no-one stepped up to the plate to violate the principle of the thing before this…
That’s not it, the official record is pretty clear – Stengel is the only one doing this.
…………………
Yeah, that must be it. I’m sure that not a single, solitary politician has ever been dishonest.
Bridge for sale! Bridge for sale!
Stengel’s photo, sitting arrogantly in his chair, while House members surrounding him were standing, hands on hearts, saying the Pledge, tells me all I need to know about Mr. Stengel.
I agree that rules should be better spelled out for this for future reference. I have no doubt per diems have been abused in the past, but it would pretty hard to abuse the system more than Stengel did.
What a visual that headline creates……
TBM and BMR, I wonder why the Dems gave him a pass as well. I would have “drilled” him given the chance.
You think perhaps it was a “gentleman’s” agreement, becasue each team knows that this is just the tip of the iceberg down on Cap HIll. Lot’s of potential embarassment for both????
“these are ladies and gentlemen who want to believe they can trust each other to do the rihgt thing”
Now only if they could trust the citizens too, rather than passing more nannyist laws.
Whatever legalisms were used to keep him out of prison, the fact remains that Joe Stengel knowingly and intentionally abused his leadership position to rip off Colorado taxpayers by claiming per diem payments for time that he was actually on vacation in Hawaii. The man is a crook. A jury of Colorado taxpayers would have surely sent him to jail. The committee has tarnished the reputation of entire legislature by letting him go unpunished.
I think colddawg probably has called this one right. My guess would be that there was a trade off at some point. I would guess Stengel getting a pass was a trade off for Paccione. Just a guess, but the timing seems to be about right.
GR
Don’t do the equivalency thing with me here. Party roles aren’t equal. Republicans sell the ideals. The Democrats sell the rationalization for whatever low, half conscious thing you wish to pursue.
Don’t do the equivalency thing with me here. Party roles aren’t equal. Republicans sell the ideals. The Democrats sell the rationalization for whatever low, half conscious thing you wish to pursue.
Gee… that’s not biased at all.