U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(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) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

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
January 05, 2010 03:30 AM UTC

Campaign Finance Complaint Filed Against "Dr. Evil" Initiatives

  • 15 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

High-powered elections lawyer Mark Grueskin, representing the committee Protect Colorado’s Communities, today filed a complaint alleging significant violations of Colorado law by proponents of Amendments 60, 61 and Proposition 101–better known as the “Dr. Evil” initiatives. Release follows: says Grueskin, “You don’t get three initiatives on the ballot without spending thousands of dollars – or winking and nodding while someone else does it for you.”

We don’t have a good answer either–how does one collect hundreds of thousands of signatures without spending any money? That’s some real “sharks with frickin’ laser beams” for you. Who knows what they’ll actually accomplish with this complaint (we never get our hopes up about these), but the appearances are shady enough that opponents would be fools not to try.

Issue Committee Calls on Proponents of Anti-Government Measures to Disclose Donors

“Money was spent putting these measures on the ballot.  The public has a right to know who is footing the bill.”

DENVER, CO – Protect Colorado’s Communities-an issue committee filed with the Colorado Secretary of State’s office to oppose Amendment 60, Amendment 61, and Proposition 101-filed a complaint with the Colorado Secretary of State’s office this afternoon alleging the proponents of the three anti-government ballot measures spent well more than $200 to print and circulate petitions to place the measures on the ballot and failed to report the donors who are behind their effort.

“You don’t get three initiatives on the ballot without spending thousands of dollars – or winking and nodding while someone else does it for you,” said Mark Grueskin, attorney for Protect Colorado’s Communities. “The law is clear: the public has a right to know who is funding these anti-government efforts.  These complaints just ask, what – and who – are these proponents hiding?”

“Proposition 101, Amendment 60 and Amendment 61, if passed, would initiate the most vague and reckless overhaul of state and local fiscal policy that Colorado has seen in almost 20 years”, said Tyler Chafee, the Registered Agent for Protect Colorado’s Communities.  “These measures would certainly put an end to any hope that Colorado had of recovering the jobs we lost in the economic downturn.  I think the people of Colorado deserve to know who is really behind such a radical set of disastrous fiscal policies.”

Comments

15 thoughts on “Campaign Finance Complaint Filed Against “Dr. Evil” Initiatives

  1. While I think these would be devastating for Colorado, I also support the right for anyone to put anything up for a vote if they meet the requirements.

    And while I agree that it strains credibility that this was accomplished for $200.00 – it is possible. And I don’t think we should require people to prove innocence just because we think something is unlikely.

    Here’s hoping that PCC has some actual evidence to back up their complaint. Because otherwise it’ll be thrown out, and should be. But that also makes it harder for someone else who comes later with actual evidence.

    So good luck PCC, but you better have something more than “we don’t think it can be done this way.”

    1. I  also support the right for anyone to put anything up for a vote if they meet the requirements.

      Weren’t you a strong supporter of Ref O?  

    2. He’ll do what it takes not to get this lawsuit thrown out. There’ll be depositions. I would love to see the transcript of a deposition of Douglas Bruce done by Mark Grueskin.

    1. I can just picture him in the White House, watching that flick over and over. I’ll bet the asshole spent five more times watching Austin Powers flicks then he ever spent reading the 9/11 Report. Make that ten times. Twenty.

      Meanwhile, Obama is poring over hundreds of pages of information about the recent bombing attempt.

    1. if it is done by liberals or community activists like ACORN.  Otherwise it is OK and winky winky we all know that playing hardball means crossing the line sometimes.

      Cheaters are as American as Dick Cheney and those who play by the rules are wimps who deserve to be slaughtered.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

135 readers online now

Newsletter

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