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 05, 2011 12:01 AM UTC
12 Comments
Yes, that’s what Gardner should do. Hold back so the Dead Guvs can call him a sellout!
To the communist carbon cap.
We must not stop the industrial machine, please feel free to foul our air as much as possible. Regulations! We don’t need no stinking regulations (just stinking air)
Losers
Not only are corporations “people” but they are “people” who should have the right to poison me and then bill taxpayers for their inconvenience if I fail to suffer quietly.
What an honor it is to have a True Conservative™ like GOPweenie posting at COPols.
on gutting environmental safeguards.
Let the voters in Colorado see exactly what they got in this Neanderthal.
Show us your true colors Rory. Your allegiance to the corporations should never be in doubt.
Interesting that the (coughs) true conservative’s answer to too big government is more government.
Or maybe I missed the meme of why HCR is so bad.
Under the CRA, a regulation is nullified if both chambers of Congress pass an identical pronouncement (called a “joint resolution”) saying so. The joint resolution is NOT a bill that would enact a statute, which means it does not require a presidential signature to take effect.
That, at least, is the intent of the CRA, which was enacted by the Republican Congress (and, yes, signed by President Clinton, since CRA is a statute).
The question, though, is whether it is constitutionally permissible for Congress to disapprove executive branch action by joint resolution. There are good arguments that, in fact, Congress could do so only by passing a bill subject to presidential approval or veto.
That’s one reason CRA has been used only once in the nearly fifteen years its been on the law books. I think it is likely that the Obama administration, which seems generally intent on preserving presidential prerogatives, would act to defend rulemaking authority against any attempt to invoke the CRA.
The CRA, as it presently exists, may be unconstitutional.
For the same reason the line item veto was unconstitutional.
Remind me not to play you in Chess.
The problem with using CRA as I see it is that the Republicans screwed up big time nominating not ready for prime time nuts like O’Donnell and Angle and lost the Senate. Hoping that Democrats will pass an pro-Republican resolution in the Senate right now seems blatantly stupid but we are dealing with Rory Gardner here aren’t we. Looks more and more like the abortion ploy where they make a lot of noise about how tough they are but do nothing about it.