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
January 30, 2011 10:19 PM UTC

A Love-Hate Relationship With Dave Balmer

  • 16 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As reported last Thursday and Friday, Rep. Dave Balmer’s privileges to visit the floor of the state Senate have been revoked for the duration of the session, in the aftermath of a confrontation there between Balmer and Sen. Gail Schwartz over redistricting. Both Balmer and Schwartz serve on the “Kabuki Kumbaya” bipartisan redistricting committee, and it will be interesting to see how those meetings change in tenor following this incident.

But amid the bipartisan condemnation of Rep. Balmer’s behavior, and the apparent resolution of the incident in a way that both punishes Balmer and avoids the time and expense of a formal investigation, Senate Minority Leader Mike Kopp is…well, he’s unhappy with how this all went down apparently. Here’s what he says about it in his weekend newsletter to constituents:

Finally, on a sad note, two legislators argued on the senate floor.  One was a Republican house member, he was being boisterous and demonstrative.  The other one was a Democrat member of the Senate.  An apology by the house member should have been made, and was made to both the senator and to senate leadership.  The matter should have been dropped. But it wasn’t.

You see, a legislative panel was formed by the Democratic majority to investigate the matter.  Later, when the house member apologized to leadership, the investigative panel was dropped, but the house member was still denied access to the senate chamber for the remainder of the legislative session.  Why?  If the apology was sufficient to eliminate the need for the investigatory panel in the first place, should it have not also been sufficient to maintain access to the senate chamber?  

See why so many in the capitol smell politics?

Each of us has an obligation to treat each other decently, even as we fight for our ideas, and often times do so with great intensity.  But as adults, do we not have a similar obligation to also forebear a little with those who might be gesticulating wildly and being a little extra boisterous?

It’s possible that Sen. Kopp just hasn’t had much experience with Dave Balmer, and doesn’t know about the man’s long history of bizarre and even threatening behavior–at least not to the extent our readers do. We think that Kopp certainly shouldn’t put himself further out on a limb here than Balmer’s nominal boss House Speaker Frank McNulty, who had the good sense to not try and defend Balmer’s behavior as mere “boisterousness” that an “adult” should “forebear.”

For one thing, “boisterous” is not synonymous with “creep.” It’s kind of difficult to ignore the fact that these incidents seem to involve women more often than not–we’d say it’s about the only thing that Debbie Stafford and Gail Schwartz will ever have in common.

On the other hand, perhaps Kopp has heard about Balmer’s one redeeming virtue to Republicans; the virtue expressed in the form of a check. No one will dispute that Balmer’s uncanny ability to raise funds for GOP candidates and causes has papered over his character flaws before, even if it hasn’t saved him from ruthless character assassination in leadership elections. It seems like every time we think Balmer is washed up for good, somebody gives him another prominent role; like this seat on the redistricting committee. There has to be a reason, doesn’t there?

Tweet
Share

Comments

16 thoughts on “A Love-Hate Relationship With Dave Balmer”

  1. BEFORE Balmer apologized. I hadn’t realized that, but I’m fairly certain that if Mom and Dad actually have to turn that car around before the apology is made, no ice cream for you!

    There is no divine right that allows a member from the opposite chamber to be on the floor. They’re always there at the leisure of whichever body meets in that chamber, it is a privilege.

    If Balmer has such a great need to be in a place that he doesn’t need to be maybe he should resign his seat and start campaigning.

  2. By Lynn Bartels, who used to be a political reporter but now appears to be the new gossip columnist.  She described the Balmer incident (obliquely; I still can’t figure out what “boisterousness with gestures” means) and explained that this was the first investigation since 2008 when Doug Bruce kicked a reporter.  Then, I assume to be fair and balanced, she went on to describe a flap 2 years ago when Paul Weissman went off on some Republicans who had voted against his bill.  I couldn’t figure out what the Weissman situation had to do with the Balmer incident, other than to show that Democrats do it, too.  Of course, when Bartels writes about Democratic party stuff, she calls it the Democrat party; I guess she was being fair and balanced.

  5. There was a real issue behind his dispute with Schwartz.  It’s gotten lost in the noise over Balmer’s ejection from the Senate chamber.

    The redistricting commission scheduled the Western Colorado meeting for the 3rd CD in Glenwood Springs (other meetings for CD3 in Alamosa and Pueblo).  Some western slope representatives on the commission balked at this (it is a real extra burden for people in Durango, Cortez, etc. compared to Grand Junction.)

    It was hard to tell from this article, but I think the Commission changed the meeting to GJ and Schwartz was pissed because she wanted it in Glenwood.

    If that’s what the fight was about, I agree with Balmer (although I don’t condone his behavior).

    http://www.gjsentinel.com/news…

    Not sure if subscription is required.

    1. Which was nice because it’s the first helpful article I’ve seen on this.

      Don’t you just love when important stuff is overshadowed by pseudo news?

      I’m having trouble following the location, too. To me it looks like Schwartz and Balmer agreed on Glenwood, but Schwartz thought the way to handle it was to add an extra meeting.

      So where are the public meetings? Or are they not officially set yet? I don’t live in CD3 (current or the soon to be, I’m sure), but am curious. Redistricting touches us all. (Hopefully Balmer doesn’t)

      1. It looks like the Committee set Glenwood and then changed its collective mind.  And it looks like Schwartz didn’t like that (even though the Alamosa meeting is in her district already).

        Ashby’s article suggested that there WON’T be a fourth meeting, because all the other CDs have three and they didn’t want to give CD3 an extra one.

        I wish the Sentinel had a better political reporter–one who could write shit that the rest of us understand–but that’s a whole different thread.

        But I don’t know where the meetings are at the moment.  I hope there’s one in Grand Junction.  Maybe the Sentinel will choose to clear that up someday.

        1. then what was Balmer doing in the Senate chambers.  You would have thought he got the better deal and would have blown off her concerns or agitation.  From the article it seems like he was the loose cannon.  If he had the better cards then why go off?

          1. doesn’t work with Balmer. Kid’s got issues.

            @Ralphie – Political reporters are hard to find anywhere in the state. (Sighs) Maybe someday we’ll recoup those loses.

            Good night.

    1. This is the same kind of bs we’ve seen from Balmer for years.  And now you think he won’t be able to get Spence’s Senate seat?

      Only if they draw the map really different. Or Mike Coffman decides he wants it.

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

191 readers online now

Newsletter

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