President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(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%
December 28, 2011 07:31 PM UTC
25 Comments
also the most petty and vindictive when he doesn’t get his way. The rest of his tenure is going to be excruciating and there’s probably nothing we can do about it without the proverbial dead girl or live little boy turning up. He’s so despicable, he wouldn’t make a credible fictional character. Such a character would be judged too over the top. Yuck!
One can only imagine the sleaze level of a 2012 election overseen by an SOS with this my way egardles of little things like the state constitution or I’ll do everything I can to trash it for everyone attitude. I don’t suppose there’s any chance of impeaching or recalling him for having no idea what constitutes the job description for SOS? Because he clearly has not even the vaguest idea.
if this will rouse the ‘bot? Last week was one of the GOP’s worst in recent memory – the obvious inability to spin it away is the reason for his absence. But someone’s attacking Gessler! To arms, to arms!
How is one reasonably to prevent hazard?
already announced GOP primaries, I wonder how reporting penalties will be enforced
no matter their political affiliation. Gessler could find himself backed up against a wall facing a firing squad if he keeps this up.
The legislature’s best way of firing back is to cut his budget. And since he’s not doing anything constructive, I say, let ’em. It can always be restored once we have a real SOS who takes his office seriously.
It collects fees.
recommend those fees be reduced or go to other needs in the state?
He wanted to keep that surplus to pay for some sorely-needed mods to the software on the business side of his operation.
He also cut fees, as if me paying $5 or $10 less to renew my trade names is going to create jobs.
has failed to respond with another paean to Gessler and rant about the evil of Dem attacks on a man who is the world’s most pristine example of the very soul of integrity and everything else that’s good in the universe. Either that or ArapG’s alternate argument: Everybody does it.
aren’t having a meeting that ArapGopher had to attend
It’s the holidays, and I have family to spend time with as opposed to hanging out on this liberal blog 24/7.
Scott Gessler is charged with interpreting and enforcing the law. Because the legislature required Gessler to make rules based on poorly written statute that caused an inherent contradiction, Gessler tried to make them reasonable. And Legal Services said no.
Once they did, the only choice Gessler has is to issue rules that follow the law. The legislature can fix this so it’s not that big of a deal. Gessler may be “encouraging” them to fix it by showing them what their mistake means, but that’s his job too. I don’t know who the Republicans are the Denver Post is talking to, but they don’t understand how this works.
By now, Republicans understand that Gessler is a target, and that Democrats intend to scream bloody murder no matter what he does. The Post seems to be inventing controversy, and Pols is as always only too happy to help. Nothing new there.
The legislature is charged with making the law. The courts are charged with interpreting the law. The Attorney General is charged with enforcing the law.
The Secretary of State’s responsibility is to implement the laws that are on the books, not make his own.
you never disappoint. Enjoy your family. No need to bother with writing your own stuff. You could delegate any one of us to write your comments for you. We have your shtick down by heart.
You’re back–with the talking points the Koch boys gave you. Just in the nick of time.
Don’t you ever get tired of being jerked around by those strings? Or do they have their hand up your (sock)? Just for the record, which kind of puppet are you?
…having a Koch hand up his (sock).
Scott was relly into productive territory when he was looking in to PERA’s high income pensions. Then all of a sudden it stopped. Bet that some were upset that our retired govenors and others, would have been disclosed as taking extreme advantage and he was scared off. It would have been interesting to see where the money was going.
Except that it wasn’t Gessler demanding that information from PERA, it was Walker Stapleton.
Good for Stapleton. Maybe he will speak up.
PERA is a pension system; it operates in the same manner as an IRA or a 401(k) – put a lot in, and you get a lot out (theoretically).
What is the point in requesting details about the top pension earners in the state? If they earned a high pension, then they deserve to collect it just as surely as someone who gets a pension in private industry or by putting away funds for retirement. They most certainly don’t deserve to be singled out or demonized for utilizing an alternate retirement income system just because it’s convenient for conservatives to attack government funds.
all I’ve ever heard even speculated is that the board may have set interest rates at a rate higher than could be reasonably expected given financial climates in today’s world.
It is not like a 401 or an IRA, that assigns you a payout from what you contribute. The article I read said that the PERA pension you receive is based on the highest earnings. This is grossly unfair if the highest earnings are not proportionate to the overall contributions that you made in relation to what everyone else has contributed. From that basis it should be similiar to what an anuity would pay. This could place an unfair burden on those that do not have exceptional earning years during the payout years basis.
So the question still stands – for what reason does Stapleton think he should receive disclosures on the top PERA pensions in the state?
It is a public pension system and if there is a shortfall the taxpayors and/or other pensioners can be forced to sacrifice in order for it to maintain its integrity. It is also suseptable to political play. The logic of problems can always be blamed on the economy, contributions and other excuses, wheras the real problem is that the system may be becoming flawed in order to unjustly enrich someone who hasn’t contributed their share. It amazes me that it hasn’t been audited and explained to the public already.