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

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

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

52%↑

48%↓

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
February 28, 2023 10:39 AM UTC

House Republicans Brag of "Really Drastic Right-Wing Legislation"

  • 8 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Last week we wrote about two related topics involving Republicans at the Colorado legislature: 1) The crazy, no-hope bills being promoted by the rhetorical leaders of the GOP House caucus, Colorado Springs Reps. Scott “There is No” Bottoms and Ken “Skin” DeGraaf; and 2) An open question about who is actually leading a caucus that is moving further to the right and away from the majority of Colorado voters.

Today, courtesy of Elliott Wenzler of The Colorado Sun, we can coalesce these two posts into one singular thought:

Banning abortion. Restricting transgender athletes’ participation in school sports. Slashing state revenues by cutting the income tax rate.

A wave of bills Republicans are introducing in the Democrat-controlled Colorado legislature reads like a list of hot-button GOP talking points. And that’s not by mistake, even if they have no chance of becoming law.

House Minority Leader Mike Lynch, R-Wellington, said the measures — some of which are highly controversial — are “statement bills” that show Coloradans what Republicans’ priorities are and how they would lead the state if they were in charge.

“I think if we were suddenly to be in the majority, you’d see a whole bunch of really drastic right-wing legislation,” Lynch said. [Pols emphasis] “But I think that’s largely a factor of the fact that we’ve been out of the majority for so long. We’re trying to fix these things that have piled up over the last 10 years.”

What we have here is House Minority Leader Mike Lynch (R-Wellington) making it crystal clear that the extremism on display from the Republican micro-minority in the State House is not a lack of leadership nor a problem of strategic indifference — it is instead an intentional approach geared toward attracting the attention of Colorado voters.

Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen and his pleading eyes.

We’re not entirely convinced that this is really part of a broader plan sketched out in advance. Lynch may just be saying this now in order to make it appear that he has more control over his caucus than he actually does. But regardless, this comment from Lynch is going to come back to haunt Republicans again and again ahead of the 2024 election cycle. Colorado voters have affirmed in the past three election cycles that they want no part of any “really drastic right-wing legislation.”

The few remaining rational Republicans at the State Capitol understand this problem. Back to The Colorado Sun:

The legislation may only be sponsored by a handful of Republicans, but they reflect on the entire caucus. Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen, R-Monument, urged people not to necessarily lump the entire GOP together. [Pols emphasis]

“The Republican caucus is an intellectually diverse caucus. It brings an array of perspectives,” he said. “One or two people have a strong conviction of this specific nature and there may be other perspectives.”

Republicans should have left THIS cat in the bag.

Every Colorado legislator can submit up to five different bills each legislative cycle, and the State Constitution guarantees that every one of those bills must at least be granted a committee hearing. Thus, there is no way for Republicans or Democrats to prevent crazypants legislation from getting its moment in the spotlight…supposing either caucus would want to get in the way here.

Wenzler writes in The Sun that “Democrats are effectively powerless to stop controversial GOP measures from seeing the light of day.” While this is true in a technical sense, from a strategic sense Democrats have no interest in preventing “really drastic right-wing legislation” from getting its turn in the spotlight.

If Republicans want to talk about cutting taxes for rich people and screwing over the lower- and middle-class, Democrats should be happy to hand over the microphone.

If DeGraaf wants to discuss his belief that carbon dioxide emissions are actually good for the planet, then the hearing room is his for a few hours.

Multiple bills restricting abortion rights in a state where voters have regularly opposed such ideas? Right this way, Rep. Bottoms!

The 2024 election, like all elections, will be another chance for voters to decide which political party they would prefer to be in charge in Colorado. House Republicans are doing all of the the heavy lifting…for Democrats.

Don’t take our word for it, Democrats can say. The Republican House Minority Leader himself says that if the GOP is in control, “really drastic right-wing legislation” would be just around the corner.

Comments

8 thoughts on “House Republicans Brag of “Really Drastic Right-Wing Legislation”

  1. Taking their word at face value yes if they had majority they would pass drastic right wing legislation. However; they don't, and should we take their word at face value that at some point they will pass it at a barrel of a gun?

    These unrealistic and extreme bills republicans are bring up seems less like viable suggestions of legislation and rather messaging to a criminal gang.

  2. "If we were suddenly to be in the majority"

    If ands and buts were wishes and nuts, every day would be Christmas!

    There is a reason they will not be in the majority – suddenly or gradually.

    1. Do you believe that John Tegan guy running for mayor of Colorado Springs feels the same way? Is it reasonable to take these armed militias at their word that there comes a time they will "need" to "retake" their country by force? 

      I get the need to have sunlight on the nutsos to marginalize Republicans but are we listening to anything they are saying?

  3. We could do something like this in Colorado, but I think it is better to let the Republican Party cancel itself.

    A Republican in Florida just introduced a bill that would ban the Democratic Party from existing in the state. Registered Democrats in Florida would be notified that their party has been “canceled” and they’re now no-party voters.

  4. Here's hoping Democratic pragmatists can be nominated to run against these folks, in order to shrink their minority position even further. 

    Cafe gatherings in district could be asked: 

      * What are the most pressing problems facing you and Colorado at this time? 

      * Did Republican Representative or Senator xxxxxx help address that problem?  Was there any effort to try to find a way to limit or eliminate that problem?  No? 

     * Then how about electing me and letting me work with the Democratic caucus and see if we can find a way to make it happen.

    I suspect there would be methods & trade-offs for most issues.  For example, on abortion:  no way the Democratic caucus is going to take away choice from women consulting with their doctor.  But there probably are INCENTIVES that could work to diminish the choice to have an abortion.  For example, I'd bet many Democrats could support a bill to insure better health care and genetic counseling to diminish genetic problems that lead to some abortions.  Some would back short-term support for pregnant women who can't see a way to continue supporting their family AND be pregnant or add a newborn.  Many would back the government finding ways to expand the use of LARC, long-acting reversible contraception. 

    1. The successful LARC program, which cut teen abortion in half, had bipartisan support. But that was in 2015. I don't know if that could happen with the current hard-core culture warriors on the GOP side.

      For myself, and all the other women who had other kids to raise and limited income to do it, abortion was the solution to an unplanned pregnancy. That's about 60% of the women who have abortions – they had other children to support financially and to care for. For many, it was a family decision, not just the pregnant partner. 

      Today's Republican party won't do shit for 60% of families who lack the means to raise another child. 

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

201 readers online now

Newsletter

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