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
April 04, 2024 08:05 AM UTC

Thursday Open Thread

  • 20 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Mistakes are always forgivable, if one has the courage to admit them.”

–Bruce Lee

Tweet
Share

Comments

20 thoughts on “Thursday Open Thread”

  1. Once again our government has destroyed the oil & gas industry.

    https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2024/04/04/colorado-oil-natural-gas-output-2023.html

    Colorado oil production jumps, adding million of barrels in 2023 – Denver Business Journal

    “Any increase in oil production is good for consumers and good for energy security,” said Dan Haley, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association trade group. “The production numbers in Adams, Arapahoe, and Broomfield counties reflect the years-long cooperation between local communities, operators and regulators that have led to this growth.”

    1. Wasn't Dan Haley whinging about Colorado's O&G industries being "under attack" just a few weeks ago? If I were a journalist (I am not) I would be asking him why he said that then and why he said this now, because thats two different stories in a very short amount of time. It would be fun to watch.

  2. Colorado River Over-Usage: 22%. Alfalfa is single largest user. Colorado Sun.

    Agriculture: 52% (Alfalfa by itself: 26%)
    Riparian & River (nature): 19%
    Cities/Industry/Commercial: 18%
    Reservoir Evaporation: 11%

    I’m going to suggest an extremely simple & obvious (but illegal) solution: If Colorado River is over-used by 22%, then ALL users must cut by 22%. That doesn’t consider that certain users were never included in the first place, specifically Native Tribes.

    Something even simpler (and also illegal): cut all alfalfa production and let the cattle roam on the range.

    Across the basin, alfalfa hay uses more than 5 million acre-feet of Colorado River water — that’s 26% of all the water consumed in the basin. One acre-foot roughly equals the annual water use of two or three households.

    In the Upper Basin, irrigated agriculture consumes 2.8 million acre-feet, or nearly half the water used by Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, the environment, reservoirs and water exports out of the basin. Cattle-feed crops, like alfalfa, consume 90% of all water used by Upper Basin agriculture.

    That means alfalfa uses more water than cities, commercial users and industries across the entire basin: Collectively, these users consume about 3.5 million acre-feet, or 18%, of the river’s water. The Colorado River provides water to 40 million people across seven Western states, 30 tribal nations and two states in Mexico. 

    Basinwide alfalfa production also uses more than the water sucked up by riparian ecosystems near rivers and wetlands, which use 19% of the river’s water.

    2. It has Tragedy of the Commons undertones: 

      “..should a number of people  handful of water users enjoy unfettered access to a finite, valuable resource such as a pasture water they will tend to over-use it, and may end up destroying drastically increasesing its value altogether (at the expense of the common good). Even if some users exercised voluntary restraint (they can’t given our “use it or lose it policies“), the other users would merely supplant them, the predictable result being a tragedy for all. 

    3. Your "simple and obvious" solution is extremely flawed.  Upper River states (CO/WY/UT/NM) have historically used only about half their Compact allocation.  Lower states (AZ/NV/CA) have overused their allotment substantially.  Cutting 22% across the board might very well leave the lower states still consuming more than their allotment.  
       

  3. RTD puts gun to its head and shoots.

    https://www.denverpost.com/2024/03/27/rtd-service-cuts-denver-rail-bus-ridership/

    RTD cuts rail service to just one train per hour on key lines amid big projects. Will it lose riders?

    “RTD officials have approved cuts in rail service that will mean one train per hour on some key routes starting May 26, far short of the 15-minute frequencies that public transportation advocates urge to entice more metro Denver residents out of their cars.

    James Flattum, a cofounder of Greater Denver Transit, a grassroots advocacy group, said the cuts to help address maintenance along the I-25 corridor rail lines may be necessary for safety but risk a downward spiral for public transit.

    Reducing rail service along the I-25 corridor to one train per hour will lead to “permanent demand destruction,” he said. “People who have relied on these rail lines as part of their daily routines are going to be forced to look elsewhere. Maybe they won’t come back.”

     

    1. RTD seems to have been in a death spiral of "people don't use RTD cuz it's inconsistent and not convenient so RTD doesn't try to make it consistent and convenient so then people don't use it" in a while now.

    2. At the risk of being labeled a rural, democratic socialist, I think public transportation should be free, our RTD buses should be run on biodiesel from animal fat and waste grease, trains powered by rural wind and solar farms.  If we’re going to take climate issues seriously we have to make public transport the preferred mode.  

      Cheap sugar and corn shouldn’t be the only ones benefitting from government assistance.

      1. If you call Summit County "rural," its Summit Stage is free to ride, and you don't have to live there. It's maybe sorta socialist, but at the same time a benefit to capitalism because it brings people to the ski resorts and might even have some impact on parking. It's nowhere close to the scale of operation RTD has to deal with, though.

        1. There would no doubt be a lot of rural hysteria. Maybe even another call for War!  All of these challenges require a comprehensive solution, an Innovation Economy  approach that' spans across rural and urban. (Hey, one can dream, right?) 

          1. Well, as a dreamer you're not the only one. RTD needs help, as Barnes and Chickenheed said, and while not much of the district is rural it serves an area with several million people – probably close to half the state's population. I don't think a lot of rural Colorado would have the ridership to support transit well right now, which makes equitable funding or taxing a challenge. But done right, transit sure could take a bite out of rush hour congestion and personal vehicle fuel consumption.

            1. I wasn’t suggesting we expand RTD to rural areas. It’s more that we, as a state, have an interest in increasing public modes and reducing emissions. I think it should be heavily subsidized (not all that much different than heavily subsidizing rural ag operations). The former, a state investment, the latter, federal.  Poorly worded on my part. Dream scenarios that would require rural leaders to roll up their sleeves, too. While one could have envisioned such a scenario (you’d have to go back to Romer-era “Dome on the Plains” days), I fear that 20 years of Fox News and now MAGA, I think those days may not reappear anytime soon, if ever. 

              1. No worries MB, I was just trying to say we probably need state-level pretty big money to achieve the kind of transit frequencies that would attract ridership, but rural areas that can't support transit would probably not be happy if they didn't get something out of the deal. So, why didn't I just say that in the first place?

                1. All good, Jung.  Yes, they should get something.  Doesn't need to translate to transportation issues but billions of opportunitiy in addressing new opportunities in food production specifically.  All big ideas that would require partnerships with private capital and state / federal resources. 

    1. Seeking treatment in rehab isn't like drag racing Colorado State Patrol in your EV with a loaded gun in your pocket but I guess it'll do. Sounds like she's had a shit year. I hope it helps.

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

100 readers online now

Newsletter

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