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%
March 21, 2007 02:42 PM UTC
21 Comments
Senate wants to repeal, rewrite Amend. 41
By Jennifer Brown
Denver Post
Senate leaders want to dump Colorado’s new ethics law and ask voters to replace it with a “common-sense” rewrite that applies only to elected officials and policymakers.
The proposed Senate fix to Amendment 41 – a voter-approved measure that has been broadly interpreted to ban gifts between friends and scholarships for the children of government workers – comes a week after the House passed its own proposal.
Both plans end with an election in November 2008, but the House version would clarify the ethics law’s “unintended consequences” through legislation this session. Then voters would have to sign off on the narrowed interpretation of the ban on gifts to public officials.
The alternate approach announced Tuesday by Senate President pro tem Peter Groff and Senate Republican Leader Andy McElhany would ask voters to repeal the amendment and replace it with a version that excludes rank-and-file government workers.
In the meantime, a government-appointed panel would offer guidance on the ethics law.
. . .
http://www.denverpos…
here:
http://energycommerc…
http://blog.washingt…
also, the Denver Post has a similar article but it doesn’t go so far as to predict Scotty will quit.
http://www.denverpos…
heckuva job, Bushie.
http://salazar.senat…
Thank the gods.
Karon Hatchett, former (disgraced) executive director of the Denver Election Commission, blocks citizen journalist. h/t Denver Politics
http://denverpolitic…
keeping money out of politics one attack ad at a time:
http://www.rockymoun…
And it looks like Jared Polis is playing fast and loose with the Article 29 Coalition’s name, much to the unhappiness of the other Coalition members.
If it’s true, shame on you, Jared. You don’t need to sink to this level.
Her stonewalling position on A.41 (and her, indirectly, attacking Polis) made the amendment about the CD2 race. She can’t claim outrage over Polis’s response. Can she?
she had a chance to get in front of this issue and be a real leader, much like her conterpart Romey did but she totally blew it and now she is paying the price.
I don’t think she “started it.” I think it was “started” by the Blue Book warnings long before this whole brouhaha got going. I know there’s dissent over Amdt. 41; it’s not limited to Jared v. Joan.
I *do* think that Joan aught to let the bill go through, or at least work on a compromise that both the House and Senate can agree on. I’d very much like to see a CO Supreme Court ruling on it as soon as possible. But if Joan is working with Groff et al on what I consider to be the RIGHT solution – a re-write of Amdt. 41 – then I don’t think she’s being particularly political about it.
What I was writing about above is that Jared may have used the Article 29 Coalition’s name without consulting with the rest of the Coalition members, and that he’s attacking Joan for a difference of opinion over what even he claims was not the best wording in an Amendment.
use the term resignation 4 times in twelve minutes when discussing the USAG issue? They weren’t resignations!
To make you have to change your pants – he knew you could only take so much teasing like that.
They were each ‘asked’ to resign. Result is the same.
What if they had refused the request?
Hidden in the bushel of 8 apples is a rotten apple that was going to reach into Cheney’s office.
The Pentagon has begun investigating conditions for veterans at the Armed Forces Retirement Home after Defense Secretary Robert Gates received a letter from the Government Accountability Office. “The letter reported that the GAO had heard allegations from medical personnel who treat residents at the facility, including a rising number of resident deaths, resident rooms spattered with blood, urine and feces, and veterans suffering from bed sores and, in one case, maggots in a wound.”
Soldiers have, when used for corporate interests, been used as fodder for special interests. Who among our readership believes that is the case in oil rich Iraq?
Soldiers, clerks, drivers….whatever, who dares to treat citizens of the greatest country in the world with such disregard. Who should be held accountable?
“maggots in a wound”…those readers in health care KNOW that this is an egregious lapse in care. Supporting the troops!! From poor planning, to providing poor equipment…those who started this war are the biggest hypocrites I’ve ever encountered. Accountability, people…accountability.
Finally, after many years of Republican rubber stamp politics, we’ll be getting some answers to these atrocities and putting our country back on track.
I lean in moderate agreement, but I’m not going to jump to conclusions, if only because maggots in a wound is still a legitimate medical practice depending on the wound and injury.
Amendment 41 ads smell political, critics say
By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News
March 21, 2007
A coalition backed by millionaire Jared Polis is running a radio ad that singles out Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald as “the one Colorado politician to put up a roadblock” to the ethics measure Polis put on the ballot last year.
Critics say the ad is misleading on a number of fronts, including it never mentions the two lawmakers who are leading the charge against a Polis-backed plan for implementing Amendment 41.
Those two lawmakers, Sens. Peter Groff, D-Denver, and Senate Minority Leader Andy McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, said today that the radio spot sounds more like a thinly veiled campaign ad.
That’s because Polis and Fitz-Gerald are considered the leading contenders for the Democratic nomination in the 2nd Congressional District next year.
Even those behind the ad admit it was intended to spur calls from Coloradans in the district Fitz-Gerald “aspires to represent.”
. . .
http://www.rockymoun…