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%
November 15, 2013 11:17 AM UTC
33 Comments
And fracking essentially deprives people of secure and enjoyable use of and the value of their private property. Which private property is more important, Governor?
The laws that gave legal dominance to the mineral estate were enacted in the 19th century. Those imperatives have changed, and to use that as an excuse to make surface owners pay for bad decisions about where to invest in minerals is fundamentally wrong. Tough luck to those who purchased minerals located near churches, schools, hospitals, residences, waterways, and any other vulnerable locations. You should have done your due diligence.
I should not have to subsidize your bad investment.
Is it just me, or is Hick starting to resemble Brophy more and more with each passing day…???
And the people in these towns are getting better and better at <a href="http://www.coloradoindependent.com/144919/broomfield-joins-front-range-movement-to-ban-urban-fracking">articulating their view</a>:
"The split estate is a concept that may have run its course,” he said, referring to the idea that drilling companies can own the land under your house and can do what they want with it, even while you’re living your life above, making dinner, raising children, reading book on the porch swing.
“They can’t say that it’s all about their property rights. It’s not mutually exclusive. You can’t say it’s all about property rights while you’re crowding into our backyards with your machinery.”
He's being Governor for ALL of Colorado, including its oil and gas.
Now if only that oil and gas belonged to all of Colorado, but that's "socialism"eh?.Or, not advocating armed violence here, we could take the N3bbish tack,gun up and shoot the frackers off private property.
For the closest thing to socialism where the distribution of profit from Big Oil is concerned, see Sarah Palin's Alaska, by the way. You get a check and you get a check and you get a check, etc. kind of like on Oprah.
About those polls. As of the time they were taken, June 2013, it actually looks pretty good for Hick. Solid leads in the most populous urban/suburban areas.
Progressives may be pissed off at him but this is a purple state and Hick won with the votes of lots of moderates and old style Rs who usually vote R. My husband does work for a lot of these types in places like Cherry Hills who really liked Hick for his first election and who are just fine with Big Oil.
We may be over-estimating how much damage this does him taking into account all the demos. Where we see DINO and don't like it, the sophisticated
McMansion crowd sees DINO and thinks of it as a plus. They get the pro-corporate policies without crazy Tea Party stuff. Kind of like the GOP candidates they used to vote for all the time.
I couldn't agree more about the split estate concept, though. Pretty hard to reconcile who is having their property rights violated, the owner of mineral rights by interference from the owner of the surface property, as Hick sees it, or the other way around. When push comes to shove the mineral rights owners seem to prevail and that's clearly as Hick feels it ought to be but in that case it's far from an even split.
What would it do to our real estate market if it had to be made crystal clear prior to every sale and well prior to closing that any time the mineral rights owners feel like it they can come in, turn your life upside down, destroy your peace, if not your health, and drastically reduce the value of your property? If that's the case do you actually have private property rights in any meaningful sense, split or otherwise, or is it really the mineral rights owner who has all the rights?
Maybe Hick could take five minutes to give that some thought.
I've long thought that real estate listings and disclosures, both prior to and at closing, by real estate agents as per the status of mineral and water rights should be fully disclosed. I've suggested it to various politicians over the years. They've all rolled their eyes, because if there's one industry more powerful in Colorado than O&G, it's real estate, encompassing developers, contractors, builders, small equipment owners and companies…and real estate agents. That's where the effort should be focused, not on Hick.
I like this idea, Gertie. Of the options available, it's the best democratic strategy I've seen yet to get to the wallets of the frackensteins.. Is there any legislation on this in the works?
None that I know of yet, but it is in Fort Collins' proposed legislative agenda for this session: " Better balance between surface land ownership and mineral right ownership" – if it is important to you, let your legislators know.
Great suggestion. I will.
Good, creative thinking Gertie but it only addresses property transfers that are going on now and in the future. For those who are currently enjoying property that is not being fracked YET things could change in a day. These folks need protections too.
See Ross's suggestion. This would be a good cause for petitions, calls, e-mails etc.
I understand the unhappiness with Hickenlooper over his positions in oil and gas policy but 2014 is not the year grill him over it.
If you like the idea of Governor Tancredo or Governor Gessler, then by all means carry on. I prefer Governor Hickenlooper and will wait until 2015 to push Hickenlooper on fracking.
I doubt lefties are going to be pushing a third party candidate instead of voting for Hick as the preferable choice. I think we'll leave that to the righties. We seem to have more of a learning curve than they do. It's our addiction to, you know, fact based reality.
With all due respect, Not Edna, you apparently don't live in the gas patch. Those facing the onslaught of bulldozers, semi-trucks, drilling rigs, and the pungent influx of aromatic hydrocarbons into their airshed don't have time to wait.
Hick has steadfastly clung to the coat tails of his friends in the Armani suits, the "Oily Boys" of 17th St. As long as there are folks who keep defending him because he is a Democrat, he WILL NOT change his behavior.
You are saying to him, "Hick, it is OK for you to sue Coloradoans for protecting their homes and their health. It is OK for you to support the rapid degradation of our air quality."
You defend him because he supported progressive measures any Democrat would support. Sorry, but he needs to change his allegiance from the O&G corporations to the people of the state. Until he does, I(we) will not let up.
We need a Democrat who will primary this sadly misguided man.
If we get a new Governor next year, it won't be a more sympathetic Democrat. I do know that something should be done. For all those activists in this effort, put together a citizens initiative. As I said before, I'd happily sign that. And I am willing to bet that you would have a lot of company.
Yep. Political Pragmatism….It still hurts to see big oil and gas bullying their way into communities…we have the same problem on the west slope…not only drilling and fracking, but a sense of overwhelming kowtowing to corporate masters…we are saddled with pro-polluting, pro-destroying the earth for profit county commissioners…the courts are the only thing standing between the complete shredding of any standards for private property and water rights…Hickenlooper is a goper in dem clothing…blue dog…yellow dog, whatever…
But still the only alternative this time around to a way worse GOTP Guv. Let the GOTPers and Libertarians (at least they call themselves that .Pretty much they just don't want to pay taxe.) do the knocking each other off so the people they disagree with the most can win dance.
When you've lost the Pope, you've lost [fill in the blank].
And, speaking as one of those who worked to pass the moratoria, this recent comment makes it clear that he is not on my side. And if 2014 is not the year to grill him on it, what year is? It's the only opportunity we have to apply pressure.
I really don't think we have a lot of leverage here. Certainly people should continue to make their voices heard but I don't think Hick is going to change much and it would be insane to try to primary him under present conditions.
Ross, I guess you didn't read the last part of my comment, so I will repeat it. If you prefer Governor Tancredo or Governor Gessler, then by all means carry on.
Oh, I read it. But I see it as a false choice. If *Hickenlooper* doesn't prefer Governor Tancredo or Governor Gessler, he knows where to find the environmental community.
And, it is probably not your intent, but the sentiment that "don't fight for what you care for, or the bogeyman will get you" comes across as somewhat condescending. Kind of, "sit down and shut up."
It is sort of "sit down and shut up." Hick coasted to his first term because the whiny crybaby tea party idiots hijacked the Republican assembly and nominated Dan Maes. A weak candidate to start with and as teapublican as they come. Tancredo waded in because looney as he is, even he knew Maes didn't stand a chance. All Tancredo did, despite his best efforts, was split the Republican vote. If you wand idiological purity go to church, not the Capitol
Wha'ts with the stars and what does " If *Hickenlooper* doesn't prefer Governor Tancredo or Governor Gessler, he knows where to find the environmental community." mean? Not being snarky. I just don't get what you're saying and especially don't get how this is what Dame Edna was supposedly saying.
That would be"What's"
The *stars* are just an old Usenet convention indicating emphasis. I don't trust the formatting on my phone.
Regarding, "he knows where to find the environmental community" – I think he would do well to consult with environmental leaders to develop policies and propose legislation that might actually address environmental issues in a meaningful way. Right now, his record on oil and gas and alternative energy is poor. Unless he makes substantial progress, it will remain poor.
And Not Dame Edna.
It will be the citizens of Colorado who suffer if Hickenlooper looses to one of the clowns the GOP is running.
If you want to fight and not hurt everyone else, then start a citizen's initiative. I'd sign that. But there is a point where you have to be realistic and hurting Hickenlooper's reelection is not the right thing for our state under present circumstances. And while the Governor is terrible on this issue, he has supported and signed many other progressive issues. Top of mind is civil unions, voting rights, immigration reform, and gun safety. Where do you think the GOP clowns stand on these issues?
I care about the social issues, of course. So do nearly all environmentalists. As does your average person, I think, at least in Colorado. A GOP governor combined with a GOP house and senate would set those causes back half a decade or more.
However, the social issues, as painful as it is to realize, and as tragic as it will be for everybody affected, *have* half a decade or more. To quote Martin Luther King, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." I have faith, given time, that we will move our state and country in the right direction.
Our environment does *not* have that kind of time. Look around. Planetary health is the defining issue of our day. Climate change, chemical contamination, soil degradation, urban sprawl, habitat destruction, ocean acidification, air pollution – the list is very long and very depressing. The Colorado of today is not the Colorado where my father was born in 1934. Very far from it. And if we don't do a lot of somethings very soon, we may have all the social rights one could ask for, but no healthy place to live to enjoy them.
Hickenlooper could still take a stand for the benefit of us all. It's what I'm hoping for. I've got several lists where he could start. But if he does not – I will not raise a cent, nor lift a finger, to help his re-election. And neither will many others like me.
And when people die of gun shot wounds, they don't come back either. The repeal of the gun safety rules passed keep guns out of the hands of criminals and perpetrators of domestic violence. Maybe you should ask a victim of domestic abuse about how they would feel if their violent abuser is allowed to have a gun.
Yes, gunshot deaths are tragic. Do you know what else is tragic? A young mother miscarrying due to contaminated water is tragic. A grandfather dying of chronic pulmonary disease caused be elevated ozone is tragic. Thousands of children growing up surrounded by a post-industrial wasteland is tragic. Tens of thousands dead from global-warming-amplified typhoons is tragic .
We can continue to trade hyperbole all day, if you like. But the truth is, Hickenlooper has it in his power to change course, and work on environmental as well as social issues. It is going to take a significant and meaningful change on his part to accomplish this. It's up to him, not me.
People facing the industrialization of their communites are not looking at it through a political lens. They want their government to protect their health and safety and for the government's agents to serve the public interest as their first order of business.