Colorado Democrats Want To Make ‘Em Show The Numbers

UPDATE: Before using Republican attempts to make Barack Obama “prove” his citizenship as a foil, Republicans in the Colorado legislature might want to re-read Senate Concurrent Resolution 11-003, requiring “any person elected to public office in the state of Colorado to provide proof of citizenship along with the oath of office.” If they have any questions, they can direct them to co-sponsor Sen. Kevin Grantham.



President Donald Trump.

As the Colorado Independent’s Marianne Goodland reports, Democrats in the Colorado House have introduced legislation directly addressing the hot potato of President Donald Trump’s tax returns–the refusal by Trump to disclose them having emerged as a major point of dispute as questions swirl about Trump’s loyalties and liabilities:

Two days after an estimated 7,000 people took to Denver’s Civic Center Park to demand that President Donald Trump release his tax returns, a House committee okayed a bill to require presidential candidates to make their returns public.

The measure, which is sponsored by Democratic Reps. Edie Hooten of Boulder and Chris Hansen of Denver, would require both presidential and vice-presidential candidates to submit the most recent five years of tax returns. Those who don’t submit those documents won’t appear on Colorado’s presidential election ballot, under the bill.

At least eight other states are working on similar legislation to require those tax returns, Hooten said; six are states carried by Trump in the 2016 election. In other states, although not Colorado, the legislation is referred to as the Tax Returns Uniformly Made Public Act, or TRUMP Act. [Pols emphasis]

We assume that the decision to not go with the “TRUMP Act” as the title of the legislation in Colorado was in hope of persuading a few Republicans to place principle ahead of partisanship and help pass it. Presidential candidates disclosing their financial history has routine for the last 40 years, after all, and it won’t be long before the shoe is on the other proverbial foot. But as the Denver Post’s Brian Eason reports, Republicans couldn’t get past the fact that the legislation was inevitably a response to a fellow Republican’s actions:

Suzanne Staiert, the deputy secretary of state, told lawmakers that in the past, the U.S. Supreme Court has resisted state-level efforts to impose new qualifications on candidates for federal office — except for things such as petition-gathering or filing fees designed to deter insincere candidates.

National legal experts have opined on both sides of the issue in recent weeks as similar efforts have proliferated. So if nothing else, Staiert said, lawmakers should expect the measure to be challenged in court if it became law…

A number of Republicans Monday said they favor transparency, but fear that the bill would only attract such a lawsuit. And, they added, despite Democrats’ insistence that it shouldn’t be a partisan issue, the measure appeared to blatantly target a particular Republican candidate.

Rep. Susan Beckman, R-Littleton, recalled Republicans across the country mounting a similar effort to require candidate birth certificate disclosures while Barack Obama was president, in response to debunked questions about his citizenship. [Pols emphasis]

We’d say there’s a very large difference on the merits between requiring financial disclosure from a presidential candidate and the racist campaign to make Barack Obama “prove” his citizenship–which persisted for years after Obama did just that. In fact, that absurd comparison from a Republican lawmaker is an offensive reminder of the double standard Obama was subjected to for his entire presidency.

It will be even more absurd when Colorado Senate Republicans kill this bill.

40 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. bullshit!bullshit! says:

    You guys. Obama was black.

    • Early WormEarly Worm says:

      No previous president had been required to produce his birth certificate. The republicans needed a black president to show us why proving that you were not born in Kenya was now so important. Every president for 50 years has released their tax returns. The republicans needed their own grifter president before they realized why disclosure of potential financial conflicts of interest is not important. 

  2. Andrew Carnegie says:

    Maybe you should heed the advice of your loser in chief:

    “We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought,” Clinton added. “But I still believe in America, and I always will. And if you do, then we must accept this result and then look to the future. Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.”

    It is difficult to show less class than the Clintons, but Colorado Polsters lead the way in doing so.

    • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

      We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.” 

      I guess you are right, PissAnt. The Republican Party showed us the way to do that when Obama was elected….oh, wait. No you didn't.

      You sniveling hypocrite. 

      We owe him and you nothing ….but resistance. You underestimate the resolve of free people. We will not go down easily…lay in some supplies, motherfucker…this is far from over….

    • unnamed says:

      You who have posted racist shit and fanned the flames of hate against Obama from day 1 have no business lecturing about class.  You have zero. 

      You just want Americans to be blindly compliant when the GOP is in charge.  Cornhole, in your heart you are not an American.  Just a vile fascist.  

      • Conserv. Head Banger says:

        Worth remembering in 2009 what George W. Bush had to say when asked about President Obama's performance: "(nothing), he deserves my silence." 

      • DavieDavie says:

        A majority of voters said NO to Trump.  Trump never won the trust of a majority of Americans, and is losing even more every day through his actions, broken promises and chaotic performance that shows no signs of improvement.

        Cynical hypocrites like ACHole want blind, ignorant, fearful followers. Knowledge and courage are poison to the GOP's agenda.

        The faster we toss the Buffoon-in-Chief and his Band of Bozos out of office starting in 2018, the better.  Trump has no respect for law or history, much less anyone or anything that doesn't suck up to him or bend to his impulsive will of the moment.

        But Good Nazis like ACHole will continue to spin and "normalize" all his and Trump's outrageous words and conduct.

    • ModeratusModeratus says:

      They have no class.

    • ZappateroZappatero says:

      Putin does train them tough. 

      Not smart by a long shot, but tough. 

  3. Roger Edwards, Candidate CO 6th DistrictPowerful Pear says:

    Just like Democrats who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, to offer up a bill that on its face that is unconstitutional. But at least they get to feel good. Now the question is, what will be the design of the ribbon they wear. Maybe a knit hat in the shape of a dollar sign. Nothing is too crazy for the current makeup of the Democratic Party.

  4. Andrew Carnegie says:


    The Senate gives its "advice and consent" to approve appointments that the President makes.  In the case of Garland the advice was they were not going to vote on any nomination to the Supreme Court until after the election.

    You may not like it, and it may or may not have been wise, but it was in keeping with their constitutional role.

    • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

      Yeah, CHB. the constitutional role of congress is to wrest control of the government through every unethical means possible and hand it to an autocrat who will reward them with untold riches…

      …being honorable servants of over 300,000,000 constituents who are struggling to make it in an increasingly unbalanced economy…not so much. Mitch McConnell (R-Big Pharma, Big Money, Big Oil, Big Ag, and on and on…) is an enemy of the American people, for whom he has complete disdain….unless you’re rich as fuck, that is.

      • Conserv. Head Banger says:

        Andrew: the 200+ years of constitutional law may not give such a restrictive position to the role of the Senate. When one gives advice, the very definition of the word is providing information on a nominee. Ditch O'Donnell saying he won't allow a vote is not exactly "advice." 

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.