CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

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
May 07, 2009 06:12 PM UTC

McInnis In Serious Trouble Over Pinon Canyon

  • 21 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Pueblo Chieftain reports:

For 12 years, Scott McInnis was the Republican congressman who represented the vast 3rd Congressional District, so it took some Democrats and Republicans by surprise this week when McInnis urged Gov. Bill Ritter to veto legislation that could hobble the Army’s long-contested plan to expand the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site.

McInnis retired from Congress in 2003 but resurfaced in recent weeks as a possible GOP contender for governor. His letter to Ritter on Tuesday said HB1317 – which would prevent the Colorado State Land Board from selling any of its land around Pinon Canyon to the Army – could be used by opponents to block any future compromise between the Army and ranchers. Pinon Canyon is located northeast of Trinidad and in the 3rd District

In his letter, McInnis called the legislation “premature” and expressed confidence that a compromise with the Army would be reached in time if the process was not hampered by state restrictions.

In an interview Tuesday, McInnis insisted that some landowners do want to sell their property and that expanding Pinon Canyon would mean significant economic development at Fort Carson and Colorado Springs…

If you, like us, dropped your jaw and asked yourself “what the hell could he possibly be thinking” yesterday regardless of your party or preferences in the governor’s race, you apparently were far from alone. The Chieftain continues:

“I’m surprised and thought Mr. McInnis would be a strong supporter of private property rights,” [Rep. John] Salazar said in a statement.

That also was the reaction of some Republicans, including one longtime Republican state activist who asked not to be identified. “It looks like Scott is willing to give up all future support in Southeastern Colorado to court voters in Colorado Springs,” he said. [Pols emphasis]

That also was the view of state Sen. Ken Kester, R-Las Animas, and one of the sponsors of HB1317.

“It’s disappointing that Rep. McInnis, who represented the district all those years, is not willing to help the ranchers around Pinon Canyon protect their livelihoods and land,” Kester said Friday. “I’ve spoken with Gov. Ritter today and he’s told me he will be signing the legislation.”

Kester and Senate Minority Leader John Penry, a Grand Junction Republican who also is seen as a contender for governor, sent a letter to Ritter on Wednesday, pointing out the state land bill had strong bi-partisan support in the House and Senate…

There’s no need to mince words here, this will go down as a self-inflicted PR disaster for Scott “McLobbyist” McInnis, and it won’t just hurt him in sparsely-populated southern Colorado–the takings issue resonates with base Republicans all over the state, as anybody along an RTD right-of-way, for example can tell you. The damage this boneheaded, craven move will do to McInnis around the state will negate any tactical advantage he might have gained with the military-friendly voters in El Paso County. This is why it makes no sense to us–who the hell is giving him advice?

We hate to say it, since everybody loves a good primary, but between McInnis’ continuous foot sharpshooting (helped along by notably eager friendly fire though it may be) and Ken Buck’s faceplant campaign debut, it’s possible this primary situation could get settled a little bit faster than, well, many Democrats would prefer…

Comments

21 thoughts on “McInnis In Serious Trouble Over Pinon Canyon

  1. math is on his side: El Paso County vs. Southeast CO. And that what makes sense in CD-3 and CD-4 math doesn’t so much statewide.

    I don’t have a sense of whether this issue as even nearly as prominent to EPC voters as it is in the southeast, but the point about the statewide implications of the eminent domain issue is well taken.

    The Army’s maneuvering is part of a chess game that positions them for takings actions down the road.

    The Pinon Canyon landowners are extremely well-organized, and have been for years. They are in a good position to make McInnis pay for this not just locally, but statewide.

    Whatever the Republican primary implications, Ritter’s in a position to look positively gubernatorial on this.  

    1. Penry is playing this right, Scott not so much.

      But the break up it could cause between GOP interest groups could cause another major fracture in the party if it breaks in to open war.

    2. Yes, there’s certainly a lot of military support here.  But like the rest of the state, there are plenty of people here that are quite upset about the possibility of people losing their private land to eminent domain.  I know the political leadership in El Paso has been very much pro-Pinon; but I’d be surprised if the actual voting public is in favor.  Even just among Republican primary voters, I’d guess it’s close to a 50-50 split.

  2. In soccer, this is called scoring an own goal…i.e. putting the ball into your own net.  The math just doesn’t work out for him on this.

    Even if taking this position gave him 100% support in El Paso County, he’s going to be crippled in the rest of southeast colorado including Pueblo.  Scott need these people to support him in any primary.  

    Reality is going to be different and he’s already got problems with El Paso primary voters because of his long, winding and ever changing position on abortion.

    Not to mention he’s going to be crippled among primary voters across the state who feel that eminent domain is being abused.

    The only positive spin out of this is that any press is good press.  Nevertheless he’s driving his own negatives up, and as he repeatedly shoots himself in the foot there isn’t enough laundered federal PAC money to stop the bleeding.

  3. El Paso County Republicans have, for generations, filled the role for the Republican party in Colorado that African-Americans used to fill for the Dems nationally. That is, when senatorial/gubernatorial candidates are nominated, they won’t be from EPC-although absent the GOP vote from EPC, no Republican could ever be elected statewide.

    Given the weakness of McInnis & Buck (what a pair of dolts!!), it may be time for EPC Repubs to get behind one of their own-say County Commissioner Jim Bensberg or Commissioner Sallie Clark. They’re both thoughtful, competent, and reasonably moderate folks, who would do well in a statewide race.  

    And it’s about time.  Last EPC Governor: John Love 40 years ago.  Last EPC Senator: There has never been a Senator from EPC-not since statehood in 1876!!!

    To quote Marx: “Republicans of El Paso Cou8nty, arise!!  You have nothing to lose but your irrelevancy!”

    1. even ran statewide was Ken Kramer for the Senate, wasn’t it? I think your description of their place in the party is insightful, and I hope they rise up!

      1. You’re right-he was foolish enough to leave the 5th CD seat in Congress, where he could have served for decades, accumulating power and seniority. Instead, he waged a forlorn campaign for the Senate-I remember seeing him do a grin & wave at the traffic on Union Boulvard-poor Ken indeed!

      2. El Paso County has been better represented by Dave Schultheis and Doug Lamborn than Bill Armstrong or Wayne Allard?

        The faux parochial regionalism from EPC is amusing because it is so ridiculous.

  4. Those of us that spent many years (and lots of money) supporting McInnis in years past are starting to wonder if he’s playing with a full deck.  I mean seriously — he is so naive to campaign finance laws (that he voted on in Congress) that he hasn’t purged the term “527” from his vocabulary!?  

    Now he’s abandoning his position on protecting private property rights in an effort to gain some support from the Bently Rayburn wing of the El Paso County GOP?  That hardly sounds like a bargain when you’re looking at a statewide campaign.

    More than anything this illustrates that Congressman McInnis is out of touch with state issues in general and the Pinon Canyon issue in particular.  Go back to the Hogan & Hartson gravy train or go back to DC, Congressman.  

    1. Good point MM.  McInnis is most likely getting his advise from Hesse and Rayburn on El Paso politics.  That worked out well for both of them and now it’s working out well for McInnis too…

      1. The inevitable message to southern Colorado Republicans (along with everyone else) is that they have been written off. That can’t feel good.  

  5. .

    How about, Ritter signs the law throwing up a roadblock to the PCMS expansion, the Democratic President of the United States is caught on video decrying Colorado’s lack of support for the troops during a time of war,

    exclaiming that the federal government would have never resorted to taking through eminent domain on his watch, and McInnis comes out smelling like a rose ?

    .

    1. No president up to now has been stupid enough to get involved in this kind of eminent domain issue. I doubt Barack Obama will be the first.  

      1. .

        it is a figment of the vivid imagination of a handful, fanned to outsized proportions by those who would exploit these fears for political gain.

        I think.

        .

        1. Because a patchwork of land buys makes for a great training ground. Only if you ignore the totality of the US Army’s history in this issue will your comment make sense.  

  6. I’ll bet he was just honestly thinking that this was the right thing for Colorado, and that his letter would influence Ritter to do the right thing.

    And that there really are unicorns.

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

142 readers online now

Newsletter

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