Wait, Frank McNulty is in Charge of an Ethics Group?

Frank McNulty

Imagine, if you can, Donald Trump leading a Girl Scout Troop. Or Cory Gardner coaching the high jump. Or Kanye West serving as Secretary-General of the United Nations.

If you think these scenarios might make smoke come out of your ears, then we’ve got something that will really bake your noodle: Republican Frank McNulty is the Executive Director of a new “ethics in government” organization in Colorado. Yes, that’s the same “Ethical Frank” who married a pharmaceutical industry lobbyist during his tenure as Speaker of the House.

As the Denver Post reported on Friday, McNulty unveiled a new secret “nonprofit” organization called The Public Trust Institute (PTI) with the publication of a 189-page report accusing Governor John Hickenlooper of failing to disclose “gifts” of private plane travel and other travel accommodations over a seven-year period. Hickenlooper’s office promptly called PTI’s complaint “frivolous” and “a political stunt,” pointing out that PTI only registered as an official entity with the Colorado Secretary of State on October 10.

You read that correctly: PTI had officially existed for all of two days when the Post reported on its 189-page complaint against Hickenlooper. As David Migoya writes:

McNulty’s new group is designed to “ensure that public officials are generally holding themselves to an ethical level,” he said, noting the group will pursue complaints objectively and without political persuasion.

“In this day and age, since politics slams to the left and right so quickly, we need someone to call balls and strikes from the outside,” McNulty said, refusing to identify the group’s revenue stream or its membership. [Pols emphasis] “The main focus is me and having that outward-facing figure. That’s where we’re comfortable right now.”

McNulty is heading up an “ethics” group that has officially existed for less than a week and refuses to divulge its revenue stream or membership. Seems totally legit.

If you’re not familiar with McNulty, allow us to enlighten you. McNulty is a former lobbyist and legislator who has made his living (somehow) as a Republican political consultant since completing his fourth term in the State House in 2014. He is best remembered for his disastrous two-year stint as the Speaker of the House (2010-12). Republicans captured a one-seat House majority in the 2010 Tea Party wave election year, but thanks to McNulty’s bumbling leadership – both inside and outside the Capitol — Democrats flipped the House into a 9-seat majority just two years later.

According to a brief bio of McNulty on PTI’s website, the former Highlands Ranch Republican “gained firsthand experience of the ethical challenges facing U.S. government systems” during his time as an elected official. This is a curious way to phrase McNulty’s “experience”; the reason McNulty has “firsthand” knowledge here is because he personally crossed every ethical line he could find while regularly engaging in bad-faith negotiations at the legislature.

Here’s a look at some of McNulty’s not-so-greatest hits:

♦ McNulty shut down voting on all legislation late in the 2012 session so that a bipartisan bill legalizing civil unions couldn’t be approved. He also threatened to remove Republicans from committee assignments for suggesting that they supported civil unions;

♦ McNulty skipped numerous working days during the legislative session so that he could attend Republican political strategy seminars across the country;

♦ McNulty rammed through legislation to increase per diem rates for legislators without allowing any testimony;

♦ McNulty literally invented a story about government red tape in order to justify his maniacal budget-cutting proposal. When that wasn’t enough, he made up numbers so that Colorado’s budget would look worse than it was;

♦ McNulty married a lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry during his tenure as House Speaker;

♦ McNulty has been at the forefront of numerous shady attempts at rigging the redistricting process in favor of Republicans;

♦ McNulty instructed Republican House candidates to run on repealing FASTER transportation fees in 2010, then absolutely refused to consider the idea once the GOP took majority control of the House. Unsurprisingly, the GOP caucus never forgave him for hanging them out to dry;

♦ McNulty even plagiarized his own opening day speech when he took control of the Speaker’s gavel in 2011.

 

It’s no exaggeration to say that McNulty’s unethical and unwise leadership cost Republicans their majority in the State House in 2012. While McNulty was re-elected for a final term himself in ’12, his credibility was so damaged that the former House Speaker didn’t even try to run for a caucus leadership position.

The reason we bring all of this up about McNulty is not to bash the guy, but to issue an important warning: If Frank McNulty is associated with a government ethics watchdog group, then you can be damn sure that the group in question is about as legitimate as a $10 Rolex.

“The Public Trust Institute.” Yeah, sure thing.

The End Is Nigh: Now Tim Neville’s Hiding Behind Hickenlooper

Sen. Tim Neville (R).

This is a campaign mail piece delivered late last week in incumbent GOP Sen. Tim Neville’s red-hot SD-16 race against Democratic challenger Tammy Story. We’re not completely sure which voters was targeted with this piece, sent by the “independent” Business Opportunity Fund tied to a network of well-heeled Republicans at the Colorado Concern–but we would assume it’s aimed at Democrats and left-scoring independent voters.

For readers who haven’t had the pleasure of getting to know Sen. Tim Neville over the years, we’re basically talking about the anchor of the Colorado Senate GOP Majority’s far-right fringe. Neville has been the ideological driving force behind two different Republican Senate Presidents, and along with his son House Minority Leader Patrick “Boy” Neville control a bloc in both chambers without which Republicans can’t achieve a working majority within their caucuses. Neville’s policy interests range from perennial anti-abortion campaigns to dismantling Colorado’s gun safety laws to making public schools safe for “anti-vaxxer” conspiracy theorists at the expense of public health.

In short, to imply that moderate Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper would in any way support Neville’s re-election is an absurdity like few others possible in Colorado politics. Hickenlooper supporting Tim Neville would be like Hillary Clinton endorsing Ted Cruz for re-election over the competitive Democrat in the race. No one who knows anything about Tim Neville would ever possibly believe this. That’s why a mailer with these two men together and a fake “quote” below Hickenlooper’s image praising Neville stands out as not just deceptive, but outlandish dishonesty.

Trying to remake Tim Neville into a palatable candidate outside his fringe base is an extreme example, but this is merely the latest product of a years-long strategy by Colorado Republicans to audaciously triangulate off their own brand in order to stay alive politically in a left-trending state. Much like Rep. Mike Coffman’s roundly lampooned (but probably effective) TV ads sporting Planned Parenthood logo and Coffman’s occasional press-release criticism of Donald Trump, there is an implicit recognition that Republicans are deeply unpopular with a growing and diversifying majority of Colorado voters. But maddeningly to local Democrats, Coffman and others have made this self-deprecating strategy work.

But Tim Neville takes the farce too far. This can’t work. And if it does, then truly–nothing means anything.

Throwback Thursday: “The Candidate Democrats Fear”

Most of the time, when you hear a candidate say they’re the “candidate Democrats fear,” they’re implying that they would be stronger in the general election than their primary opponents–usually by being moderate on one or more issues that turn off Republican primary voters.

We’ll give you a hint: one of these had a modicum of truth to it!

Bob Beauprez, it can be safely said, was never a candidate Democrats particularly feared. While Beauprez’s margin of defeat narrowed between his two runs for governor in 2006 and 2014, by the time of the latter race Beauprez had painted himself irrevocably as a fringe crackpot brainlessly regurgitating “Tea Party” sedition.

Cynthia Coffman, on the other hand, had a number of qualities that made her a potentially formidable general election candidate for governor. Before Coffman’s run for governor collapsed in one of the most spectacular heaps in recent political history, no small amount of Democratic strategizing was devoted to what was considered the undesirable scenario of her winning the primary.

In the end, of course, the moderate line items on Cynthia Coffman’s resume were totally unacceptable to Republican primary voters–and combined with her role in years of intraparty backstabbing, Coffman limped into the GOP state assembly a virtual pariah. Her campaign didn’t make it out alive, and her political career is over.

Unless she decides, and this is not on balance a far-fetched notion, to become a Democrat!

In which case we’ll all have a good laugh over this picture, won’t we?

Bennet, Hick Try To Slow Trump Drilling Frenzy

Sage Grouse of the Greater kind.

AP reports via CBS4 Denver:

Top Colorado Democrats on Tuesday accused the Trump administration of rushing to open public lands to oil and gas drilling without giving the public nearly enough time to comment.

In letters to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Sen. Michael Bennet and Gov. John Hickenlooper also asked the government not to go ahead with plans for oil and gas drilling on habitat for the greater sage grouse, a bird that Western states and federal agencies are trying to protect…

A joint federal-state program called the Sage Grouse Initiative, launched under the Obama administration, is trying to save the bird without resorting to the strict restrictions of the Endangered Species Act.

It’s ironic that, in barreling ahead with drilling in areas inhabited by the greater sage grouse, the Trump administration could thwart a somewhat controversial effort to protect the species without invoking the Endangered Species Act–by reducing the population enough to trigger the Act unequivocally! In the long run, it would be better for energy producers to cooperate with the current plan, demonstrate its success, and avoid much more stringent long-term oversight.

Unfortunately for the sage grouse, Donald Trump’s regulatory free-for-all isn’t going to last forever. And given the choice between short-term profit and long-term sustainability, energy companies will do what they will always do given the opportunity, undoing the best-laid plans of their apologists on both sides of the aisle.

The real moral of the story? Elections matter.

Sorry, that’s the answer for a lot of things right now.

Masterpiece Cakeshop: It’s Not Over

This year’s biggest Supreme Court decision pertaining to Colorado directly, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, was a lopsided 7-2 decision but a ruling very narrow in its scope. In the majority opinion, the fundamental question in the case, whether bakery owner Jack Phillips has the right to discriminate against same-sex couples in his bakery, was not conclusively addressed. The decision hinged on whether Phillips had been treated fairly by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, not the underlying question of Phillips’ discrimination against customers.

As the Colorado Independent’s Corey Hutchins reports, this unanswered crucial question isn’t going away–and now that Jack Phillips has fashioned himself into a lightning rod, it’s no surprise he’s getting struck repeatedly:

Following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June that sided with a Christian baker over a never-baked wedding cake for a gay couple in Colorado, lawyers for that baker are now suing Democratic Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, Republican Attorney General Cynthia Coffman and members of the state’s Civil Rights Commission.

The Supreme Court’s decision rested largely on process, avoiding the deeper Constitutional issues around free speech, freedom of religion and civil rights, but lawyers for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which supported Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips of Lakewood, say in their complaint that a lawsuit is necessary to “stop Colorado’s continuing persecution of Phillips.”

The problem here is that neither Gov. John Hickenlooper nor the Civil Rights Commission are ‘continuing to persecute’ Phillips. Once it became clear that the decision in the case was not going to address the question of whether Phillips’ refusal to bake a same-sex wedding cake was unlawful discrimination, anyone could have predicted that there would have been another test case–and of course it was going to be Phillips getting the call. From the lawsuit as cited by Hutchins in his story:

…[S]ome Colorado citizens, emboldened by the state’s prosecution of Phillips, have targeted him. On the same day that the Supreme Court announced it would hear Phillips’s case, a Colorado lawyer called his shop and requested a cake designed with a blue exterior and pink interior, which the caller said would visually depict and celebrate a gender transition. Throughout the next year, Phillips received other requests for cakes celebrating Satan, featuring Satanic symbols, depicting sexually explicit materials, and promoting marijuana use. Phillips believes that some of those requests came from the same Colorado lawyer. …

Any resident, after all, can visit Masterpiece Cakeshop, and any resident can file a complaint with the Civil Rights Commission. Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws were not struck down, and if a complaint is filed it must be investigated. To the extent that Phillips is a “target,” it’s because he made himself a target. None of that is the fault of the state or the laws on the books. No one is persecuting Phillips, but it is necessary post-Masterpiece to demonstrate that Colorado’s discrimination laws are still in force.

If Mr. Phillips doesn’t like that, there are other states with more accommodating laws for, you know, bigots.

No Clear Path for Hickenlooper in 2020

John Hickenlooper(s)

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper seems virtually assured of attempting a run for President in 2020, though it’s much less obvious how such a campaign might actually succeed. As Joey Bunch reports today for the publication formerly known as the Colorado Statesman:

For months, Gov. John Hickenlooper has told reporters he’s too focused on being governor to think about running for president.

Now he says he’s thinking about it this summer.

“My wife and I have been talking about it for a couple of months and talking to old friends whose opinions we respect and trust,” the coy Colorado governor said in remarks reported by The Hill newspaper. “We’ll try and sort through it this summer.”

He said something similar in a D.C. appearance back in April.

First off, we can stop wondering about Hick’s interest in a national campaign. It’s been clear for a long time now that Hickenlooper absolutely, positively wants to run for President after he finishes his second term as Governor in January 2019. From a personal perspective, this makes plenty of sense. Hickenlooper will be 68-years-old next February, and while that makes him a young whipper-snapper compared to the likes of President Trump and potential Democratic candidates like Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, 2020 is certainly his last best opportunity to make a run for the White House.

Unfortunately for Hickenlooper, this is where the 2020 logic starts to fall apart.  There was some talk last year of a potential “Independent” ticket with Hickenlooper and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, but those rumors have since died off — in part because neither man is particularly interested in being the #2 guy on that train. That leaves Hick to chase the Democratic nomination for President at a time in which Democratic voters will be completely uninterested in a middle-of-the-road candidate. Politics is as much about timing as anything else, and the national mood in 2020 almost certainly won’t align with the image of “The Grand Equivocator.”

Take a look at this March Washington Post story about the Top 15 potential Democratic candidates in 2020. At least half of these people probably won’t end up running for President, but there isn’t a name on that list that Hick could likely leapfrog.

Hickenlooper’s most obvious problem in a Democratic field is that there is no potential platform where he might be able to stand out. What do you say about Hickenlooper the Democrat relative to his eight years as Governor of Colorado? Hick doesn’t carry the torch for any particular progressive issue — and certainly not more than other potential candidates. He might have had an opening as the Governor of the first state to legalize marijuana, but Hick has made it abundantly clear that this is not an issue that he wants to embrace.

Hickenlooper’s potential as a national Democratic figure is also hampered by the fact that he isn’t even really considered to be a Democratic leader in Colorado. Hick’s half-hearted backing of Lieutenant Governor Donna Lynne’s bid for Governor won’t earn him any favors from top Colorado Democrats — particularly since Lynne is almost certain to finish fourth in a four-way Primary on Tuesday — and his well-known support for the oil and gas industry won’t earn him any new liberal friends nationwide. Hickenlooper’s carefully-crafted image as a non-partisan politician may have served him well with Colorado voters in 2010 and 2014, but that approach doesn’t translate to building a base of supporters in a Democratic Primary. It also doesn’t help that Hick has increasingly surrounded himself with advisers who have a lot of business experience but strikingly little background in politics of any kind.

Hickenlooper never got far enough in 2016 to be Hillary Clinton’s running mate, but he would have been a favorite to receive some sort of top job in a Democratic administration, and that might be his end-game in 2020. Had Hick tried to move more to the left after the 2016 election this might be a different story. But he didn’t, and it isn’t.

You Call This a “Nasty Primary?” Puh-leeze

Oh noes! Candidates…campaigning!

9NEWS reports that outgoing Gov. John Hickenlooper is terribly upset about the “negative campaigning” in the Democratic gubernatorial primary to succeed him–this being the second such admonishment from Hickenlooper, after a PAC supporting Cary Kennedy “went negative” attacking two of her opponents for their stands on education:

Gov. John Hickenlooper (D-Colorado) says allies of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jared Polis went “below the belt” by using his image in an attack ad against fellow Democrat Cary Kennedy.

“Seeing my face used in a negative ad after I had pretty clearly stated what I thought about it, I thought that was hitting below the belt,” Hickenlooper said in a Wednesday news conference at the state Capitol. “I didn’t think it was fair.”

9NEWS asked him about an ad from an outside spending group called “Bold Colorado,” which accurately quoted Gov. Hickenlooper as saying he was “disappointed” by a previous attack made by a similar spending group intending to help Kennedy.

Early on in the governor’s race, all Democratic candidates signed a voluntary pledge to avoid “unnecessary personal and negative attacks” against one another. The “violations” of this pledge have so far, and this is an important point, generally not been carried out by the candidates themselves–rather by “independent” message groups that are legally prohibited from coordinating with the candidate they support. That makes these calls for candidates to “put a stop” to ads being run by independent groups either disingenuous or a tacit admission that there is no real separation between PACs and candidates.

The latter seems to be the case for Republican candidate Walker Stapleton, whose SuperPAC was openly supported and pitched by the candidate before he was technically in the race. Democratic candidates should keep this in mind as it could be an important issue in the general election–and avoid opening themselves to charges of hypocrisy if it does.

Which leads us to the most important point: the 2018 Democratic gubernatorial primary, in any objective sense, isn’t all that “negative.” The Clean Campaign Pledge signed by Democratic candidates obliges them to refrain from “unnecessary personal and negative attacks.” But is an ad outlining the candidates’ records on a key issue like education really “unnecessary?” We’d say that’s exactly what campaign ads should be about. Debating education policy isn’t something you would call “personal,” not in the manner of (for example) GOP gubernatorial candidate Victor Mitchell’s acrimonious attacks on Stapleton’s Bush family lineage.

In the end, there’s more hand-wringing going on about the notion of “going negative” in this race than there is, well, anyone actually going negative. Tame issue-based exchanges like what we’re seeing between the Democratic candidates on education do not a “smear campaign” make. Not even close. And even if it was, it isn’t the candidates doing it.

This is why we’ve been here since 2004, folks. To help keep this perennial silliness in perspective.

Lawmakers, Marijuana Industry Slam Hickenlooper Vetoes

Gov. John Hickenlooper.

As the Denver Post’s Jesse Paul reports, anger over Gov. John Hickenlooper’s veto this week of several important marijuana bills that passed the legislature with overwhelming bipartisan support has yet to subside, with proponents, bill sponsors, and the industry continuing to ask why the lame-duck beer-brewing governor chose to make such a public display of disdain for an industry that helped put Colorado on the map during his expiring term:

Four state lawmakers joined a group of marijuana advocates Thursday in blasting Gov. John Hickenlooper over his veto of three pot bills, saying the term-limited Democrat’s decisions threaten Colorado’s place as a leader on cannabis and hurt patients, consumers and businesses…

Hickenlooper turned down legislation that would have added autism to the list of conditions eligible for medical marijuana, allowed for pot “tasting rooms” and opened up the cannabis industry to investment by public companies.

Hooton was a prime sponsor of House Bill 1263, the medical marijuana for those diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders legislation,and said she was especially upset by Hickenlooper’s decision since a bipartisan group of lawmakers spent months working on the measure. She called its veto “absolutely devastating.”

Here’s more from Rep. Edie Hooton of Boulder on the governor’s veto of House Bill 1263:

HB18-1263 passed the CO State House and Senate with broad bi-partisan support (90%). We worked countless hours with these tireless, committed families, and as legislators across the aisle, did our research and came to the same conclusion that seven other states, representing every region of the country, have already come to – recognizing the value of medical marijuana in significantly reducing the symptoms of autism – CA, FLA, MI, MA, PA, GA, DE. It took a lot of groundwork and collaboration to get this bill passed and was devastating to see it vetoed. I’ve already requested the bill for reintroduction next year with confidence that our next Governor will be more knowledgable about the value of [medical marijuana] and engaged in the legislative process…

While I definitely applaud the call to research, it isn’t going to help alleviate the hardships these families are experience now, or stop children from dying while we wait for it to happen. [Pols emphasis]

Colorado Public Radio’s Ann Marie Awad:

Much of the ire was focused on the veto of HB 18-1263, which would have added autism spectrum disorder to the list of qualifying conditions under the state’s medical marijuana program…

“We have to be here for our children,” Walker said. “We cannot risk losing them. We want to work with our doctors and medical professionals, and we want to do this legally and the right way.”

Walker and others also slammed the timing of the veto at the very end of the day Tuesday, right before Hickenlooper left town Wednesday.

“We respected you, and you vetoed our bill at 5:01 p.m., when we respectfully and cordially left the Capitol,” she said. “This is a slight to our families.”

Politically this unexpected series of vetoes of marijuana bills appears to be backfiring, with much more negativity about the vetoes in press coverage than discussion of Hickenlooper’s defenses offered in his veto letters. In the case of the autism bill, this anger at least partly results from Hickenlooper’s contradictory statements about the reasons–that there wasn’t enough data, then claiming flippantly that the bill could encourage youth marijuana use.

In all cases these were bills intended to resolve legitimate issues, crafted with stakeholders on all sides, and supported by legislative coalitions that spanned the ideological poles. Vetoing these bills, especially with a record as governor of only very rarely vetoing legislation passed with bipartisan support, leaves a permanent blemish on Hickenlooper’s image with no political upside we can see.

If that looks different by 2020, we’ll let you know. As of now it looks like a huge mistake.

Outrage Grows After Hickenlooper Vetoes Key Marijuana Bills

UPDATE: Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jared Polis weighs in–and says he would have signed them both.

—–

Gov. John Hickenlooper (D).

Gov. John Hickenlooper held the final bill signing ceremony of the year yesterday, but most of the conversation today is about two marijuana bills vetoed in the last two days–bills that both passed the legislature with broad bipartisan support, intended to address significant issues related to its legal use. The Colorado Springs Independent reports on the veto of House Bill 18-1258, legislation to allow limited consumption of certain marijuana products at dispensaries who set up a proper space for it:

Currently, there are no legal places in Colorado to consume marijuana outside of a private home, making it difficult for renters, out-of-state tourists, and parents with young children to enjoy dispensary purchases. It’s possible that contributed to a 471 percent increase in citations for public cannabis consumption in the first three quarters of 2014, as Colorado Public Radio reported. Westword also reported that between the time of legalization in 2014 and 2017, Boulder saw a 54 percent climb.

The bill would have limited purchases in tasting rooms to 10 milligrams active THC in an infused product or one-quarter gram of marijuana concentrate. In compliance with the Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act, customers would not have been allowed to smoke. Products would have had to be consumed on business premises.

The bill passed the Senate in late April with a 22-12 vote, and the House in early May with a 57-8 vote.

The governor’s stated reason for vetoing this legislation is the “concern” that allowing consumption of marijuana anywhere other than a private residence could lead to “additional impaired or intoxicated drivers on our roadways.” Notwithstanding the legal limbo that the absence of a legal place to consume marijuana leaves tourists in who come to our state to partake, creating a major policy conflict–by Hickenlooper’s logic, no one should ever be granted a liquor license again! After all, more places to drink would logically result in “additional impaired or intoxicated drivers on our roadways.” Right?

But our brewery owner governor doesn’t see it that way. And that’s not a good look.

The second bill vetoed by Gov. Hickenlooper has less of an economic impact, but has particularly upset parents of autistic children who earned considerable press this session in support of House Bill 18-1263–a bill to add autism spectrum disorder to the list of qualifying conditions for obtaining a medical marijuana card. CBS Denver:

Before Hickenlooper’s decision, parents of children with autism gathered outside the governor’s office at the state Capitol.

“We ask that the governor help our children. Our kids are dying. We can’t wait another year,” said Michelle Walker whose son has autism…

One mother brought prescription bottles to show what her child has taken. She came in hopes of legalizing marijuana for autism.

Hickenlooper’s statement to reporters after vetoing this bill seemed to go much farther than his official statement on the veto, which claimed the bill was vetoed “on the sole concern” that not enough study had been done on the usefulness of marijuana in the treatment of autism. But as the Denver Post reports:

“If we sign that bill we end up, without question, in some way encouraging more young people to look at this as an antidote for their problems,” he told reporters before turning down the legislation, House Bill 1263. [Pols emphasis]

For the families of autistic children who pleaded with the governor to sign this bill, and who won the public’s sympathy this spring with a high-visibility media campaign highlighting what their families go through and how marijuana has helped, this high-handed sermonizing about the message to “young people” is a shocking insult. This bill was not about enabling drug use by kids, it’s about treating a serious disorder on par with any of the qualifying conditions for medical marijuana today. That’s why the bill passed by a lopsided 53-11 margin in the House and near-unanimous 32-3 in the Senate.

Along with other recent lurches to the right like Hickenlooper’s endorsement of a work requirement for Medicaid and lip service to re-criminalizing marijuana entirely, these vetoes seem to be political moves to “sanitize” himself politically for a possible run for higher office. We don’t know exactly who is giving Hickenlooper the advice to take these actions, but it’s exactly the wrong way for him to be moving politically. Undoing any good will with the proponents of the autism bill by dismissing their concerns as an attempt to promote adolescent drug use, and punting the huge unresolved issue of legal marijuana consumption, is not how a governor shows leadership.

It’s how you prove you don’t deserve to be President.

The Grand Equivocator

Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper is getting beaten up on social media today because of his penchant for answering one question with two answers…and probably for good reason. Taking multiple sides of a single issue is not a new trick for Hick, but as John Frank of the Denver Post points out, the Governor’s wordplay is getting a little out of hand:


Frank is referencing this CNN story about the legalization of marijuana in Colorado (and around the country), in which Hickenlooper suggests that he wouldn’t rule out re-criminalizing the funky herb:

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper has two facts in front of him: Since 2014 crime has been rising in his state, outstripping the national trend, and since 2014 recreational use of marijuana has been legal.

Whether the two are connected is hotly debated — and if they are, then what? For the first time publicly, Hickenlooper told CNN he doesn’t rule out recriminalizing recreational marijuana, even if that’s a long shot.

“Trust me, if the data was coming back and we saw spikes in violent crime, we saw spikes in overall crime, there would be a lot of people looking for that bottle and figuring out how we get the genie back in,” he said. “It doesn’t seem likely to me, but I’m not ruling it out.” [Pols emphasis]

Hickenlooper has never been particularly enthusiastic about legalizing marijuana in Colorado, and that’s fine. But going back and forth like this is a bad look for a guy who is trying to position himself for a potential run for President in 2020, and he’s been doing it a lot lately. Earlier this week we took note of a comment from Hickenlooper in a KUNC story about addressing sexual harassment at the State Capitol:

“There’s an argument that says let’s get it right, let’s not rush into action,” said Gov. John Hickenlooper. “That being said, there needs to be a sense of urgency.”

Yes, there are two sides to every story, and two sides to every coin, yada, yada, yada. But if Hickenlooper is going to have another act in his political future, it would behoove him to present himself as more of a leader and less of a mediator.

Colorado Democratic Assembly Results

Colorado Democrats assembled at the 1st Bank Center in Broomfield from Friday, April 13, to Saturday, April 14, 2018. The crowd of almost 4,000 Democrats were enthusiastic, engaged, yet civil (in contrast to the stunning back-stabbing and skullduggery at the Republican assembly) . The CDP Assembly was superbly well-organized, with balloting completed in about a half hour, and counted in less than two hours.  Kudos to Chair Morgan Carroll and all of the CDP staff and volunteers.

All of the  congressional districts held their own assemblies; many candidates had primary challengers or Democratic challengers to Republican incumbents. In this “blue wave” year, no office held by the GOP can be considered to be off-limits. Democrats in Colorado put forward a slate of phenomenal candidates.

The official results from the Colorado Democratic Party (CDP) for statewide offices are:

CU Regent-at-Large
Lesley Smith: 3,229 votes (100.00%)

Based on these results, Lesley Smith has qualified for the Democratic primary ballot for CU Regent-at-Large.

Treasurer
Bernard Douthit: 1,074 votes (31.50%)
Charles Scheibe: 557 votes (16.34%)
Dave Young: 1,778 votes (52.16%)

Based on these results, Bernard Douthit and Dave Young have qualified for the Democratic primary ballot for Treasurer.

Secretary of State
Jena Griswold: 3,352 votes (98.44%)
Phillip Villard: 53 votes (1.56%)

Based on these results, Jena Griswold has qualified for the Democratic primary ballot for Secretary of State.

Attorney General
Amy Padden: 360 votes (10.54%)
Joe Salazar: 1,249 votes (36.58%)
Phil Weiser: 1,805 votes (52.87%)

Based on these results, Joe Salazar and Phil Weiser have qualified for the Democratic primary ballot for Attorney General. Amy Padden can qualify for the ballot if the Secretary of State determines that she has collected the requisite number of valid signatures.

Governor
Cary Kennedy: 2,101 votes (61.65%)
Jared Polis: 1,120 votes (32.86%)
Erik Underwood: 187 votes (5.49%)

Based on these results, Cary Kennedy and Jared Polis have qualified for the Democratic primary ballot for Governor.

NOTE: These are not all of the candidates that are running for these particular offices. Some candidates have chosen to qualify for the ballot by submitting petition signatures instead of going through the caucus-assembly process.

Here are the CD results in order: ( rounded to nearest 1%). I’ll update this list with numbers as I find them.

I’ve included my notes on the assemblies I attended and on the speakers I heard.

CD1: (Denver metro)Diana Degette – 61% . Her primary opponent, Saira Rao , got 37%, and  will be on the ballot. Rep. Degette has been a reliable Democratic vote for many years in a safe district – I think Rao’s candidacy will be a needed wake-up call to be more progressive and to offer better constituent services. Rao is sharp, a great speaker, and has energized the progressive base. Degette attended her CD1 assembly on April 13 , did not attend nor speak at the state assembly April 14.

CD2: (Boulder area – Jared Polis vacated the seat to run for Governor) Joe Negeuse – 91% Joe gave a helluva speech, as he always does. His personal story touches many people. Boulder will be well represented by him, as he’ll certainly win the primary, and almost certainly the general election. His primary opponent, Mark Williams, did not make the ballot.  The GOP has put up a couple of “Nicks” against Neguse: Nick Thomas and Nicholas Morse. I don’t know who won the GOP assembly vote, but they won’t beat “the Goose”.

CD3: (most of the western slope and SW CO – currently held by Scott Tipton) Diane Mitsch Bush had the highest delegate vote with 56%; Karl Harlon also cleared the 30% threshold with 41%, and will be on the ballot.

CD4: (Mostly NE CO – current incumbent Ken Buck) The Doctors were in the house! Veterinary doctors Karen McCormick and Chase Kohne each had throngs of energetic supporters on stage for their nominations. Each gave a rousing speech:

Kohne’s best line, in my opinion: “If you want to shoot an AR15, go down to the recruiting office and join the military.”

McCormick’s nominators are emphasizing Dr McCormick’s support for Dreamers and immigrants. Karen McCormick emphasized Cannabis, immigrant rights, healthcare, union support, bipartisan cooperation to get laws passed. Full disclosure: I live in CD4. I’m voting for McCormick, will be fine with Kohne as well.

CD5 (El Paso area, currently held by Doug Lamborn) Stephany Rose Spaulding won the delegate count and will be on the ballot. I don’t know about the other CD5 candidates, whom you can read about at the EPCO Young Dems site.  It’s great to see so many young Democrats running from what has6been the Tea Party GOP’s bastion in Colorado.

CD6 Aurora / Arapahoe County area, currently held by Mike Coffman. Jason Crow won top ballot with 64% , while Levi Tilleman will also be on the ballot with 35%. I saw Crow speak to the assembly, and found his persona to be authentic and appealing. PPP surveyed 761 voters, and found that Crow polled 44-39 against Coffman in Febrary 2018.

CD7 Ed Perlmutter, the Democratic incumbent, did not attend the Assembly as far as I know. Ed, a very popular Congressman in his district,  is not  being primaried in this election.

 

Author’s note – this diary started as an open thread based on my  live blogging at the Colorado State Assembly. I’ve updated it with ballot results.

 

 

Yes, Hick Might Someday Maybe Wannabe President

President? Yeah sure maybe.

The Denver Post’s politics page reports, and no it’s not the first time you’ve heard it, and no it’s not the last time you’ll hear it either before in the event that it becomes a thing:

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper is taking steps toward a presidential run in 2020, holding meetings with veteran political players, ahead of a visit to Iowa next month for an official trip that is sure to draw attention.

The Democrat’s actions in recent months signal to his closest associates and top party strategists that the former Denver mayor and two-term governor is more serious than ever about mounting a White House bid against President Donald Trump.

“John’s sense of timing in politics is his lucky star. It served him well when he ran for mayor and then governor. It may do the same for a run in 2020,” said Alan Salazar, Hickenlooper’s former chief political strategist.

Because we have addressed this possibility for as long as it’s been an item of speculation–in fact long before anybody seriously imagined Donald Trump becoming President of the United States besides Donald Trump–we’ll spare readers another long-winded rundown of the pros and cons of Gov. John Hickenlooper running for President in 2020. The short version is that Hickenlooper has led a relatively charmed political life in Colorado politics as an unconventional and sometimes lovable oddball whose record is fairly moderate but generally pro-Democratic–with a few well-known blind spots.

With that said, whether Hickenlooper has what it takes to become the next Bill Clinton–and we mean that in all the good ways–or is more like the next Martin O’Malley in what we can expect to be a large field of Democratic presidential candidates for 2020, is not at all something we feel comfortable predicting at this point. There is a sense of wide-open opportunity for Democrats after Trump’s chaotic likely-only term in office, but how Hickenlooper’s sometimes clunky “post-partisan” brand fits into this emerging new matrix is anybody’s guess. We’re not ready to buy proverbial stock, but we surely wouldn’t rule him out.

If Hick does pull it off, we’ll be excited to host the first Oval Office edition of The Get More Smarter Show.

Ultra-conservative CPAC conference has Colorado connections

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

The 2018 Conservative Political Action Conference kicked off today in Maryland. It features a lengthy list of speakers and panels, including NRA President Wayne LaPierre, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Vice President Mike Pence. You can watch the livestream here. Coloradans, though, may be more interested in tomorrow’s program, which not only features former Congressman Bob Beauprez interviewing two Trump cabinet members, but also two live events taking place locally at Lakewood’s Colorado Christian University. Tickets for the Friday events at CCU are available here. Here’s a rundown of all the Colorado-related events:

Friday, February 23, 6:35 am MT

A Conversation with Secretary of Energy Rick Perry and Secretary Ryan Zinke, interviewed by former U. S. Rep. Bob Beauprez

Former CD7 Representative, twice-failed GOP gubernatorial candidate, conservative blogger and occasional right-wing radio host Bob Beauprez will interview two powerful members of President Trump’s cabinet: Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. No specific topics are listed, but issues such as fracking, the oil & gas industry and public land management are safe bets. If a discussion of federal vs. state responsibility for public land does occur, it’s always possible that Beauprez will reiterate his support for the failed “Northern Colorado” secession movement launched by conservative activists in 2013. It’s also possible that Beauprez will raise his fears of “creeping Sharia” with Secretary Perry, who has been accused by fellow CPAC speaker* Pam Geller of being overly friendly with Texas Muslims.

Friday, February 23, 11:50 am MT

Michelle Malkin: “A Time for Action,” Live from the Colorado CPAC Stage

 It’s unclear what specific action Michelle Malkin will advocate for during her ten-minute speech, but a review of her past positions and statements reveals some possibilities. She may suggest placing Muslim-Americans in internment camps, which she justified in her 2004 book, “In Defense of Internment: The Case for “Racial Profiling” in World War II and the War on Terror.”  She may call for Americans to mock the suicides of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, as she did in 2006, shocking her interviewer, Bill O’Reilly.  Perhaps she’ll pose for selfies with those who believe President Obama was a Nazi, as she did in this picture, taken at the Colorado state capitol in 2009.    

(more…)

Hick’s Swan Song State of the State

UPDATE: Denver Post:

Hickenlooper spoke at length about the plight of rural Colorado, singling out issues such as teacher shortages, jobs and rural broadband, as well as a hidden financial force that is steadily eroding the ability of rural communities to pay for public services. Next year, the Gallagher Amendment will trigger further reductions to property tax rates across the state, providing property tax relief to the Front Range but squeezing rural governments and school districts that are already struggling financially…

On economic development, the governor called for an expansion of apprentice programs, something he has long been pushing for. And he advocated for the continued expansion of renewable energy, even as Republicans are pushing to refocus the state Energy Office on carbon-based fuels like coal and gas and cut its budget by $1 million.

“What is it the critics don’t like?” he asked. “Is it the cleaner air or the lower utility bills?”

—–

Watch it here, and we’ll update with coverage after:

Top Ten Stories of 2017 #7: The House That Blew Up

Like smoking, lawn darts, and bars on cribs spaced just far enough apart for babies to stick their heads through, oil and gas development in Colorado wasn’t always considered to be a problem. It wasn’t controversial for several reasons–in addition to the lack of public knowledge of the health and safety risks. For decades, Colorado’s “split estate” mineral rights law establishing property rights under the surface of the land in addition to the rights of landowners on the surface operated without major conflicts. Colorado’s wide open spaces gave drillers plenty to explore, and the population centers along the Front Range didn’t have the most easily-accessible minerals underneath them.

But over time, two things happened: the increasingly urban Front Range started to expand into energy-producing areas, and a maturing technology for extracting oil and gas known as hydraulic fracturing put minerals under residential communities within economical reach. Because under Colorado law mineral rights have parity with the rights of surface landowners, within regulations controlled by the state’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission drillers are routinely allowed to override local zoning and place heavy industrial operations in the immediate vicinity of homes and schools.

As the political battle between concerned residents of local communities threatened by drilling and the energy industry has heated up in recent years, the industry has spent lavishly to influence Colorado’s political leadership on both sides of the aisle. This has resulted in gridlock at the Colorado legislature on the issue, especially for the last seven years under an avowedly pro-energy Democratic governor and frequently split control of the General Assembly. When citizens turned to the state’s initiative process to get relief by popular vote, the energy industry bankrolled 2016’s Amendment 71 to make it prohibitively harder to get constitutional measures on a statewide ballot.

Entering 2017, the fight over oil and gas drilling in Colorado was simmering but hardly boiling over. The success of Amendment 71, and the likelihood of no real movement on the issue until after Gov. John Hickenlooper leaves office, combined with the much bigger threat of the Trump administration over this and so many other issues left supporters of better protections feeling defeated.

On April 17th, a recently-built home in Firestone north of Denver suddenly exploded, killing two people and severely injuring two others inside. The home was totally destroyed in the explosion, which also damaged nearby homes and caused a fire that took hours to extinguish. Investigators determined that a flow line connected to a disused well owned by Anadarko Petroleum had not been properly disconnected from the well. Raw methane gas, lacking the telltale additive to warn of high concentrations by smell, began to flow again through this line, accumulating undetected in the basement of the home until being ignited accidentally by the homeowners with tragic results. After the explosion, more underground plumes of methane in the immediate area were discovered and vented.

The Firestone home explosion immediately brought the issue of oil and gas production near homes back to the fore. In this case, homes were built near abandoned wells from which methane had seeped, but that certainly doesn’t absolve the industry of responsibility of not just properly capping old wells but ensuring all infrastructure in place for energy extraction is rendered safe before homes are built over them. And obviously, if the industry is this careless with abandoned flow lines, it invites basic questions about how careful the industry is with everything else they do.

But in Denver, the industry’s sway over leadership on both sides of the aisle ensured little would change. A limited set of reforms announced by Gov. Hickenlooper in August fell pitifully short of addressing concerns, as the Denver Post reported:

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper is asking oil and gas operators to pony up money to plug the 700 to 800 “orphan wells” in the state, but is shying from taking stances on more contentious policies, such as how close new homes can be built to existing wells.

The governor also won’t force the energy industry to allow state officials to compile a publicly available map of all oil and gas pipelines. Instead, he said he wanted to enhance the 811 call program to ensure homeowners can use their telephones to access pipeline information for site-specific areas. Hickenlooper said industry officials were concerned a comprehensive statewide map could lead to people illegally tapping pipelines to siphon off gas. [Pols emphasis]

Hickenlooper’s thoroughly ridiculous contention that scavengers might “siphon off gas” if the public is made aware of oil and gas pipelines running through their neighborhoods, and that this concern somehow trumps the rights of residents to know where these potentially deadly gas lines are located in relation to their homes, perfectly symbolizes the tone-deaf approach of his administration on oil and gas drilling–arguably Hickenlooper’s greatest failure in office. There is simply no way to overstate how offensive this was to concerned citizens in Firestone and elsewhere.

Meanwhile, the industry attempted to vilify gubernatorial candidate Jared Polis by proxy in municipal elections in Greeley this fall, linking his donations to city council candidates with his support for better protections from drilling. That attempt turned disastrous after one of the candidates backed by the industry was revealed to be a convicted felon and whose seat on the Greeley City Council is now in doubt. It’s fair to say that Polis, who doesn’t support a “statewide fracking ban” but has supported initiatives for local control and wider setbacks from drilling, is not under the industry’s thumb. As a result Polis is set to face the most shrill attacks imaginable from the industry and their many supporters next year–to include lots of affected hand-wringing from pro-energy Democrats during the upcoming gubernatorial primary.

It has been our contention since before John Hickenlooper won the governor’s race in 2010 that at some point, Colorado Democrats will face a seminal choice–to continue alienating their base of support and swing votes in impacted communities by currying favor with the oil and gas industry in this state, or to face them down on behalf of affected communities once and for all. We believe based on our years of experience that the political risks to Democrats standing up to oil and gas are much smaller than conventional wisdom suggests, and indeed that much of said “conventional wisdom” is a fabrication of the industry’s bought-off mouthpieces in both parties. On the other hand, this issue has done more to anger the Democratic base in Colorado than perhaps any other in recent years, making the benefits of a new approach easy to recognize.

What’s it going to take for Democrats in Colorado to remember where their loyalties should lie?

The right candidate. And an election to prove it.