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

50%↑

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
October 05, 2009 09:00 PM UTC

About CO Sen. Michael Bennet's funding sources...

  • 30 Comments
  • by: wade norris

(crossposted at Huffington Post)

As many Colorado Democrats know, there is a heated primary shaping up in the Colorado Senate Race between appointed incumbent Michael Bennet and Former House Majority Speaker Andrew Romanoff and this this Denver Post article  raises an important issue about the sitting incumbent.

With a push in Congress to reform regulation over Wall Street, financial firms have been spending big, and among the major beneficiaries is Sen. Michael Bennet. In less then six months, the Colorado Democrat (Bennet) has received $401,000 from campaign donors linked to a combination of hedge funds, securities firms, insurance companies and real estate interests. Bennet’s take is bested only by four senators, including Harry Reid, the powerful Senate majority leader, and Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

On the plus side, Republicans have had a history of out fundraising democrats so this should be a good thing that a Democrat is well funded right?

This maybe the logic behind picking Bennet, especially with the Supreme Court about to decide whether Corporations can give unlimited money to candidates, and undermine democracy  – as Stephen Colbert explains in this segment:

http://www.colbertnation.com/t…

(can’t embed player – can editor?)

Maybe the President picked Bennet because he knows that only the richest candidates will be viable in a General Election, I don’t know – but the Post is raising a point about whether voters will react to the news that Bennet is raising funds from firms that received bailout money which has been criticized in Michael Moore’s latest movie.

Bennet, 44, sits on the Banking Committee as well, as the panel’s most junior member. But he is also a millionaire former businessman familiar with the world of high-wire finance – the kind of lawmaker donors may see as a potential ally as the committee rewrites the rules under which much of the financial sector will work.

But if those factors have combined to create a financial boon for Colorado’s junior senator, they also present him with a political challenge: How to benefit from Wall Street’s largess without appearing too cozy to his patrons.

That is a good question, and it also raises how a freshmen appointee got appointed to such a powerful position as well as this latest position.

Colorado’s U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet has been chosen to serve on the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, a panel that is playing a key role in the health-reform debate.

He will take a seat that was left vacant by the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

That is very impressive – Freshman Appointee takes over Kennedy’s seat – how did he do that?

I tend to think like this statement in the Post’s comments section:


He gets appointed to the Senate and racks up huge campaign donations and important committee assignments ahead of many senators with more experience. Some one is expecting something in return.

Now to be fair, Senator Bennet does state this defense:

That money “doesn’t buy anything from me,” said Bennet, who was appointed in January to fill the senate seat vacated by Ken Salazar. “The question for me is what we can do here to ensure that credit flows to the working families and small businesses of our state.”

Voters will decide whether they trust him on that statement.

Now I have to disclose that I was wanting a primary from early on and have played my part locally to foment that cause, and I stand by my statements that the Senate appointment process is flawed and should be reformed as Russ Feingold has stated, so that we don’t see the procedural acrobatics like we are seeing in Massachusetts.

But I am just one person – so my vote is on an equal playing field – and I want to make sure that money does not have an undue influence on how I am represented.

Looks like the Denver Post thinks that is a valid point for voters of Colorado.

Oh, if you want to support the Underdog Candidate in this race with small dollar donations, you can visit Andrew Romanoff’s Act Blue page and show your support.

Tweet
Share

Comments

30 thoughts on “About CO Sen. Michael Bennet’s funding sources…”

  1. This is known. I personally think that it’s good. It generally takes an insider to get real change through.

    I doubt that the Speaker could show up in DC and have a warm conversation with the President about most topics if he spends the primary attacking Sen. Bennet’s ties to the President. Insignificant committee assignments would be far more likely.

    Securities reform  is long overdue. The excess of the Bush Adminsitration has not completely stopped devolving nor deleveraging. Sen Bennet knows this.

    2. First of all, Wade is making the point about Bennet, not Andrew. Second of all, I don’t think Wade is attacking any ties to the President. He is just pointing out that Bennet gets a lot of money from Wall Street. The origins of this are from a DenverPost article on the subject.

      I don’t believe money from one special interest group or another means that they are guaranteed any favoritism, but it is something to keep an eye on. Just as people supporting health care reform are noting that a lot of Blue Dog Dems are getting tons of money from health insurance companies, I think we will see the same attention brought on Senators like Bennet as we talk about finance industry reforms.

      In the end, it is the perception that counts. The public doesn’t want to feel like their representatives are being bought. Whether it is true or not is almost irrelevant.

        1. You also forgot to note the sub-headline,  I suppose because it’s inconvenient for your latest little hack job:

          His position is at odds with Wall Street, despite donations.

                1. you write badly, you think poorly, you shill constantly, you reason lazily, and you routinely embarrass yourself. But that’s just my opinion.  

                    1. Sharon,

                      i don’t know you, so pardon this first communique –

                      Andrew Romanoff can win this race without, i repeat, without attacking anything Michael Bennet has, or has not done.

                      Keep that in mind, and the animosity between our supporters and Bennet supporters will be kept at a minimum.

                      Keep your powder dry for the General and the repubs.

                      Hope to meet you in person soon.

                      Wade

                      “What’s the use of a fine house if you haven’t got a tolerable planet to put it on?”

                      Henry David Thoreau

                      PRAER.org

                      by: wade norris @ Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 11:55:17 AM MDT

                      [ Parent | | Reply ]

                      So, other than writing a diary filled with attacks and innuendo (and practically copied and pastied from someone else’s ope-ed because apparently you are too lazy to write something original) where’s the consistency in your own mea culpa from less than two weeks ago?

                    2. for telling her to keep her mouth shut

                      about her gripes with a candidate – such as Bennet – was not the point of blogging or the people voicing their concerns.

                      she was right, I was wrong.

                      to her I owed a mea culpa, but not you…

                      and you are attacking me for not doing enough to meet your diary standards?


                      (and practically copied and pastied from someone else’s ope-ed because apparently you are too lazy to write something original)

                      This coming from someone who has only posted ONE diary on this site?

                      http://coloradopols.com/userDi…

                      sheesh

                    3. I thought it was about quality. Thanks for clarifying your standards for us all. I marvel at your ongoing hypocrisy.

                2. You might want to change Andrew Romanoff’s title in the first paragraph. Romanoff has been a lot of things, but I don’t think he was ever House Majority Speaker. The Speaker of the House speaks for the whole house, not just the majority.

      2. The implication tries to say that Sen.Bennet raising money from the securities industry is bad.

        I’m sure that the the Speaker would happily take the contributions instead of Sen. Bennet in order to remain competitive.

        Sen.Bennet would follow the Presidents’ lead in Secuirties reform, as he works with him closely.

        It is perception that counts. I perceive that Colorado would have far more clout regarding legislation with Sen Bennet being re elected.  

    3. I doubt that the Speaker could show up in DC and have a warm conversation with the President about most topics if he spends the primary attacking Sen. Bennet’s ties to the President.

      no one is attacking Bennet’s ties to the President, but to calling into question his fundraising sources.

      1. Has the Speaker sworn off funding from financial insititutions, or their employees?

        Has the Speaker sworn off PAC money?

        Has the Speaker sworn off any funding?

        If he has then a press release would be in order. If he hasn’t then attacking 400,000 out of close to 4 million is simply trying to discredit the Senator with innuendo.

        Senator Bennet is an honorable man. Attacking him for having supporters in an industry he has worked in makes no sense.  

  2. To get real secuirties reform through it will take someone familiar with, and able to negotiate  with Wall St.

    As a YaLe Law graduate that has worked in the field, I don’t see any learning curve in moving forward or identifying where legitimate reform can take place. Sen.Bennet would work closely with the President on this.

  3. Strange that nobody’s ever looking out for the big businesses. If every Congressperson favors small businesses, how does anyone expect megacorporations to compete?

  4. had he started campaigning 8 months ago.

    And had Underdog been appointed, he would be taking whatever money he could take to ensure this seat stays Democratic. This is going to be one of the most expensive Senate campaigns in Colorado history, and it’s only fair that we should have as much money as possible to combat what will likely be an onslaught of Republican attack ads over whoever the Democratic nominee ends up being.

    I wish campaign financing was different. If I had my choice, it wouldn’t be like this. We would have publicly funded elections, and TV stations wouldn’t be able to rake in millions in TV ads every election season. Unfortunately, the reality and the idealism don’t match up. Whoever is going to win this race next fall needs to have the best combination of public visibility and grassroots organizational machinery possible. Both of those things cost a ton of money to be effective.

    The GOP isn’t complaining about where its money is going to come from. All they care about is turning this seat back to red. Why should we be any different?

    1. The article you’re referencing is an Op-Ed by Susan Barnes-Gelt. I’m just curious about how much she’s donated to Andrew Romanoff, and if there’s not a conflict of interest in her writing a newspaper column bashing the opponent of the candidate she supports.

      Also, I don’t know if it’s in good taste to ask for donations after your diary. You’re just a blogger, obviously, but it seems a little strange that Barnes-Gelt writes this column, you write this passive aggressive hit piece, and then you can stir up enough discord to get Andrew Romanoff a few bucks.

      Not only that, but Barnes-Gelt’s piece is riddled with Daily Kos talking points, namely this tired old yarn:

      However, Romanoff’s primary challenge has already paid off. Bennet in late August was decidedly ambivalent (an oxymoron) about health care reform’s public option, stating that it must not “unfairly” compete with private insurance nor resemble Medicare. With Romanoff entering the race, Bennet quickly recalibrated. By Sept. 1, Bennet stated his support for a public option.

      This has been refuted so many times, it’s unbelievable to me that the Post would print her column without properly fact-checking it.

      If this is what we can expect from this primary campaign from the supporters of Andrew Romanoff, it won’t be long before Bennet’s supporters stop holding back. People have been talking about running a “clean” campaign, but it’s rapidly becoming clear that such a thing is outside of the grasp of St. Andrew’s acolytes.

        1. was attributed to Andrew Romanoff talking about his conversation describing his own candidacy with his father.

          What I was saying is that Romanoff would have been the underdog, but because he waited so damn long to get in the race, he ends up being the underdog. It’s not a cinderalla story here by any stretch of the imagination.

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

64 readers online now

Newsletter

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