U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

(D) David Seligman

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) J. Danielson

(R) Sheri Davis
50%

40%

30%
State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(D) Jeff Bridges

(R) Kevin Grantham

40%

40%

30%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(R) H. Scheppelman

(D) Alex Kelloff

70%

30%

10%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Trisha Calvarese

(D) Eileen Laubacher

90%

20%

20%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

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

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Shannon Bird

45%↓

30%

30%

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 15, 2009 05:06 PM UTC

Burying The Lede, Just Enough Rope Edition

  • 33 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The ongoing story of gubernatorial candidate Josh Penry’s alleged use of the resources of the state-funded Senate Minority Office for his campaign takes an interesting turn this morning–at first glance, you might think that the sagely Lynn Bartels of the Denver Post has missed the point of this budding little controversy.

We, on the other hand, think she’s allowing the Penry campaign to talk itself right into a corner:

Colorado lawmakers who save e-mail addresses from constituents and others can send campaign-related messages to those accounts, according to a 2008 legal memo.

Senate Minority Leader Josh Penry, one of three Republicans running for governor, last year asked for clarification about using the e-mails for campaign purposes…

Several Democrats who had not signed up for Penry’s campaign e-mails recently received messages from him on their official state Capitol e-mail accounts. They surmised he got their addresses because they signed up to receive updates from ColoradoSenateNews.com, operated by Senate Republicans.

Penry, of Grand Junction, oversees the minority office.

Mike Britt, Penry’s campaign manager, would not say whether Penry used the SenateNews e-mail database.

“We’ve received lists from all kinds of different sources,” Britt said Wednesday. [Pols emphasis] “And there is no reason for us to release that kind of information to the Democrats and their liberal allies.”

We’ll let the reader decide if that’s basically an admission that the Penry campaign did pull the email list from the Senate Minority Office’s website–we’d say if Penry campaign manager Mike “RNC.com” Britt was sure they hadn’t, he’d have no problem telling that to Bartels. And apparently they’ve got this memo that says legislators can use lists collected on their websites for campaigns, empowering them (they think, anyway) to get kind of snippy about it.

Here’s the problem: individual legislator’s websites are not state property. A typical state legislator’s website serves as both a campaign website and in a general information role, depending on whether or not it’s election season. The two functions are really not separable and the memo’s conclusions are justified as it pertains to those sites.

The state-funded Senate Minority Office’s website, on the other hand, is state property and is subject to entirely different rules. Former Senate Minority Leader Andy McElhany discovered this, much to his embarrassment, when he tried to use Republican Party funds to pay for developing the site a couple of years ago. It’s certainly not covered by this memo concerning the lists of individual legislators, and if it is? Why, doesn’t that mean that Gov. Bill Ritter can hit up Colorado.gov for every email address it’s ever received? You see where this is going, don’t you?

Chantell Taylor of Ethics Watch said Wednesday she had not reviewed the 2008 memo but said she believes Penry used a list compiled by ColoradoSenateNews.com, and the memo appears to cover only databases established by individual lawmakers.

Something tells us the next story isn’t going to be as “balanced.”

Tweet
Share

Comments

33 thoughts on “Burying The Lede, Just Enough Rope Edition”

  1. Shocked, shocked I tell you that CEW has failed to file the same CORA request on other elected officials …

    Penry is not the only candidate to send campaign information to either workers at their government addresses or to people who had made an inquiry: Two of his rivals, Republican Scott McInnis and Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter, have done the same thing.

  2. He may think there is no reason for him to release that info. But there is also no reason why he shouldn’t release the sources. Unless he is lying.

    1. [Halliburton] may think there is no reason for [it] to release that info. But there is also no reason why [it] shouldn’t release the sources. Unless [it] is lying [about the safety of its fracking fluids].

      When Penry’s minions start making this argument, then, maybe, I’ll have sympathy for their desire to have the Governor release a work in progress.

      1. to provide his “transparency” lecture to Penry?

        “Look, I’m a “schmuck” for nailing Pres. Obama for trying to ship mercury to GJ.” – Josh Penry’s twitter

          1. about everyone’s transparency that I weep the same way you liberal boys cry at a Celine Dion concert or whine about Josh Penry.

            While you’re looking into Penry’s e-mail lists, I want you to figure out how I got on Michael Bennet’s e-mail spam list. Methinks it is because I sent messages to Mayor Hick protesting funding increases for services to illegal aliens.

            Yeah, I’m gonna give one red cent to Bennet.

            CORA the hell out of everyone.

            1. so be careful what you’re saying.  

              Paper all of Colorado with as many frivolous CORA requests as you can, you fiscal conservative you.  Won’t cost the gubmint anything to respond.

              1. and no one has to CORA. Checkbook, constituent correspondence, e-mail chains in which official business is discussed, etc.

                You kids don’t seem to understand that there’s a creeping clampdown on public information in this country. Court and police records that used to be open are extremely hard or costly to get, or are closed completely. Officials duck behind outdated CORA provisions to shield themselves from private investigation. State phone records, internet activity logs on state computers, etc. all hidden.

                It’s a problem.

                Open up the government. It’s do-able. Technology makes it possible.

                I don’t get why you self-congratulatory “investigative” bloggers aren’t demanding this stuff.

                1. I’d much prefer that everything was online, but unfortunately, it’s become a revenue stream to the State.  I don’t think you’re going to find too many anti-tax Republicans that would vote to put everything online at taxpayer expense.

                  On the other side of that, as a consultant who does science and writes reports, I don’t mind at all when my final product, that which I’m willing to put my name on, is made public.  But it would bother the hell out of me to release intermediate work product that might not have been checked or edited.

                  1. I do see your point.

                    Still, the public ought to be able to know the “ingredients” that go into making public policy, they same way we are entitled to know the ingredients in our food.

                    If there’s a “candid, unvarnished” report to the governor from one of his lieutenants influencing public policy, the public should be able to see that report.

                    If you e-mailed the governor your “candid, unvarnished” assessment about how to craft policy, I would be able to obtain that record.

                    Yet I can’t obtain a record of a state employee’s “candid, unvarnished” policy recommendations?

                    You fellas defend this scenario all day long, but it’s bogus and you know it.  

                    1. It’s too broad and, as you say, hides too much of the public’s business. But that is what the law says. The Republicans who CORA’d Ritter’s office knew this and wanted to score some cheap political points (“what does he have to hide?!”) rather than illuminate anything. Of course, this is their right under the law, as it should be. Many of the most interesting open records requests are filed because someone has an ax to grind.

                    3. I’m sure that Skip had no problem whatsoever with the entire Bush administration hiding everything, even going so far as to hide Poppy’s presidential papers.

                      And tell us how tranparent Coffman’s SoS office was?

                      R’s favor transparency only when they’re out of power. Otherwise it’s an intrusion into constitutional executive powers.

                3. Really?  Within the last year or two Colorado’s legislature standardized charges for public law enforcement documents so most police records are rather cheap at 25 cents per page (which is not enough to cover the cost of staff time to find and copy the records, plus copier/printer costs).  Most police records are available to anyone who wants them – there are exceptions in the law, such as for juvenile records.  

  3. For years Penry and his small clique have dealt in misinformation and down right untruths to get him elected (along with a couple of buddies).  Is it finally catching up with him? We can only hope.  As for Lynn Bartels, you have more faith than I do.  She’s always had her favorites in the legislature at the Rocky and now at the Post.  Would that Pols is right that she’s finally waking up.

    1. Don’t see this having any more of an effect on Penry than all the little would be scandals brought up in the last election on various Coffman rule bending/breaking issues.  Which is not to say Penry will be as successful in his run as Coffman was but, whatever happens, it won’t be because of stuff like this.  

      1. a lot of people are annoyed by the daily barrage of spam in their inbox. Usually, you can’t pin down where spammers got your email address. In this case you might.

        And as ineffective as it may seem,  it can be used to either attack Penry’s ethics, or to defend yourself from Penry’s attacks (as in, he’s a schmuck, too).

  4. The Pols has been beating this horse so long its beginning to stink.

    Must be a slow couple weeks in gotcha politics.

    I’m sure you can find a candidate or elected official using their cellphone while driving. Now that would be a story!

  5. I know for a fact that Penry is using the SenateNews email list because I am on that list and have never ever signed up to receive Penry emails (and yet I am getting his emails for some reason).  

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

155 readers online now

Newsletter

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

Colorado Pols