U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Janak Joshi

80%

20%

(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) Jena Griswold

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) David Seligman

50%

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*

(D) Milat Kiros

90%

10%

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) Jessica Killin

70%

30%

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
January 06, 2010 10:12 PM UTC

Curry Leaves Door Open to Come Home?

  • 16 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The Grand Junction Sentinel reports the latest in Rep. Kathleen Curry’s odd saga:

State Rep. Kathleen Curry faced little criticism during a town hall meeting Tuesday night over her recent decision to leave the Democratic Party and become an independent.

Some 30 people, including members of both parties, attended the Glenwood Springs event, and many broke out in applause at one person’s comment that a lot of people support the Gunnison lawmaker…

Margi Hilleary of Glenwood Springs expressed disappointment Tuesday that Curry had left the Democratic Party.

“I guess I’m one of the few people here who are really sorry you’ve changed,” Hilleary said.

She said Democrats fought hard for their gains in the legislature.

“We have our torchbearers and not enough of them,” Hilleary said.

“In a way, it looks like you’re telling me that not having these positions of leadership is going to put you in a position to serve us better?” she asked.

Curry said she believes that’s the case. She said she’d be willing to re-evaluate her decision if she learns she can’t be effective. [Pols emphasis]

Well there’s no question that Rep. Curry won’t be as effective for her constituents as she would be as a member of House leadership, or chair of the Agriculture committee. She also won’t be nearly as effective as a “caucus of one,” basically denying herself the ability to network and coordinate her legislative strategy.

We said previously that we don’t think Curry’s decision was very well-planned, and the more time passes the more erratic she frankly looks here. Whatever disagreements she had with other legislators over policy, it was her decision to disaffiliate from the Democratic party–a decision that had secondary consequences for her, like going from a popular lock for reelection to a longshot write-in candidate. If Rep. Curry steps back from the brink, we believe that her erstwhile Democratic colleagues would be magnanimous: maybe not magnanimous enough to give her back her leadership positions, but enough so that she could keep her seat without undue hardship.

But like everything related to this weird little episode, that decision will be hers.

Comments

16 thoughts on “Curry Leaves Door Open to Come Home?

  1. The only way the Dems could do that would be to not run a candidate in her district AND campaign for her as a write-in.

    That would not be strategically wise in this important election year which will determine redistricting.

    If Curry wants back in, she should step out of the House race until 2012 and allow the Dems to keep that seat. Her presence in that race sets her up as a potential spoiler which gives the seat to the Republicans.

    1. I understand that you are correct on the statutory language as she will not have been a Democrat for a year before the election.  However, there is the US Supreme Court ruling that allows parties to decide how they want to do things (based upon the “free association” clause) which could be used by her to allow the Democratic Party to change the rules.  Don’t know whether they would do that, but I think it is possible.

        1. This is a Supreme Court decision.  I understand exactly what the statute says, and as I said, agree with your reading.  However, the US Supreme Court decision overruled other state statutes making all sorts of requirements for party’s to select their candidates.  I think this case comes within that, though I don’t have time to go back and find and read the cases.  Maybe Zakhem or one of the Deomcratic lawyers who handles these matters could weigh in.

    2. Has she actually filed the paperwork? Is there no way that could be written off as a mistake if she returned to her prior affiliation – or never formally changed?

      If there is any way to put this behind us the Dems should allow it, and she should take advantage of the chance.

    1. I think the party can waive the one year rule and paut her on the ballot.  But she must be a d 60 days before the caucus, which works out to Jan. 16, I think.  Personally, I’m hoping she does because I like here but there is no way she will win as a write-in, she’ll just split the vote and elect an R.

      1. Something similar to when I was trying to figure how long Penry had to make up his mind on a senate run.  Although this one deals with party affiliation.  And I’d like to see her run as a D also.  But if not, Governor Salazar will need someone to head DNR.

      2. The party does not have the ability to waive the one-year rule. It is not a party rule, it is a law.

        Craig mentioned a Supreme Court ruling that allows parties a little more leaway, but it would not be applicable to this case because there is a statutory restriction which was nto in place for the instance the case was based on.

  2. Curry’s comment can also mean she would step aside and support a Democratic candidate.

    As an Independent write-in, she is a ghost. Local Democrats cannot and will not sacrifice all the other candidates on the ticket to push her career along after it has careened off the highway purposely by the driver.

    Defecting from the party might have been the best solution for her problems, but appears Curry never considered the consequences to the people who believed in her the most. She will have no voice now, no influence on the issues that face the legislature this year concerning the Western Slope. Sure, the Republicans will be more chummy, but that will be to use her, as they have done before.

    The Democrats do have a Big Tent, especially on the Western Slope. Look at Congressman John Salazar.  Everyone makes mistakes and it’s ok to ask for a redo — Kathleen, we are all willing to forgive and forget — otherwise, this is the end of Curry’s political career.

        1. And does she think this move will help her with her mission?  Stripped of power in a Dem majority and a write-in candidate?  I’d love to know what her thinking is, because it doesn’t make sense.  

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

134 readers online now

Newsletter

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

Colorado Pols