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%
March 22, 2019 10:27 AM UTC
20 Comments
I am reminded of an observation by the late, great, Speaker Ron Strahle, R-Fort Collins.
"The stupid ones have a role in the process too. They slow the rest of us down."
The House Minority "Leader" is too busy trying to push bogus recalls.
The Dems need to get ahead of this. Here is a suggestion: change the session hours. Majority leader should announce at 11:55 pm when they recess for the day that they will reconvene at 5:30 am for the reading of the journal and all bills scheduled for that day. Serious business begins at 10 am.
Good idea. Maybe that'll shut em up.
Let the tree fall in the forest with no one there to hear it…
Maybe do it at 12:01am.
I wonder though, let's say no Republicans show up at 12:01am. Can you just vote to stop reading?
They could just run away to deny quorum, like some others legs have done, no?
Generally, a quorum is not larger than a majority of members. That same majority can also set times for sessions and set rules of procedure, except for changes in the status of members or existing rules which require a super-majority.
Hire a motormouth to read/speak.
High school and college debate seasons are basically over, and some of those students can sustain 300+ words per minute. I'm sure they'd be willing to work for a modest stipend.
An auctioneer.
Well, the Democratic Party controls the trifecta. That provides ample resources for making the Republicans sorry for being obstructionist.
Maybe take away all their office spaces, and make the share a cube-farm.
What kind of really vindictive law could you come up with to make their lives hell? Like Trump cutting disaster relief to Puerto Rico and California, while sending crop subsidies to soybean farmers suffering from the tariffs he created.
Is the requirement to read truly in the Constitution?
I knew the Colorado Constitution was a long document, but I hadn't heard it reached the level of parliamentary procedure for the legislative chambers. Articles about the court case only say the reading "violated the spirit of the Constitution" and violated rules of the Senate.
Does someone know if the Constitution really does go into parliamentary procedure? And if so, could you provide a reference, as I couldn't find it with a word search.
It is. From Ballotpedia Article V, Legislative Department
In addition, due an amendment to Section 7 in 1988, the length of the regular session is limited to 120 days. Basically the state constitution is designed to allow just one legislator to stop everything and run out the clock. This is probably not an accident since the anti-government zealots had a good long run of getting shit in the state constitution from about 1985-2000.
There is, however, nothing I can find about limited the length or subject of special sessions. Anyone have any reason that Polis could not summon everyone back after a week break to try again from June to December with every bill the Democrats want to pass named in the proclamation?
Thanks …
I suppose I should be thankful there is a chance for illiterates to serve in the legislature without worrying they would be mislead about a bill … but a rule in the Constitution requiring a bill to be read aloud twice stretches my inclusive soul.
Anything in there says they can't have ten, maybe twenty people reading different parts all at the same time
T***plicans need to learn the Dems can play fuckee-fuckee, too.
So, you’re expecting voters in Colorado Springs to actually select legislators who aren’t slow? And, just where do you expect those legislators to be found in EpCo??
. . . ”I’m ajust be repesentin’ them constitients what done sent me here.”
DougCo is even worse.
The stupid runs strong in Mesa County.
Speaking of that…I ran into John Justman a couple of days ago.
P.S…the reply function is really weird..sheesh.
The requirement to read bills at length on request is definitely the law, but I wish the media would push back a bit on statements like Hill's, where he slips in a notion that the Constitution has any relevance to the blatantly partisan strategy of abusing bill reading as a stall tactic. Plain reading of Section 22 says absolutely nothing about intentional delay – while the clause about dispensing with reading entire bills seems closer to acknowledging that legislators can decide reading a bill out loud takes more time than it's worth.