The 2020 Democratic U.S. Senate primary in Colorado has been spun as a two-way battle between political veterans, former Gov. John Hickenlooper versus former Speaker of the House Andrew Romanoff, but also between two competing ideologies: Hickenlooper being characterized (pejoratively) as a “moderate” Democrat, while Romanoff has fashioned himself in this race as the “progressive champion” campaigning on progressive policy planks such as Medicare for All and the Green New Deal.
The reality beneath the spin of this race is very different from popular perceptions, as we have pointed out in this space to some consternation from Romanoff’s supporters. Hickenlooper’s record as governor was more progressive than even his own presidential candidacy cared to admit, strongly supporting gun safety measures, the Affordable Care Act, and LGBT rights among many other causes. And the hard truth is that Andrew Romanoff has taken both sides on most of his signature issues like universal health care and oil and gas drilling throughout his long career, often in response to the perceived needs of the race he was running.
This is not a conclusion we come to based on any bias or preference in this race. Like Romanoff’s fundraising, managing only a small fraction of Hickenlooper’s number in a race considered the nation’s most competitive, this is reality–and observers on all sides ignore it at their peril.
Today, the Colorado Sun’s Jesse Paul dived into another issue Romanoff has a long record on, immigration–and it’s a story that every Democratic primary voters who thinks they know Andrew Romanoff needs to read.
As Colorado’s House speaker from 2005 to 2009, he oversaw the passage of what at the time were considered among the most restrictive policies in the nation when it comes to people living in the U.S. illegally…
“What is extraordinarily frustrating is that he’s never acknowledged the actual harm he helped create for the immigrant community –– legislation that’s still impacting those communities,” said state Sen. Julie Gonzales, a Denver Democrat and longtime immigrant advocate. “I want to work alongside people to build the world that we all want to see. It’s hard to believe them when they were actively involved in building policies that harmed members of our community but who now say, ‘Trust me.’’’
Romanoff says the measures were a “serious mistake” that produced unintended consequences that he deeply regrets. But at the time he maintained that the measures didn’t compromise his beliefs and told The Los Angeles Times that at least some of the policies were “tough, effective, enforceable and practical.” [Pols emphasis]
This isn’t the first time that Romanoff’s compromised record on immigration has back to bite him. During Romanoff’s 2014 run for Congress against Mike Coffman, Romanoff’s votes on immigration in 2006 became a critical liability as Coffman used it to shame Romanoff before the district’s Latino voters while hypocritically burnishing Coffman’s own “pro-immigrant” credentials. Likewise during Romanoff’s losing 2010 U.S. Senate primary bid, when the 2006 immigration bills undermined Romanoff’s then run to the left against Michael Bennet.
At the time, the 2006 immigration bills were praised by pundits and moderates as a way of flanking hard-line Republicans like Tom Tancredo on the issue, who had proposed a ballot measure with even harsher sanctions against undocumented people in Colorado. That year Bob Beauprez relied heavily on lowbrow anti-immigrant demagoguery to attack Bill Ritter, an attack that backfired and contributed to Beauprez’s crushing defeat. In retrospect it has become obvious that the 2006 immigration bills did far more harm than good to the Democratic coalition in Colorado, at best an opportunistic betrayal of Latino voters and at worst evidence of enmity against immigrants on both sides of the aisle.
In 2013 the worst of 2006 immigration legislation, Senate Bill 90, was repealed. By Gov. Hickenlooper. The facts of this history are simple and incontrovertible. Hickenlooper literally was the governor who undid Speaker Romanoff’s cardinal error.
It is telling that Romanoff never apologized for the 2006 immigration special session publicly until just days after Hickenlooper entered the race. But in 2014 in particular, Romanoff ran a very different campaign against Mike Coffman, casting himself as a balanced-budget championing moderate instead of the “progressive champion” he’s running as today. In the 2020 primary, on the other hand, the only way that Romanoff can possibly overcome Hickenlooper’s lopsided support in polls and overmatched fundraising performance is to essentially run as the second coming of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Romanoff’s record, and immigration won’t be the last issue for which it’s the case, does not back that up.
Pols, now you are just baiting the Hick haters to come out swinging….
No, no, no — Hickenlooper repealed SB-90. I just read that somewhere . . .
It was his idea!
Only 2 years after he was first elected.
He campaigned hard on repealing SB-90 in 2010, remember? It was his biggest issue!
There’s more than enough <fill in candidate> troubled record revisited around to unnecessarily derail our need to have honest debates about a broad range of policies, what they’re going to do about it today, and whether I trust they’ll actually fight for what they campaign on if they’re elected
I don’t hate John under any stretch of the imagination; if he is the nominee I will work for him with the same cadence I would for Andrew.
Pols is arguing that Andrew is really a centrist, like Hick, but he has fooled the left wing of the party into supporting him, unlike Hick.
Doesn't that make Andrew the stronger candidate?
Ummm. OK. Alva is making an argument out-of-context but those of us who remember those days aren't fooled. So Andrew out-flanked Tanc and his gang of nationalists on the ballot initiative, delivers us a statute that can be undone at a future point without another vote of the people. Seems like brilliant political gamesmanship given the circumstances at the time, and the light shade of red we still had as a state (meaning the ballot initiative could well have passed and like TABOR, spend decades trying to unravel the mess).
It’s almost like Alva’s forgotten we had a Republican governor in 2006 that had to be delivered something he wouldn’t veto…and a really pissed off Senate minority still stinging from their 2004 spanking.