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%
January 14, 2011 07:52 PM UTC
54 Comments
not an engineer. You shouldn’t insult him by calling him an engineer 🙂
I wouldn’t want to insult the Guv.
Well done and thoughtful Duke. Will you be mailing the letter or try to hand deliver this evening when he’s in our neck of the woods?
Got details?
New Community Center. Tonight’s a paid one and I trashed my e-mail. Maybe Ralphie has it.
The GJ event is a dinner at 6:00 PM at The Ale House, 2531 N. 12th St. Cost is $25. Too rich for my blood.
is open to the public, presumably?
Shoot me an email – I’ll make the donation to Hick’s campaign and give you my invite. I very much want him to get this letter and to read it. (And I’m also happy to donate money to Hick.)
I just got back in …thanks , I can’t go anyway.
issues.
remind me to ask if he read this letter from you and his thoughts on it. I will ask.
Nice job Duke.
Hope the guv reads it and takes it to heart.
Is there no way for land owners and mineral extraction efforts to coexist harmoniously? Or is there, but these firms are executing poorly?
Are they not meeting govt. standards? Are those standards enough? Are they being enforced?
Rep DeGette is trying to get the clean water act applied to G&O companies.
CEO really, come on now. I will present an article that shoots your terminology full of holes. Specifically labeling politicians CEOS.
http://www.strike-the-root.com…
Column by Cristian Gherasim.
Exclusive to STR
The rhetoric of statism fosters a cult of experts, of wise, all-knowing politicians and government bureaucrats able to identify exactly what the public wants, even when the public remains silent. They are the real life action men of our time. Nothing’s too complicated for them. They have their charts and numbers telling how to run even the most unpredictable of human activities: the economy. The language of statism works most effectively when it can channel concerns into what state officials label as policy. These public policies are preached as panaceas for everything: from fighting racism to bank regulation, and from monetary policy to linguistic guidelines. They are the tools of political pragmatism and efficiency.
This is how bureaucrats, the press and sadly many of us have come to understand the role of government. Economic competence has come to define not only what businessmen strive for but also what politicians hope to achieve, erasing the difference between two opposed areas of activity: politics, with law enforcing as its only purpose; and the economy–with individual wealth supply on its agenda. Welding the two together gave way to crazy expressions like economic policy and economic recovery plan. What made this political rhetoric possible?
It started with the first Marxists. They envisaged a world in which the non-economic features of society are seen as being an outgrowth of its economic activity. Politics is merely a derivative, conditioned entirely by the forces and relations of production. Society is but a workshop, and those governing it are simply nothing more than managers. If pragmatism and productivity define good management, then expect nothing less from politicians. But it’s hardly their fault alone. In fact, when Election Day comes, they will be measured by how well they planed, regulated and managed the economy. Tricked into thinking that this is the only way to go, people are likely to accept and encourage this political behavior. Many of us become quite enthusiastic by the politics and economy fusion on the principle of good governance.
And nobody seems to be more enthusiastic by this old belief than the US president. On September 23, Barack Obama addressed the United Nations on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. In his speech, the president spelled out a general principle upon which all social progress depends: good government. What President Obama understands by good government is how public institutions conduct economic planning and manage public resources in order to guarantee the social well-being of all. I have to say that those in Washington will have a hard nut to crack in the coming years determining what each of the 300 million Americans consider to be his/her own well-being.
The politician has come to resemble a bad copy of a businessman. Far from this being an unintended consequence, socialists believe that there should be no difference between a factory supervisor and a political man. They argue that every person is a homo economicus, and society is determined by economic factors alone. All that decision makers have to do is to enable a program for economic development, much like a project manager does. And that shouldn’t be too hard either, as you can’t go wrong keeping with the laws of Marxist materialism. According to them, the economy becomes as predictable as any given law of science. Also, individual economic behavior holds no mystery, as economic forecasting is enabled by the understanding of Marxist laws. The scenario put in place leaves no room for uncertainty or bounded rationality. This is the ideological framework upon which Big Government was created. Bounded by the laws of progress, decision makers act and speak as if running a country and managing a workshop are one and the same.
This reminds me of something I saw a couple of months ago on CNBC, which organized a town hall with an individual they dubbed “Our nation’s CEO.” Those who didn’t see the program might be inclined to think CNBC bestowed this title upon one of the US’s great businessmen or entrepreneurs. Sadly, it was referring not to a great entrepreneur but to President Barack Obama. This is how CNBC advertised the show: With the country’s confidence shattered, and the American Dream slipping away, our nation’s CEO, President Barack Obama goes face to face with his shareholders (you) from Wall Street to Main Street.
The confusion between politics and economics has never been greater. We are no longer citizens but shareholders. This is precisely how American politics works for some time. Instead of buying shares, politicians buy votes. Money and efficiency now define a system never intended to deal with such things. And there’s no sign that this madness will stop anytime soon. In fact, politicians are advocating wholeheartedly the need for a positive approach towards the economy. What does that mean? It means exercising political monopoly over society and every economic activity deemed in need of correction. This monopoly came to be seen as a rather convenient solution: If the whole world is nothing more than a workshop, as socialists pictured it to be, then leaders should act with the utmost pragmatism, proving that they are good managers. With the help of enlightened bureaucrats, they will organize and coordinate each and every section of society as if it were a gigantic factory. For a better world, namely a more efficient one, they require absolute control and intense planning. Instead of a free society in which passions and interests spontaneously coordinate, we get a bunch of bureaucrats, allegedly rational and completely obedient to a handful of top government officials. The outcomes of these practices are truly disastrous: crushing free enterprise and generating economic isolationism and protectionism. The role of state monopoly remains unchanged: stifling open markets, muzzling free societies, enriching well-connected firms, and benefiting politicians.
Long story short, the political man is solely judged on the economic efficiency of his actions. We have become so used to this, we fail to react each time a politician parades his accomplishments in terms of fiscal regulations, inflation control, and remedying market failure.Nobody seems to find inappropriate, to say the least, the coagulation in the public conscience of this double role as both politician and businessman. This probably explains why, when things like limited government and separation of economy and state seldom arise in public speech, the general belief is that such ideas can only pose a threat to progress and should be ignored in favor of proactive state policies.
LOL…I will certainly yield to you on the point of calling the Guv a “CEO”. You may or may not have noticed that I pointed out having chosen the term for a specific reason. I assumed the casual reader would have guessed that I pointed it out because it might be, possibly, a mis-application of the word. Silly, me. My bad.
Um…what about the point I made..you know, about oil and gas development…anything?
First off copying the whole thing violates fair use. Second, no one is going to read a comment that long – summarize and provide a link.
Let’s move on. Nothing to read here.
The very first sentence of my post is an article summary and a link. Secondly everything posted at the STR website is posted with implicit permission to distribute and reproduce. The people I read, they want the message to be spread rather than to receive payment. Sometime liberty is more important than the bank account. I suppose you think reproduction and distribution of the Declaration of Independence is a copyright violation.
Relax and read the article. If the article is too long, maybe your attention span is too short. Stop watching TV for a while this might help.
How will you read any of the greats if you cannot read 5 paragraphs?
But I wouldn’t put the long-winded rambling diatribe above in the same category as The Gettysburg Address.
As to providing a link and a quote, comments should be kept short. If you want to post the whole thing, post it as a diary.
ps – I don’t watch TV (no time).
… but that’s how you’re currently coming across.
Pols is not a new community. David is respectfully sharing some of our expectations with you, that is, that we don’t go for long winded comments but will give them our time in the context of posted diaries.
You might have generated some interest in your point if you had quoted the pertinent lines and left it up to us to decide if we wanted to follow a link to another site. As it was, it was a case of TL;DR.
I guess in all the hoopla over Maes and Tancredo you let some centrist tendencies slide by. Well, that’s the price of playing establishment politics. You get what you vote for.
what I didn’t vote for. 🙂
How did your candidate(s) do, exactly?
“he saved the GOP from minor-party status”?
A spectacular accomplishment in an otherwise disastrous cycle for the formerly grand, old party?
But in the process Democrats were forced to acknowledge the problems with the current size of government and move to the center. Well, Cory Gardner won, but I’m keeping an eye on him. So far he talks the talk.
You can’t win a statewide election in Colorado without moving to the center.
You’re also ignorant of the fact that Hick’s ALWAYS been a centrist. This was one reason why we KNEW, for a fact, that he would be our next governor the minute we learned the news that he was running. (The other was that he was, far and away, the most popular politician in the state. But his pragmatism and centrism are key to that popularity.)
if the Repubs had fielded a credible candidate to challenge Hick. Tough races, difficult campaigns, and close elections almost always reveal some surprises about both candidates involved. Otherwise, untested candidates undergo their trial by fire after they’ve taken office, when their learning curve can do the most potential harm (see Ritter, Bill).
Reminds me of what happens in some vacancy committee processes, too. If a county party (or multi-county district committee) does not recruit candidates on an ongoing basis (and in open processes) then a candidate who is not only untested but perhaps not nearly as well-qualified as others might be appointed by a vacancy committee. This doesn’t happen everywhere, but it sure does happen.
Because of the natural gas glut in US markets, O&G companies are talking about exporting to China.
Great. Let’s exploit Colorado’s UNrenewable resources, destroy water and air quality, and ruin people’s health so that O&G can reap even larger profits than they do now.
The Industry is going to “blackmail” Hickenlooper over jobs vs regulations — yet, the price of natural gas at the Henry Hub is what really dictates drilling when and where.
Colorado regs and local complaints are mere road-kill the industry steers around.
Our 42nd Governor, John Hickenlooper, more than returned the $50 contribution. A commemoritive coin and beer glass, dated 1.11.11, were nice take aways.
Bernie Beuscher and Al White were there, as was Mayor Teresa Coons. Teresa is the sole Democrat on a 7-member City Council. I love her for that alone! She has a couple more years till she’s term limited. I pulled her over as she passed so as to introduce her to my wife. I’d onely met the Mayor once before, but she remembered me and was instantly charming. Obviously a very capable and confident young mathematician. We immediately felt at ease with her, as with Governor Hickenlooper.
I’ve listened to interviews on NPR with the Governor, and was always struck by his grounded nature. Personally, he is very likable.
This wasn’t a night for policy discussions, but more for celebration. He did call for all counties to come together around what they could do to assist their economies. Twice, he used the term, “eliminate red tape”.
He called out a couple of Republicans in the audience…reaching across the bar as it were. There were no guns in the joint, everyone apparently having checked at the door.
He mentioned international trade challenges and opportunities – citing China and India… and then quickly sequed into how water consumption is down 35% in Denver. He was very proud of this.
He asked for reasonable regulations. He wanted to see “the highest environmental and ethical standards”. He went out of his way to praise his Lt. Gov. Mr. Gomez. With a Harvard education, and his resume’, I’d expect Mr. Gomez to bring a strong education focus to Colorado.
His delivery was skillfully extemporaneus. He held a glass of beer naturally. He easily…..between the military guard and the young girl scout troup, impressed with his comfortable demeanor. He does have great natural political skills.
drinking that much, or did Joe Garcia get a better offer in another state?
Can you rephrase it?
The question might be, “who drank more tonight, you or Hick”?
It’s Mr Joe Garcia — not Mr Gomez.
My apologies to Mr. Garcia.
and I’m glad you will hold him to that, especially as it relates to the new GOGCC regulations which your rightfully hail as a watershed accomplishment. (Thanks Gov. Ritter for this and many other reforms you made that you have not received credit for, but will in time as the results become apparent).
But I have a concern about something Hick said in his State of the State Address:
“In the days ahead, I would like to see if we could look at adding a regulatory impact statement to new legislation. Just as we require a fiscal note for every new bill that estimates the costs to state government, we could also include an estimation of the cost to businesses of additional regulations.”
The Republicans couldn’t believe it and roared their approval. What Hick is missing here is that it was the DEREGULATION of the banks and Wall Street since the 1980’s that created the demise of the middle-class and the collapse of the economy we have today.
We, as a state, should also look at the benefits to residents, consumers and workers, along with cost to business, of additional regulations. That would be more balanced.
but as far as O&G goes, we have been asking them to prove their claims about the burden of regulation for years and they never come up with anything.
If something like that happens, I think it would be fair for the state or the industry to calculate the cost of the damage the lack of regulation will do to the affected stakeholders. How’s that for a fantasy?
Once again, I think Hick lays awake at night thinking about ways to appease his buddies at the Chamber, without losing the hearts of the folks in the Alliance Center. It is a tightrope, to be sure.
They would have to acknowledge–with more than the occasionally reasonable comment–that the impacts of new regulations were/are negligible at most. CO is currently leading its neighboring states, is coming off its third biggest (for permits) year ever.
Much easier to talk in vague and dubious generalities than to provide (for the public) meaningful substance and facts that might suggest your industry should not merely be given its way whenever it wants it; and to continue the extortion–that its ‘promise’ of ‘jobs’ (another thing they cannot quantify, suggesting anywhere from 30,000 to 70,000 to 120,000 jobs depending on which oily is talking when) is hostage–always, to the desire of residents to have potable non-toxic water, breathable air, and safe roads.
Drilling the daylights out of Colorado is not a good strategy for long-term economic well-being in our state. Not only is it trashing our natural capital, which attracts new ‘footloose’ economic activity as well as place-based recreation and amenity-based businesses; but it also puts too many of our economic eggs in a single, dangerous, roller-coaster-like industry.
Over-reliance in notoriously volatile sectors (boom and bust) is the very reason places like GJ and down-valley GarCo are hurting the hardest.
As I am sure you do, CT, that we did the research when the “oily boys” started citing the CERI study and claiming they “supported” 71,000 jobs in Colorado.
It turned out that, even at the height of the boom, the entire O&G sector employed fewer than 10,000 people.
You are absolutely correct about the “boom-bust” cycle. Garfield and Mesa counties are hurting because of the unchecked development during 2002 to 2008 . Without the “Boom”…there would have been no “Bust”.
I can’t even see Grand Mesa from my kitchen window.
I’ve lived here 35 years and seen a lot of inversions, but it had never been this bad.
I’m very ambivalent about growth–I realize I can’t be the last person to move here from New Jersey and then shut the gate behind me, nor do I want to be.
But I really feel we’ve sold our souls to the devil here in Mesa County.
look at the Chamber of Commerce, Club 20, our county commissioners, you know…all the people who run things around here, and it is easy to see that the O&G business controls our governments, the business community, and the message machine.
I came here 38 yrs. ago, Ralphie, and I, too, can never recall inversions as bad as the last two years. These valleys just don’t ventilate well enough to handle all this air pollution.
You will remember the conversations this community had about “clean” development about the time we lured Sunstrand and Dixon Industries to town (late seventies, wasn’t it?). I am not sure Halliburton qualifies for that designation.
The reporting was in the January 15, 2011 edition of the Pueblo Chieftan.
Well at least through the pen of cartoonist Kenny Be of Westword, a longtime observer of our brand-spankin’-new governor, that is.
Realizing that not everybody on ColoradoPols gets to see Denver’s alt-weekly Westword, here are a couple of recent online postings. I most heartily suggest scrolling through the panels:
http://www.westword.com/slides…
http://blogs.westword.com/late…
I am concerned that the Governor is willing to “sell out” what makes Colorado great for the sake of a few jobs and keeping the oil and gas people happy.
Unfortunately, Colorado environmental groups are usually happy with “half a loaf” from our Governors and may not hold his feet to the fire.
The balance between getting what you want and getting what you can get is an eternal conundrum. There is a point on a curve of diminishing returns where the prudent will see that further fighting is counterproductive and it is time to solidify your gains.
That said, I have a tendency, I think, to expect more from our leaders than some. If and when I hear our governor make strong definitive statements and I see some actions on his part, that might convince me that his recent public iterations were just rhetoric. Until then, I will withhold judgement. Perhaps the most telling decision on the horizon will be his COGCC appointments.
Anybody here think that Hick is really going to go out of his way to challenge the Ritter Rules on oil/gas? What does he have to gain by doing something so drastic as an overhaul? He may make some tweaks, but the meat of the new regulations will remain simply because it is not politically tenable to do anything more.
Nice article though. Heartfelt and all. Try not to complain too much when Hick throws the gas industry a bone and makes cosmetic changes.