President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
April 29, 2011 02:08 AM UTC
39 Comments
FOX 31’s Eli Stokols 
I know I ought to be more concerned with the whole big picture thing but seeing Littleton in D1 after all my years here, especially the ones with Tancredo and Coffman, just feels so good. Better enjoy the glow now. Probably won’t last.
You mean I’ve been thrown into the same district as — deep breath — Littleton? Please, don’t take my chastity, too.
P.S. Welcome to the land of real “community interest” identity confusion.
Western Slope still divided.
GJ and Boulder in the same district is just ridiculous. It doesn’t look like Rollie fixed that little snafu.
You know, higher taxes.
We’re just arguing about how much to divide in every map on the table.
If there’s a “Amicus” brief filed against Heath’s plan when it goes to the Supreme Court, I’ll sign on.
“Community interest” speaking, that is. Except in its perenniel opposition to the Eastern Slope (Read: Denver [or Boulder]).
The only thing better (geopoliticopsychologically [Ok, there’s no such word, and it doesn’t have a fucking thing to do with congressional redistricting but a hell of a lot to do with better governance for Colorado on the national scene.] speaking) would be the break-up of CD1. We (here and in the various parts of the Western Slope) really need to start thrashing out our national stance, by way of our Congressional representation. State geography or population density alone can’t be the overriding concerns. That Continental Divide isn’t what it used to be; nor are Colfax or Broadway.
Ain’t gonna happen though this go-’round. Western Slope will still be a geographical dinosaur district, as will Denver.
Competitive maps do not have to split the western slope in half.
END THREAD
Community Interest maps do not have to keep Western Slope intact.
Is that on district only include places where water flows West. Because the direction that water flows trumps all other considerations.
Why?
Because some living in the West Slope said so.
Look people, times change. Demographics change. And while water matters there, and throughout the state, it does not trump everything else.
That’s about it David.
That’s the issue.
Glad you finally got one right. Except for the last paragraph, of course. Although times change, drainage basins don’t.
what would the map look like if insteadf of “city integrity” we had drainage basin integrity?
Or extraction integrity?
Or military faccilities integrity?
100 years ago there would have been a strong argument for districts following rail lines, because that is what tied communities together. And that is how farmers and ranchers shipped their goods out.
But it would be ludicrous to use that guideline today.
But that was regarded as loser talk. “Rain follows the plow” was the mantra of the day.
When the Treaty was being negotiated, we (USA) were supposed to get the Colorado river basin – all the way to the Gulf. It made a lot of sense. Of course we were supposed to get the Baja too.
It makes today’s travel there much less expensive and much more interesting. No snark.
Interesting idea, but so much water is shipped east of the divide anymore that it’s unclear how you would draw the map. Water from as far east as the Roaring Fork waters Denver bluegrass. So any map that unites exporters of water with consumers of water would span the continental divide.
So what arrangement of district would work best for west slope water interests? Is it better to divide congressional districts at the continental divide – and pit wealthy urban districts against rural districts? Would a Front Range greenie actually help the west slope more than a oily GJ Republican? My impression is that the latter will sell you guys down the river (so to speak) in a heartbeat. Meanwhile, most of the arguments against diverting more water hinge on environmental grounds.
West Slopers just have this thang. I’m one (willingly estranged), and I know. You’ve seen the T-shirts that say “It’s a black thang“? There should be one, “It’s a Western Slope thang.” You have to be an insider or married to one to get the real significance.
David, I’d say the thang is, “Boulder” is just a defensive dog whistle. Like “Front Range”. Or “Metropolitan Denver”, as in “bordering on”. We have to understand: Mesa County, especially, has had a very painful recent history of boom/bust and bust/bust. It’s almost been Cinderella at the ball many times (uranium, shale oil), or it’s been ignored (glitzy Telluride/Aspen gentrification). Mesa County needs Western Slope Unity more than any eventual Western Slope district needs Mesa County.
That said, if water is the overriding interest, the question arises: Why the preference for buddying the Colorado drainage with the Rio Grande drainage and the Arkansas drainage over the Platte Drainage? Is it just a Western Slope thang?
Whatever the final map, no state court will ever allow more than two safe districts in Colorado.
It means two representatives would have to pay attention to Western slope issues. That raises the influence of the West, especially if the districts are moderately competitive. In other words, Jared Polis (for example) would not be elected without some percentage of support from the Western slope, so he has to pay attention to Western slope issues..
I think that is the value of competitive districts; NOT the idea that it would benefit moderates, rather that it would benefit candidates with good constituent service who can’t write off segments of the electorate.
Also, note that Grand Junction has been growing faster than Boulder, so it will be interesting to see the trends over the next 10 years.
It just might be the kind of shotgun wedding that brings the two sides of the Divide closer.
Boulder and GJ have “common interest”? Five military bases in Colorado Springs and Highlands Ranch?
The housing proximity to Denver for our Congressmen/woman is another slap in the face.
District court.
It ignores nearly every request made by the people who testified in all of those public hearings held across the state:
Larimer is split.
Broomfield is separated from Boulder.
Jeffco remans split up
DougCo is split into 3 CDs
El Paso is split into 2 CDs
ArapCo is split into 3 CDs
The traditional Western Slope is split
Ditto for the Eastern Plains.
Greenwood Village in CD1.
The only requests they honored was keeping Longmont separate from Boulder and separating Chaffe County from El Paso, although I doubt they thought they would be lumped with Boulder in teh process.
Dan – it looks like you only went to one of the ten meetings held around the State. If you want to complain about the testimony, I humbly suggest you go to the Redistricting website and listen to the 40 hours that the Joint Select Committee heard.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Sat…
If you listen to all of the testimony, you hear quite a few competing interests. The only thing that is consistent, is a desire for more competitive districts.
Do not divide up cities and counties and specific communities.
And I actually have listened to all of the testimony.
So the Dems’ maps are the only maps that don’t split cities and split no rural counties.
Repub. maps split rural counties and a whole bunch of cities.
Both maps split the west slope and both maps split the eastern plains.
On balance, the Dems’ maps do better.
Dan Willis’ maps achieve what everyone says they want to achieve, and do so without tying every district to a population center in the northern Front Range. What’s wrong with that?
I like Dan’s maps.
I hope the Supreme Court gets copies.
It will likely be a district judge, not the Supremes
I know a number of Estes Park residents who are very happy with the proposed Larimer split, and it makes sense from a community of interest standpoint.
Broomfield doesn’t have much in common with Boulder in my experience; why they want to be lumped in with it I don’t know.
The JeffCo split is at least more logical than the current split; putting the mountain sections in CD2 places them with similar interests along the Front Range foothills.
It’s not like this is the only proposed map to split Douglas and Arapahoe – Yours do, too, in fact, and so do the Republicans’.
El Paso split I won’t try to justify other than to say that the map design requires it.
The traditional Western Slope has only been so since the 1980’s. Same with the Eastern Plains. We have in fact had a map not entirely unlike this one in the past.
I’m not saying that these aren’t laudable goals, nor discounting the opinions of those who attended the hearings to express themselves. But neither would I consider them the only valid concerns of people within the various regions, or that those concerns were the only valid concerns allowed in drawing the maps.
This is a waste of time. It might be useful ro spend a few days mocking this affront to democracy, but every page of printed text is a waste of tax dollars.
Unless Sen. Heath has some secret weapon in the House, introducing this bill is just politics.
Whether you like the map or not, the political reality appears to be that this thing ain’t going to the governor’s desk or even to the floor of the House. Is there really something to be gained from the political grandstanding on this? It seems a bit esoteric for that kind of ploy.
I think it’s a lot more far to throw northern Aurora into D-1 than Littleton.
I’m happy that I’d live in a moderate republican district now.
CD-2 amd 3 are really wak though. GJ to Boulder? And the an entire southern district from mountains to plains Utah to Kansas?
This isn’t the worst map…but it doesn’t excite me overall