U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
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*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
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) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
August 13, 2011 01:22 AM UTC
51 Comments
And probably already occurring in other forums. (Not that I’m going to waste any time to confirm that.)
What’s not to like? Suburbanites love discount coupons.
A comment I saw elsewhere – “Someone should rush to Dan Caplis and Mike Rosen’s homes to hide the sharp objects.” Thought it was accurate. Rosen was supposed to have the SB president on last week to celebrate the District’s victory but that was cancelled. It is not over, I am afraid, and it will continue to divide a very successful school district.
Either the tax payers are bearing it, adding to the administrative overhead of the district while not educating a single student.
or
They are taking money from outside special interests without children int his district who have their own motive and agenda.
Either way, it seems irresponsible.
I understand that there was a defense fund that people could contribute to – but last I heard it had less than $100 in it. I suspect that the lawyers were funded by the same people, the majority of whom did not live in Dougco, who funded the four new board members campaigns (in ’09) to the tune of $100,000+.
And funding that function with tax money is inappropriate?
Next you’re going to tell me water is wet. I will NOT stand for that, I tell you.
See you in the Supreme Court.
Oh wait, that’s only for liberals. Conservatives will sue you six ways to Sunday, then rest, then sue you six more ways.
Is it the taxpayers of Douglas COunty or the Koch Bros?
covered all frivolous conservative lawsuits out of his own fraud-infested pocket.
If you tell me I’m wrong, it will break my newly-converted-to-the-tort-reform-cause heart.
I’ve always wanted to go. Do you think I can get a tour? Maybe an autograph or two?
Are only OK when they agree with you.
See Court, Supreme.
pay for my abortions.
Good one, Irish.
to Madrassas, aren’t all religions equal in this country; or are some more equal?
with 23 private partner schools, most of which are religious institutions, to launch the program.” What was the nature of those contracts, does anyone know?
It’s difficult to make this a complex issue, I think. I would not want taxes I paid to be funneled to a church or a religion. Wrong in every way. And if public schools such as Douglas County’s are increasingly not meeting the needs of students, then districts need to improve the public schools, rather than trying to use taxpayer funds to develop and support a network of religious schools. The Pest has some interesting details about the fact that many parents who wanted to use vouchers for private/religious schools already had their kids in charter schools, or were on the waiting list for a charter school. It’s what you get when people who are not supporters of public schools get elected to a local public school board.
So true.
Supporters of students?
also supports vouchers.
When you have dysfunctional systems and as an alternative offer vouchers that cover full costs to schools that accept all students, then it can be an improvement over the status quo. (Note that DougCo does not fit any of those criteria.)
has real school choice. You may not get in to your first choice (we didn’t), but there are other alternatives.
Vouchers are a way to steal money from public schools – plain and simple. And the students who go there will be worse off, no matter how bad the place may be now.
That’s not “student support.” It’s only student support if it’s for all students, not just yours.
So a republican radio host can promote one slate of candidates in a school board election on his public airwaves radio show, Jason.
I would agree with “supporters of students” however this Board has shown very little regard for the majority of the students in the county. They were elected with a political objective in mind and not necessarily to improve the quality of the children’s education. The quality of education in DCSD has been quite good for over 20 years.
Sorry, new here just learning how posting works.
On a popular thread, it becomes a pile on and the response to your comment might be twenty comments down.
I will do my best not to intervene.
Welcome.
whose parents can afford to make up the mainly very large difference and who are lucky enough to win a lottery “support students”? It’s not that these are low performing schools and the voucher provides a chance for a decent education. These are higher performing schools and the voucher is to allow parent’s who would prefer private religious school a discount as a …wait for it righties… entitlement program!
It’s affirmative action for the affluent. Outside of a theoretic place or two, lower income students, including the modestly middle class, couldn’t afford these schools even with the voucher.
In 2008, the Tenth Circuit ruled that the state could fund vouchers to private religious schools – except this time it was in higher ed. Colorado Christian University sued the state in 2004 for barring its residents students from receiving the state-funded College Opportunity Fund. The ban came from state law, that said the COF vouchers could not be used for “pervasively sectarian” purposes, which was interpreted to mean going to schools where attending religious training was required. However, the appeals court saw otherwise and ruled the voucher program unconstitutional.
https://www.cu.edu/sg/messages…
the decision about COF and CCU had to do with the definition of “pervasively sectarian” and the fact that COF was already being offered to students of other religious institutions.
What we’re dealing with today is how the Douglas County voucher system is affected by the Colorado Constitution.
It’s not quite apples to oranges, but almost.
so therefore it doesn’t mean anything as a precedent for policies proposed by Republicans.
What a shitty court system we have. It’s all just made up at the whim of moron lawyers who don’t give a fuck about precedent.
Really, a term limited congress elected via educated populous is the way to go when compared to the options such as flawed black robes or citizens’ initiative. Certainly checks and balances are a required component of a properly functioning congress; however they must never become the first resource.
How can we get Congress to do their job? (Congress refers to any elected group with consensual governing powers.)
Define
Being governed by lawyers and judges or being governed by elected officials. If you have no idea what I am talking about, that is your problem.
the US Constitution, as an equal branch of government.
You wrote some kind of gobble goup and I asked you to define your terms, which you evidently cannot do, because you don’t know what you are talking about.
would mean being governed by lobbyists.
BTW, failing to provide your own definitions for what dwyer asked demonstrates your inability to answer the question. Not indicative of the high quality of your education, if you ask me.
Like, we’re not already?
I think it would be even more so.
COVA , Colorado Virtual Academy has been a great experience for me and my Kindergarten aged son. The program is online, based out the home however there are many group activities and there is also an assigned teacher who is actively involved. The law is such; anybody can attend this program even if out of district. (COVA is Adams 12 charter school). A little choice, a little competition and a little freedom, I was able to give my son a top notch education. I do believe more of the per pupil spending should have been directed to my bank account rather than Adams-12 because I was near full time teacher for one student.( Dad taught 4 hours per day, mom taught 2 hours per day)
The people behind the anti-voucher movement want all schools to be a brick and mortar, public/union partnership. No home schools, charter schools, private schools, religious schools, online learning or other modern, market driven solutions.
The anti-voucher people want no less than total State control of all education.
But I want it to go to professionals, not Mom and Dad teaching that dinosaurs sailed around with Noah.
to us, then perhaps we can have a conversation. Private schools are fine, but they are private – set their own curriculum, set their own rules, set their own budget, decide who gets admitted, and do not have publicly-elected governing boards.
I think Mark G. might just be the Supreme Gnut
Feelin’ sorry for little Mark
This is easily the most thoughtful and informative post I’ve read from you. I don’t agree with you about the voucher issue because it never plays out in practice in the manner it’s presented, but I do wish you all the best with your son’s education. You’re to be commended for being personally involved in providing your child with the best education possible.
(TWIMC . . . back off, families are not tools for casting aspersions. Although Mark’s posted way, way more than his fair share on nonsense, no one’s family is nonsense.)
and anti-voucher.
My daughter goes to a charter school, and I’m anti-voucher.
Whoa, dude, did your head just explode? Let me give you a minute to clean the gore off your keyboard.
I’m interested in something, Mark, so let’s see if you can explain it to me. Cons like you are known for being against “government handouts,” at least when it comes to unemployment, food stamps, and Medicaid. BUT… you support a program of government handouts to send children to private schools they can’t otherwise afford.
To me, that’s logically inconsistent. Can you demonstrate how it is not?
As a parent this involved in your child’s education, your child is probably going to be pretty successful, no matter where he goes to school. Parent involvement, I think, is much more important than almost anything else, including whether it’s a charter, public, home or private school and maybe even what the teachers are like.
Wow, hopefully even the Colorado Court of Appeals can’t screw this one up even if they try. We have, sadly, one of the worst appellate courts systems in the country. Cross your fingers, boys and girls, that they uphold Judge Martinez, who has never been confused with being a legal scholar.
I’m all for parents having a choice of where their kids go to school — I believe “open enrollment” allows for parents to send their kids to any public school in the district, not just the one closest to them.
This was a ridiculous notion though, and amazing that the voucher advocates thought they could get money for religious schools.
It’s not like DougCo schools are exactly hurting for money anyway — they are still one of the wealthiest in the state I believe, so parents have plenty of well funded schools to choose from. Failing that, it’s a wealthy area — if you want a religious school that teaches that Jesus rode a dinosaur and the earth is a few thousand years old, you can pay for it. I won’t.