U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(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) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

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) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

50%

40%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 03, 2006 05:25 AM UTC

Possible Push Survey Against Amendment 39

  • 21 Comments
  • by: Another skeptic

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

I was just called on Amendment 39 by Western Wats, which said it was doing the research for Topical Research.

Queston 1. Ritter or Beaupreaz. Ritter.
Second question. Amendment 39, which would require schools to spend 65% of revenues on class room teaching. Yes.

Strongly or moderately yes?  Strongly.

Then came a couple of questions that were arguments against 39. After that, I complained that the survey was a push ad and dishonest. They asked if I had kids in school or worked for a school district. No.

End of session.

For or against 39"

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Comments

21 thoughts on “Possible Push Survey Against Amendment 39

  1. It’s a constitutional amendment and we have IIRC an equivalent in a Referendum that isn’t.  It’s too limiting on the items that qualify for the spending cap, and this should be an issue where Republicans clamor for more local control, not more centralized control – I know I do.

    I occasionaly (aka when I get the time) sit on my local school accountability committee; we go over the board’s budget and must approve it before the board can vote on it; teachers, students, parents, and administrators all sit on the accountability committee and the committee is required to be comprised of a majority who are not school employees.  If you don’t trust the parents, residents, and students to oversight – with knowledgable input from school staff – then just who can you trust?  A vague formula?

  2. Are there any people on the committee who don’t have kids in school, won’t and haven’t?

    What is the role of the committee and the board? To allocate available funds to the various school programs in response programmatic lobbying, or to look out for taxpayers” intersts (i.e., miimize taxes?

    Why should kids be on a committee?

    Do you feel that board members have the knowledge, expertise, independence and accountability that allows for good decision making, or not?

    What percent of the budgetary decisions made by the advisory committee and the board meet with your approval?

    How independent of the school administrators are the advisory committee, school board?

    How good are the questions asked by participants, in your educated opinion?

    Why do you think 39 is on the ballot?

    1. “Are there any people on the committee who Are there any people on the committee who don’t have kids in school, won’t and haven’t?t?”

      Not that I’ve had any experience in schools other than when I was a student, but people I’ve known who “don’t have kids in school, won’t and haven’t” are usually cranks who don’t want to pay for schools, period. I guess the social benefit of an educated population isn’t worth whatever they’re paying.

      And this is a shot in the dark, but I bet the committee doesn’t have taxing authority, so there’s probably little they can do about the taxpayer money they get. It’s probaby whatever was collected for the year, and here you go.

    2. Yes, there are several – including myself – who don’t and won’t have kids in school (but still pay school taxes).

      The committee is an advisory body that has oversight and approval duties.  Every school district in Colorado is supposed to have a District Accountability Committee by law; the makeup of those committees varies, as does its state of well-being and independence.

      The responsibility of the committee is to provide accountability to the citizens of the school district – to oversee budget spending, school safety, curriculum, and just about every other aspect of the school.  They provide a preliminary approval of these issues without which the school board cannot proceed.

      I can only speak of the committee on which I reside, but I’ll give you a run-down as best I can:
      * Two AP-level students who are actively involved in sports and academic programs; they provide invaluable insight in to how at least some of the curriculum actually works in the classrooms.
      * A member of the PTA who is the PTA spokesperson.
      * One school principal from the district, to provide insight into administrative considerations.
      * One teacher, to provide the same insight into classroom needs.
      * The curriculum co-ordinator, to interface the school’s curriculum review body to the accountability committee.
      * A number of parents of school children, and a number of adults without any direct ties to the school.  The group is non-partisan in makeup, and consists of people who are obviously from a diverse set of opinions on school management.

      The school board here doesn’t appear to have too close of a tie to the school staff; they are definitely people with experience and a dedicated interest to responsibility, accountability, and quality education.  Some are better than others, but we’re used to dealing with small school budgets up here – we’re still operating largely in a just-post-gambling-legalization mentality.

      I have to say that I haven’t had many problems with the school budget so far; we aren’t spending enough on fire mitigation – the which the board knows – and I’ve been pretty hard on the curriculum folks while they were deciding how to proceed with CBT programs.  But overall, the board is truly trying to make the best of what they have to work with and improving student education at the same time.

      We’re pretty hard on the school staff when asking questions, IMHO; our subcommittees are made up of people who are interested in the various topics, so the knowledge level is pretty high at the initial contact points.  And our chair is pretty blunt to the board when need be, too.  I’d say that not all of the questions are dead-on, but that’s to be expected from any citizen’s advisory committee.

      As to why 39 is on the ballot, I can only reply that it was put on the ballot by the same people who didn’t believe that this state had a fiscal problem and opposed Ref. C last year.  You can take it from there I guess.

      1. I’ve always supported public schools and worried about them even though we don’t and won’t have kids. While I have relatives teaching k-12 who talk obsessivly about schools and teaching, I have no personal experience with public schools as an adult. I do have governnance and committe experience in several other settings, and I worry that school boards are the captives of school administrators and teachers unions.

        And that’s why I support 39.

        Anyway, thanks for your service and your reply.

        1. It’s hard to judge school boards because they’re non-partisan elections.  But we have to my knowledge a Dem who’s very active in education issues but not tied in any way to unions, another Dem who doesn’t want to tie herself too closely to the party, a disaffected Republican who’s a responsible government type, and two others who vote more in line with small government interests – don’t know if they’re GOP or unaffiliated.

          No school administration or union ties in the lot…

    3. I don’t have children in school, and I won’t and I haven’t.

      However, I know it is in my own best interest to make sure we provide ALL children with a superior education.

      I am not so short-sighted, or selfish, to think that my best interests are served by having a few extra dollars in my pocket each year.

      I know that when I hire someone to work in my business, it is better if that person is well educated and does not need extensive (and expensive) training.

      I know that well educated citizens are more likely to make rational decisions on their ballots.

      I know that well educated Coloradans contribute to my community and to the economy.

      I know that high school graduates are less likely to resort to crime. Providing a high school education costs much less than incarcerating a criminal.

      Education is an investment. Not a “cost” that needs to be cut regardless of the consequences.

      And you know what, I think I am typical of most young, educated, childless people. If I was on the advisory committee I would look out for the “taxpayer’s interest” by making sure that educational quality was the goal, not irresponsible cuts.

      Meanwhile, I’ll vote NO on state mandated spending formulas.

  3. is betraying our troops. One of the critical services that schools In Colorado Springs providea is counseling for children in the schools. At least one board member of a school district serving Fort Carson children has complained that the counselors they provide for children whose parents are in Iraq are not in the 65%. So it is likely they would have to remove these expenses – dropping services to children who need them because their parents are SERVING OUR COUNTRY. Make any argument you want for Amendment 39 but until you take that one away I do not know how anyone supporting the welfare of the troops – as opposed to supporting an inate distaste for government – can vote for Amemdment 39.

    1. Why should local taxpayers bear the burden of counseling children of our military?

      Why shouldn’t that be funded by the feds or by charities?

      Why don’t foundations and charities provide that kind of support for military families?

      1. The DoD does provide a limited amount of funding for couseling for dependants of military personnel. These funds are are passed through the state so would be affecte by both Amend. 39 & Ref. J.

        But both Amend. 39 and Ref. J would limit what can be spent on what so that funding could be jeopardized.

        Reason #154 why both are a bad idea.

  4. So what should the sleuthy voter do when he receives a push-poll?  How does one track down the Caller ID information when the number is often masked in a phone bank?  Will a pollster reveal information about his agency if pressed?

    1. The call sounded suspicious to me because the caller was poorly trained, and I could hardly understand his mumbling.

      So I asked for his web address. He called his supervisor who gave me the web site. It looked legit, so I said I’d answer the questions, because I was curioius.
      I usually answer polls unless I think somebody is trying to find out how I’ll vote for a candidate or party. And I do get those calls, too.

      As soon as I heard the push questions, I became suspicious and a bit irritated with the unethical call. I could have let it play out to hear the whole pitch, but I essentially cut it off.

      It’s easy to detect poorly  written and dishonest questions, because they reflect a huge bias one way or another. If I’m interested in an issue, I’ll play along to learn something. If not, I thank them for the call and hang up.

  5. From the description of the poll, it sounds like a pretty standard polling method, not a push poll.  The whole point of polling, from a campaign perspective, is to figure out which messages work the best, and which messages don’t resonate.  That’s why you ask questions the way it sounds like these questions were asked.

    That’s not a push poll.  A push poll doesn’t care about what the responses are — it uses usually scandalous information to raise questions about the subject of the poll.  Indeed, a push poll is not a poll at all, but another method of robo-calling. 

    What you’ve described here is a pretty basic poll, and I’m rather surprised that the Dead Governors have elevated the post to the front page.

    1. A push-poll could in fact have been exactly what this was, but the poster hung up before listening to the rest of the poll to find out.

      Polls which only test negative and misleading questions are push-polls in my book.

    2. Sorry if I wasn’t clear. Thanks for describing a push poll. This survey is exactly what you describe as a push poll. It laid out the dangers of 39 in the questions I reported on.

      Thanks for helping me clarify and show how dishonest the opponents of 39 are willing to be.

      1. The whole point of a poll (except for media polls, whose purpose is to merely guauge the status of the electorate) is to test messages.  Obviously, the con-39 folks were testing messages — messages that you didn’t like.  But that DOES NOT make it a push poll!!!!

        I am still amazed at how incredibly naive folks are on this site about polling.

        1. This poll was done by a reputable pollster (Topical Research isn’t their normal name).  Western Watts is a major interviewing company that many polling firms use.

          You can call it a push poll just because you didn’t like the questions, but there is a clear ethical standard out there, and this does not violate that standard.  Asking negative message questions in a poll is standard political research.  There is no ethical requirement that the survey be balanced.

          You can call it a push poll if you want, but it wasn’t unethical.

            1. Most of these outfits ask a wide range of questions on both sides of the aisle.

              I don’t appreciate these surveys because they’re essentially polling to find out which of the negative messages polls most strongly, so they can use it (or counter it) most effectively.

              They essentially want to know how to advertise negatively, and I don’t like them any more than you do.

              But you didn’t stay on the line long enough to find out if it was a real push-poll.

  6. unless you enjoy getting these calls. I have 2 numbers – one listed and used by my tenant in-laws, and an unlisted VoIP number that’s my primary. The one in my name got on somebody’s list so that one gets the occassional Trailhead robocall (negative anti-Ritter attack calls and positive ones for the local Repub house and senate candidates).

    I’d rather spend time with my family, watch TV, or zone out than talk to unsolicited pollsters, but that’s just where I’m coming from. Although, since I’m unaffiliated, it would be fun to skew some of those polls toward the Dems…

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

176 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!