U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Michael Bennet
50%
50%
50%
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) Brian Mason
60%↑
30%↑
20%↓
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
45%↓
40%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 08, 2023 08:04 AM UTC
8 Comments
I don't completely feel sorry for anyone, but the legislature worked a lot of hours over the weekend, and they've got a sh*t-ton of stuff to try getting done before midnight. It's hard to imagine mistakes won't be made thanks to last-minute haste.
Some worthwhile bills are going to die while some worthless ones will be signed into law. A mixed bag session, in my view
So I just saw suggestion from Colorado Sun that legislature should have full time sessions. Seems like at least longer sessions would reduce the deadline craziness. OTOH we all know the saying about your life and property are not safe as long as the legislature is in session. What do Polsters think?
Making the session longer, or perpetual, as some states do would just encourage more nonsense from jokers like Scott (there is no) Bottoms. Giving them a hard deadline ensures that, at least, the must-pass items such as the Long Bill get done.
I've actually seen more bill ideas and informal thoughts to SHORTEN the session than to lengthen it. For legislators who live far from Denver, a full-time session would probably be a major problem. But the last weeks of session always seem ridiculously crammed to me, so it makes me wonder if it needs to be like it is now.
I would guess some things need to be done by a certain time every year, like the budget, but also bills that would put something on the November ballots. But I don't think it would matter for most bills whether they would pass in May or August.
Some of the problems with logjams at the end of session can probably also be blamed on calendar management or proposing huge bills too late in session. If I was king of the world, as far as I know I'd be down for letting more bills that are still legitimately debatable die for the year, to be taken up again in the next session.
First they came for your coal power. Then they came for your incandescent lights, shower heads and toilets. Then they declared war on your rural economies. Then your gas stoves. Then your banks.
You know what BoBo isn't going to be talking about in a month? Bank failures. (hint: she's moved on to Title 42)
Gaslighting of biblical proportion.
The physical embodiment of zero integrity.