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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 01, 2007 11:11 PM UTC

Udall Takes Subtle Shot at McInnis

  • 43 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Rocky Mountain News reports:

Rep. Mark Udall fired a warning shot in the 2008 U.S. Senate race on Thursday by co-sponsoring “anti-corruption” legislation that reminds people of a past controversy surrounding one of his potential Republican rivals, former congressman Scott McInnis.
Udall, D-Eldorado Springs, agreed to co-sponsor a bill by Rep. Phil English, R-Pa., to prohibit candidates or their immediate family members from drawing salaries from campaign committees for campaign-related work.

McInnis drew media scrutiny and complaints from Democrats in 2004 and 2005 over the tens of thousands of dollars his campaign has paid his wife, Lori, to work as campaign manager – including after he announced he would leave Congress to become a lobbyist.

Paying family members from campaign accounts is legal as long as the spending is for legitimate campaign work or expenses and it’s at market rates. The practice is relatively common in Congress, and several current or past Colorado lawmakers are among those who have paid family members from campaign accounts.

Still, none of the other Colorado cases comes close to the more than $145,000 that Lori McInnis was paid from 2001 to 2005…

…Udall did not mention McInnis by name in a press release touting the “anti-corruption act” on Thursday, but by highlighting the family-payments practice he signaled an issue that’s sure to resurface if there’s a Udall-McInnis matchup.

“In effect, the 2002 FEC ruling allowing candidates to use campaign funds to pay salaries to themselves or their family members enables them to evade the federal law that prohibits candidates from using campaign funds for personal expenses,” Udall said in a release. “This is a loophole big enough to drive a truckload of money through.”

Comments

43 thoughts on “Udall Takes Subtle Shot at McInnis

  1.   Any word on whether Bob Schaffer will be endorsing this bill by Udall? 
      I would think that the GOP’s integrity candidate would support the concept behind the bill and maybe call some of his former colleagues to urge its passage. 
      Purely on public policy grounds, of course……nothing to do with the GOP Senate nomination fight!

        1. of seeing an internal NRCC poll last December.  Among the conclusions was this: in republican districts, where republicans LOST, the number one reason voters crossed party line was ‘corruption of Congress’. Second was spending. Third, Iraq. 

      1. “Hard Left.”  Compare to who?  Funny, his district which includes a hell of a lot more than Boulder find him comfortable.

        “Environmental Nut.” The Environment is the #1 issue in Colorado in a survey taken of Democratic state party leaders.  CO is the only state that put the environment as #1. 

        Please keep up with the environmental accusations.  They are what the majority of voters want in CO.  MU’s environmental track record reflects the majority of CO’s citizens.

    1. Rubbing elbows with DeLay, sitting on the Ways and Means committee, paying your wife a $40,000 salary with phone, credit cards, meals and more, is a little more than perceived corruption.  The FEC needs to investigate McInnis with a little more…i don’t know…investigating!

      McInnis abused the trust of Coloradoc citizens, like all other DeLay Conservatives (Greedy-Ol-Party), and will not have a pray in winning a Senate race. His chances look about as good as Paschalls chances of winning in CD2!

      Maybe the GOP candidates could start wearing orange as their political color. It looks good on them.

        1. it seems to me ( and I am guessing a few others) like the McWeeny has a lot of baggage. Shaffer is looking pretty good by comparison, and it’s only been a few days.

      1. As a Bronco fan and Schaffer supporter I heartily endorse the wearing of Orange by Republicans this campaign season. And although Go Blue obviously had something else in mind, I think Orange should be made the official color of the Colorado GOP for 2007 and 2008.
        Go Bob Go!

        1. Orange is actually my favorite color.  I’m an avid Broncos fan, I campaigned for the new stadium (using orange colors), and I’m a staunch Protestant.  I also love Holland.

          Orange INDEED!

          How’s this for a slogan: “Orange you glad you voted for Bob?”

          Sorry.  I had to do it.  🙂

          1. So it’s OK to use tax payer funds to pay for a seldom used playground for a rich Canadian?

            But not care for a poor family?

            Oh, the hypocrisy!

            WJVFPB?  Would Jesus Vote for Pat Bolen?

                1. If the voters vote for it, it is reasonable and responsive government.
                  It is your logic that is flawed David. Colorado voters have always been big spenders when it come to education. Ref C was heading for an early grave until Hank Brown got in and made it all about affordable higher education. Higher education could get a real boost if only the same folks who got behind the big blank check of Ref C would propose a “T-Rex for Education”. but it’s not really about funding higher ed, it’s about politicians getting reelected and getting more pork bellies to take home to the districts. Real money for higher ed only pays out to politicians in Denver, Boulder, Larimer, Pueblo and Weld counties (a little for  El Paso, but really the education there is private and Federal… they don’t need our tax cash), so it doesn’t help our friends from Jefferson, Grand, Arapaho and Adams. Oh yeah, they’ll walk from one side of the state to the other when Caldera is calling handicapped kids pigs but REAL funding for higher ed? Why bother? Doesn’t help them build a “rec center” back in the home district.
                  Now that’s education, a topic that Colorado voters will votes for with great pleasure and excitement. I have no clue how you’re working government funded single payer health care in there… That is a topic that, if it is not dead on arrival, it is at least a topic that has not been proven viable by the voters of this state.

                  1. … It may make philosophical sense to put Higher Education with Government Health Care, but the voters of Colorado have not equated the two in past elections.

              1. as long as the defense can play more than two quarters!  The Broncos’ D is a lot like the Republicans D–great until we see a poll or two that spooks us and we go into prevent the rest of the game.  It’s anaemic and it’s why the GOP and the Broncos never hit pay dirt in 2006.

                Fortunately, the Broncos are setting up a whole new defensive package and so is the state GOP.  Maybe you can put holes in Bob Beauprez and Martinez–but Wadhams and Bob Schaffer are much more stout.

                2008 WILL BE THE YEAR OF THE ORANGE CRUSH…

                Republican-style.

          2. If we are just going to throw away tax dollars for the benefit of a few, far better that the recipients be those in need.

            I’ll post it later, but the Cato Institute did a good study about how sports teams don’t really benefit their host cities all that much, so taxpayer funded stadiums and arenas are a losing proposition for the people.

          3. A staunch Protestant? You never fail to find a way to toss some hate into the discussion.  The Orange men in Ireland were Protestants who suppressed the Catholics…the color orange used  in a political way  is anathema among Irish Catholics because of the brutal history it represents.

  2. The biggest ‘scandal’ of the Mark Foley debacle was the Republican leadership refusing to deal with a perv in their midst because they cared only about power.  So thank  Denny Boy and Boner and all the rest.  Then there are Ney, the Dukestir, Delay, Reed, Abramoff, the WH procurement guy, the WH secretary…

    Libby lying through his teeth, Cheney being Cheney, the secret Energy Task Force, Halliburton, Rove

    1. We Republicans are all a bunch of gay pedophiles.  Clearly.  Although the Foley “scandal” was a ridiculously over-hyped media bonanza it pointed to a very important fact of American political society: Democrats=good, chaste Christian law-lovers; Republicans=gay, boy-loving, hedonistic, NAMBLA donors.

      1. Actually, most of the situations that have come to light from both Congress and the Catholic Church – hmmmm, is it coincidence that all start with “C?” – were pederasty.

        But the public doesn’t understand that. Peder-what?

        1. …..whatever happened to Randy Ankeney (that decidedly heterosexual pedophile who was an up-and-coming Republican yuppie who worked for Bill Owens)? 
            Wasn’t he scheduled for trial about two and a half months ago?  Anyone know about the outcome?
            Whether it’s Mark Foley or Randy Ankeney, the GOP truly is the big tent party.  Just don’t leave the kids alone under that tent with these characters.

    1. … Just the members of the Imperial Governor’s circle. The ones who based their campaigns on something more than “We have to keep power or else…” actually did very well.

  3. If Udall keeps coming up with gems like this, he’ll be a very tough candidate to beat.

    There is NO WAY McInnis can counter this in any way, shape or form without coming out looking bad.

    Heck, he can’t even SUPPORT the legislation because he’ll look like a total hypocrite. That $145,000 he paid his wife will cost him millions in unfavorable publicity in ’08 – as well it should.

    Just because it’s technically legal doesn’t make it right, Scott.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

68 readers online now

Newsletter

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