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
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
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
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
February 13, 2007 06:00 PM UTC
16 Comments
Once this issue settles down, then I wonder if the state will consider Hefley’s ideas about public financing of the elections?
As it is, the money that is spent on a campaign is ridiculous. A set amount for all candidates would make sense if we want politics to be honest.
What is Joel’s idea? I haven’t seen that yet.
public financing of the elections?
Yeah Right, like anyone will go for that. The races in Colorado cost way to much money to provide public financing for the elections.
Yes, they are out of line. That is why public financing is needed to cap this. Every candidate can only spend so much and it ALL comes from public funds.
The interesting thing about it is that it will let us know who is capable of doing good management. If you can not spend a limited amount of money wisely, then why should you be elected? I am willing to overlook the public money being spent if it means that we will have honest and good candidates. These days (or maybe always), candidates just buy the elections due to our ignorance. We need to stop that.
their oft stated reason for their gifts is to merely support the democratic process, let them throw their money into the publicly funded campaign coffers.
What? Oh……..
The public would never support their tax money going to political ads and the Supreme Court would rule it unconstitutional.
I have yet to see a poll that supports what you say concerning the public support, yet, I see politicians everywhere saying that.
Why would SCOTUS rule that unconstitutional?
Contributions to political campaigns fall under the heading of freedom of speech.
If you allow them to refuse the free money and then raise it on their own.
are all the chicken littles in the media (online and print) who claimed the sky is falling because of Admendment 41, but even that will be forgotten pretty quickly. The truth is this 41 is more symbolic then anything elese it really wont change or effect many people’s life.
The rhetoric is not going to stop. The GOP has nothing else except scare tactics.
They are intellectually bankrupt
From where I sit, it is mostly Dems who are fighting this and trying to get thrown out. I was fully expecting it to be Owens et.al, but somebody pointed it that they have been doing NOTHING with it. Of course, the fact that they are keeping quiet and not supporting it, says that they are allowing a rope to be made and knotted. And I would say that some dems are helping them on it.
This will not blow over any time soon. The fact this needed a ‘fix’ doesn’t bode well for Polis. This is a big anchor around his neck. This is a very big deal and the ill feelings and anger will last for a long time.
“Employees of cities or counties that have their own ethics guidelines are exempt from the law.”
Can someone clarify? Wouldn’t this provide a relatively easy out for city/county employees?
Denver for example, a home rule city/county, already has an ethics commission, so Denver city/county employees are held to the Denver standard.
One way for local governments to ‘get around’ A-41 would be for them to adopt said ethics guidelines as a means of clarifying the intent themselves.