U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) David Seligman
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) J. Danielson
(R) Sheri Davis
50%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
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) Trisha Calvarese
(D) Eileen Laubacher
90%
20%
20%
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%
January 10, 2008 04:04 PM UTC
58 Comments
He’s obviously right-wing as all get-out and a friend of Tom Tancredo’s, but wondering if there’s anything else the voters in his district should know in choosing between him and the other Republicans in the race. (I’d say Democrats too but they don’t yet stand a chance in the 6th CD.)
The voters only need to see the record of Ted Harvey to understand who Ted Harvey is.
Ted Harvey is a real American.
He’s got a truly conservative voting record that the people of CO-6 will respond too.
with all of us fake americans running around these days I take deep comfort in knowing there is at least one real american out there – and that man is Ted Harvey.
misguided maybe, but still a real American.
You’ve got to have respect for a person who stands up for what he/she believes and doesn’t back down just because public opinion at the time is against your beliefs. You put John McCain or Hillary Clinton in front of me and ask who I respect more; I will pick Hillary every time. I don’t agree with her on most issues but at least she pretty much stands her ground compared to McCain who changes daily depending on the polls.
Ted Harvey, love him or hate him, stands behind what he believes and has strong enough character not to sway just because it might get him more votes. I think we need more of that in Washington on both sides of the aisle.
that sounds quite a bit like Rush Limbaugh’s “phony souldier” comment a few months ago.
a Ted Harvey Day. A day for real Americans , like Ted Harvey, to celebrate their real-ness.
Vote for Ted Harvey – he’s real (TM).
is prone to cheap political stunts to draw attention to his far-right ideology. Should be interesting to see what he does in the primary. Don’t be shocked to see photos of bloody fetuses. Seriously.
what cheap political stunts has Ted Harvey done to draw attention to his beliefs? Please don’t tell me you are referring to Ted’s introduction of Gianna Jessen, an abortion survivor, to the House floor on the same day that Majority Leader Alice Madden was introducing a Resolution to honor Planned Parenthood in Colorado. If my memory serves me right, Gianna who has cerebral palsy sang a couple songs including the National Anthem and she then told her personal story. Ted just humanized the issue that they were attempting to celebrate. I would say that he was keeping everything fair & balanced.
It is the start of the legislative session. The objective of the session seems to be for every Colorado legislator to find 5 things wrong with Colorado statutes and to propose legislation that fixes those problems.
I realize that I’m probably the only one on this blog wonky enough to look at the bills pending before the General Assembly. But, if you’re curious, here’s the link:
http://www.leg.state.co.us/
The ones that caught my eye, mostly with a reaction of “Huh? Why do we need laws here? or “Why does this matter?” were (I’m sure there will be more as the session progresses):
HB 1086 — Fees on Hotel In-Room Movies
HB 1096 — Hunting Confined Animals
HB 1103 — Amusement Ride Regulation
HB 1105 — Art Gallery Liquor Licenses
SB 6 — Suspend Medicaid for Incarcerated Persons (how does one get Medicaid if one is in prison?)
SB 24 — Event Ticket Resale
SB 26 — Cigarette Ignition Propensity Threshhold Regulation
those artsy types (guilt) sure abuse the free coupla glasses of wine at openings.
“Please stop me before I enjoy art again!”
And, why, yes, I HAVE noticed a few cigarettes igniting spontaneously…..
But I haven’t been that motivated this year, until you just brought it up.
This one sounds a bit odd:
HB 1042 — Animal Massage Therapy Exemption
We get laughed at enough as it is…
It exempts folks who have a degree in animal massage from being regulated as vets. I’m clueless why such folks would be confused with vets in the first place and why legislation giving them an exemption is necessary.
Actually this one became an issue this year because the police started not letting people give away wine and beer at art openings. Never was an issue in the last 25 years (I used to be a member of an art CO-OP that had a gallery–Viva Revolutiones), but the DPD went and made it an issue.
Some pinko lefty Dem wants to embarrass our esteemed Vice President
by requiring some sort of public notice
anytime he visits Colorado to hunt deer in a petting zoo.
This bill would even require that news stories of the “confined hunting” address whether or not his quarry was in shackles or tethered to a stake in the ground.
Pure class envy, nothing more.
It is interesting to see how legisltors decide on their ficve bills. Some have ideas and cater their bills to forward their beliefs. Others allow constituents dictate what bills they run and some legislators don’t run the five they have.
The bills you listed are mostly good ones.
1086 raises money for a child abuse fund by adding a $1.00 onto the movies or games you order in the hotel room. Comes about because of TABOR.
1096 is a bill brought by the US Humane Society. It asks that all guided hunting on fenced private land be eliminated.
SB24 is in response to the piss poor way the Rockies tix were sold (I think).
SB26 is a good one, but wierd. Requiring all smokes in CO to be of the kind that goes out after sitting, instead of burning all the way.
Someone below mentioned SB 6, one of the bills that makes the most sense so far.
HB 1103 is probably in response to the Tower of Doom episode where a girl lost her feet on the amusement ride last summer.
There’s some other strange ones to bring up…but there’s time later…
How legislators pick their bills is a mystery to me. I’ve chatted with my legislators, but recommendations as to legislation seem to fall on deaf ears.
You’d think that more critical issues would percolate to the top of our legislators’ agendas given the 5 bill and two term limits,
It sounds like the legislature has figured out a way to raise money through people viewing X-rated adult movies.
Of course, child abuse investigations do need to be funded. No argument, there.
You’re right. Fees exempt from TABOR are popular because they don’t require a vote. Every year we see these but I must admit, this is a creative one.
Maybe a door fee at Kitty’s will be next to help fund domestic violence.
I’m wondering how popular the movies are in hotels. Not just they X rated ones, but the new releases and games. Wonder if they’ll be able to raise the money they need…
This is from a 2002 Cincinatti Enquirer article:
http://www.enquirer.com/editio…
Even Mitt Romney has come under fire due to it:
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/188…
http://www.boston.com/news/nat…
Very interesting.
At around $10 a pop, movies in hotel rooms seem like a luxury to me. But than again I remember movies that cost a quarter at my local movie theater years ago.
———————–
Fact sheet for HB 1086
Hotel room – $90.00
Room service – $35.00
Minibar – $40.00
Porn on the TV – $10.00
Romantic evening with your loved one…
Priceless.
When I was a lawyer for Verizon, I came to view my job to be the in-house curmudgeon. A similar position seems needed at the legislature.
One day the marketing guys in my division — who were not meeting their revenue quotas — came up to me with a research question “Can you prepare a summary of European pornography laws?”
“Why?” (I learned to ask that question A LOT with the sales guys.)
Seems they were arranging a partnership where we would sell pay-per-view movies in hotels outside the United States. Most of the money made from such things, is, in fact, from the purchase of porno films, and the sales guys wanted to be sure they did not run afoul of pornography laws in France, Germany or the UK where they planned to sell this “service.”
My reaction was “Stop. This is not our mission. It’s not telecom. I don’t care whether it helps you make your reveue quota. You are not doing this.”
The same thing seems to apply here.
Taxing in-room, X-rated films to fund a child abuse program seems utterly off mission and outside the proper scope of government. Sure the program may be legitimate, but this is not what government should be about. What’s next? I’m sure the state of Colorado could raise more money by making its own X-rated videos and getting into the pay-per-view market as a competitor.
It seems to me that a more straightforward approach is that the legislator proposing HB 1096 ought to make a stand-up proposal to fund the child abuse program, if it requires a tax increase, then put it on the ballot for the voters to consider. If it’s a worthwhile program, the voters will approve it. If the voters do not approve it, then it’s not a worthwhile program.
that he wouldn’t vote for a bill, in this case more funding for bioscience research in the state, because of where the funding came from – limited gaming revenue.
Policy makers are forced to find alternate funding for bills, other than general fund funding, just because there isn’t enough after everything is disbursed.
Bioscience could be a great economic driver for rural Coloradans – no money.
Affordable housing in this state is almost nonexistent- no money.
Proven social programs that reduce child abuse/domestic violence/drug addiction/criminal recidivism – no money.
As you know, even worthwhile and proven programs fail in the hands of the voters. Yet, on the other hand, even uber-conservative El Paso county passed two DeBrucing measures in 2004(?), so you may be right – if the program is meritted and worthy, voters will approve it.
Then again, if the opposition is well funded, an election isn’t necessarily the best litmus test either.
To circle back – it is frustrating to have to pay as you go when other ares of the budget (cough, prisons, cough) continue to grow annually, but policy will continue to be formed and funded in this manner until we do something about the constraints in our Constitution.
When I hear of programs that are alleged to be beneficial (like a child abuse prevention program or a biosciences program, etc), but legislators who concede that they cannot get voter support for funding the program, I’m suspicious of the alleged benefits of the program.
Funding a program with a revenue stream that’s unrelated to the program is akin to saying “I can’t get voter support for my pet program, but I’m going to enact it anyway with fees I get from a segment of the economy nobody cares about (e.g., gaming, X-rated movies, etc.).”
IMHO it’s not about budget mechanics, but it’s just not honest government.
Anyone watching? I’m trying to…but as soon as I start throwing things at the TV, I’ll have to stop. That may not take long… 😛
P.S. Anyone else notice that Brit Hume only seems to own about 5 shirts and 5 ties. I don’t know why that bugs me. I should really watch less TV…or at least never watch FNC again…
It could be the same Republican debate shown over and over – how do we know it’s new? Each time it always seems to be the same questions with the same reponses given by each candidate. Exceedingly boring (and frankly the repetitive Dem debates aren’t much better).
Though I do enjoy getting to see which candidate will attack Romney the most. And Fred Thompson going on the offensive against Huck was interesting too…
Details here – DailyKOS has come out in support of Mitt Romney in Michigan. If I lived there I would vote for him…
But whenever I see what seems to be a good idea coming from Kos, it’s actually an incredibly bad idea in disguise…
Frankly, we on the Dem side have our own complicated problem to figure out. Maybe we don’t want a long, drawn-out primary on the Repub side. Yes, it would mean they would have to spend all their money winning the nomination; but it would also mean that there would be absolutely no news other than the Clinton-Obama slugfest we’re likely to end up with as primary season drags on. That, very likely, would turn off many of the Indys Dems need to win in November.
Hopefully I’m wrong…but Karma is a bitch and screwing around with another party’s primary could really come back to bite Dems more than we realize…
I just made the mistake of writing this as my girlfriend was complaining about…uh…something.
The point about Karma I’ll stick by. The drawn-out primary point makes absolutely no sense. I would clarify what I meant; but I really don’t remember what my point was. It’s time to go to sleep before I make anymore irrational and incoherent observations. 😛
but they’re so worth it.
Strange, vague memories…..
A chicken in every pot, and girlfriends for everyone (except for those who want boyfriends)!
….we can all watch X rated movies at the Marriott!
This bill is actually a pretty good idea. Many states suspend medicaid for prisoners and jail inmates – when the sentence is relatively short, say 60 days or so. Losing medicaid outright just means the inmate, when released, will have no recourse to the two to three month recertification period for medicaid – no meds to keep them functioning. By just suspending medicaid instead of revoking it these folks can go right back to getting their meds when they’re released – its cost-savings in the end.