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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 21, 2008 04:26 PM UTC

Thursday Open Thread

  • 43 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Carpe per diem-seize the check.”

–Robin Williams

Tweet
Share

Comments

43 thoughts on “Thursday Open Thread”

  1. So Doug Bruce charges the state the maximum allowable $150 per day even before he’s a legislator…

    I thought a per diem isn’t just some automatic entitlement but you actually have to PROVE – or at least be PREPARED to prove – that you spent $150 on your expenses that particular day. I mean, if it’s just automatic, why not give each legislator $150 x 365 (or whatever) and be done with it?

    I have a hard time believing that Bruce actually spent $150 per day on the people’s business. At a minimum, he should be audited.

    1.    The legislators from Denver get the smallest amount of per diem (i.e., lunch money).  Those in the metro area get a little more (i.e., lunch and dinner money because they presumably make it home each night to sleep in their own beds).  Those outside the metro area have a hard time getting home each night and need a hotel room, hence $150 per diem.

        This is separate from $30,000 per year salary each legislator receives for the regular 120-day session.

        I don’t believe that any receipts must be produced to collect.

      1. If you work a day during the session, or special session, or attend a leg. meeting (like an official interim comm.), leadership can easily claim per diem all year, you get either $99 (or $150 a day depending on where you live.  A day can be either an hour, or 16, and you don’t have to prove anything unless asked.

        I used to work for a legislator that bitched about it all the time.

  2. When Doug Dean was in the House, he not only charged the per diem, but also got reimbursed for expenses on top of that.

    There was a big flap at the time that resulted in a very angry shouting match between Dean and then Senate President Ray Powers (R) Colorado Springs.

    Ray was really upset at Dean because he thought what Dean was doing was very unscrupulous.  Dean blasted Powers for being ‘rich’, since that meant that Ray did not need the per diem or the expense reimbursement.  that really got under Ray’s skin.

    At least Doug didn’t pull out his screwdriver.

    it was quite a circus show.

    1. may be Larry Trujillo, who when serving in the Senate in the early 90s managed to charge multiple per diems for the same day.  During the off-session if he attended more than one committee meeting on the same day at the capitol, he charged per diem for each committee meeting.

    2.    IIRC, didn’t Doug Dean (yet another Doug from El Paso County) also attempt to keep an apartment in Denver year round because he was the Speaker?

        Was there any attempt to get the state to pay for that?  Could B.O. just give him a guest room in Guv’s Mansion?

        1. who out-did who.  Bruce has set himself up for this kind of attention with his knuckle-headed behavior from day one.

          I imagine covering the state legislature can be pretty dull. Having Bruce to cover makes it lots more fun and I’m sure the media is now on constant look-out for amusing new Bruce “gotchas” and why not?  He’s the one who made himself such a tempting target.

      2. didn’t Doug Dean (yet another Doug from El Paso County) also attempt to keep an apartment in Denver year round because he was the Speaker?

        I’m under the impression that it was meant to be a love shack.

      3. keep a place year round.  It was the expenses for this place that he ws billing the state for in addtition to taking the per diem.  the big flap between he and Powers was over the definition of the per diem.

        Dean claimed that it was not for expenses but was in fact daily pay and that he could charge for expenses in addition.

        if that argument has you scratching your head, you are not alone.

        By the way, this was not the house he broke into with the screwdriver.  That was later with his girlfriend who became his wife, after, in the best focus on the family spirit, he deserted his wife and children for the other woman (a lobbyist, by the way apparently in the spirit of John McCain).

        Also of note is that the wife he deserted worked for Focus on the Family.

        As my associates at the capitol like to say, ‘you can’t make this stuff up.’

  5. Williams Q4 Profit Surges 53%

    http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/TOP%20STORY/1121165/

    Thursday morning, Williams Companies Inc., a provider of natural gas, reported a 53% surge in profit for the fourth quarter, helped by strong performances in the company’s midstream, exploration and gas pipeline businesses. The high levels of natural gas liquid margins, continued strong natural gas production growth and the positive effect [i.e. making consumers pay more-pete], of new rates on two pipeline systems were the key factors that contributed to the increase in profit for the quarter.

    … were partially offset by a loss, primarily mark-to-market, of about $166 million related to the sale of certain legacy natural gas contracts associated with the former power business. [aka the Duke Energy and other 2000-01 California energy scandal, price-fixing, Enron-esque market manipulation Williams and several others were popped on a few short years back-pete]

    … Exploration & Production

    Consolidated segment profit for the segment improved to $190 million from $140 million a year ago. On a basis adjusted to remove the effect of nonrecurring items and mark-to-market accounting, recurring consolidated segment profit after mark-to-mark adjustments was $194 million, up from $140 million in the prior-year quarter. For the fourth quarter, the company increased its average daily domestic production 18% over the same period last year. Increased development within the Piceance, Powder River, and Fort Worth basins drove the strong growth in domestic production volumes. In the Piceance Basin of western Colorado- the company’s cornerstone for production and reserves growth – average daily production surged 25% for the fourth quarter.

    … Gas Pipeline

    The segment’s consolidated segment profit surged 58% to $160 million from $101 million in the year-ago period. Recurring consolidated segment profit after mark-to-mark adjustments also increased to $160 million from $101 million a year ago. Increased revenues from new rates on both the Northwest Pipeline and Transco systems and increased earnings from the company’s 50 percent interest in Gulfstream Natural Gas System were the primary drivers of the segment profit increases during 2007. Higher depreciation expenses and operating costs partially offset these benefits.

    1. Everything I’ve read about the Rezko issue is minor right now.  It would have to become a lot worse than it is right now.

      It might help Hillary a little in the short run, though it hasn’t so far.

      It won’t help McCain much, though unless it’s huge.  Mr. Keating Five, reform except when it helps me, double-talk express is not going to get much mileage out of a land deal where the Obamas actually had to bid on the parcel and win.  It has as much long-term validity as the Clintons’ involvement in Whitewater (i.e. none, though a possibly expensive “none”)

  7. Another good substantive debate. It’s good to see these two can sit down and really hammer out the issues (agreeing for the most part) but also shake it up with new issues such as Cuban-American relations.

    I give Hillary an A-

    While debates are her strongest forum, she needed to stop Obama’s momentum (almost praying for a gaffe). Unfortunately for her, I never saw a gaffe that should go jump on. She made excellent policy points, connected with audience, and was very authentic with her concerns.

    I found myself, like I did during the LA debate, cheering on Hillary at moments. For the most part tonight she took the high ground. She made excellent policy points especially on immigration and health care, but I think her best remark was her closing statement.  

    However, the “change by xerox” comment was immediately boo’d (the people are tired of the Mark Penn talking points), and I think she regretted saying it. And when asked about to comment on the “all hat, no cattle” vibe her campaign has been putting out against Obama, she actually attacked Obama’s surrogate who couldn’t name one of his accomplishments on CCN the other night. Maybe she forgot where they were debating, but that surrogate was a Rep. from Texas (not a good idea to insult a host in his house) and the crowd actually hissed.

    She did good, but it wasn’t enough.

    Overall I give Obama an A.

    He did exactly what he needed to do. He deflated all of her attacks, showed his indepth policy knowledge, listed off numerous accomplishments, connected with the people of Texas, made the crowd laugh and cheer throughout the debate, and stayed above the fray. He was prepared, and it showed.

    By laughing off Clinton’s attacks (the Deval and “cultist” ones) while showing his depth of the issues (judgement on foreign policy, green jobs, reinvesting America, and providing Universal HC), tated we need to put aside the politcs of old, and that the Democratic party needs to the challenges before us by enlisting the American people in the process.

    He complimented Hillary on many of her positions showing Democrats are united on our agenda and added to each of her points with “to accomplishment our agenda we need change DC, to combat lobbyist and corruption.” That’s a very strong message for Democrats.

    Obama was also able to give us preview of how he will handle McCain on the economy and foreign policy question. McCain’s judgement is going to be called into question from now until November. Obama has been right on Iraq, right on Pakiston, right on Afghanistan, and he knows what the word “recession” means.

    Both came out of the debate looking great, which isn’t great for Hillary.

    On a personal note. Wouldn’t it be cool if we could see the notes the candidates were making during the debate? Like a Jeopardy podium with dry erase markers.  

    1. I heard John Edwards in Hillary’s closing remarks, and I’m not the only one.

      Clinton Tonight:

      “You know, whatever happens, we’re going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we’ll be able to say the same thing about the American people. And that’s what this election should be about.”

      Edwards the December 13 debate:

      “What’s not at stake are any of us. All of us are going to be just fine no matter what happens in this election. But what’s at stake is whether America is going to be fine.”

      I still think it was excellent closer, but she did “xerox” Edwards line into it.  

      1. Look how the word “change” became du jour the day after the Iowa primary.  I think he pushed the other candidates, but mostly Obama, to the left/populist.  

    2. She didn’t destroy the party.  She took the high road. Thank you Hillary.

      She had a good performance.  If she spoke more often like she did in the last 5 minutes she might have won this election: winning means conecting with the public and the intrepid anecdote was a real connection.

      As an Obama supporter I knew debates were not his format–but the good competition in 19 debates has furned him into a formidable debater.  Thank You Hillary.

      Hillary by making Obama a better debater has given the Democrats the whitehouse.  Thank You Hillary.

      Who won or lost tonight isn’t the point,  Obama has filled in the piece he needed to win in november.

      1. She’s my barometer of how upset the powers that be in Boulder are with my comments. I think she is a high school student who’s parents are politically active in Boulder politics. (And I think she’s getting a C in Language Arts.)

        I actually view it as an affirmation that my blog is having some impact. It’s amazing the number of people up here in “liberal” Boulder who tell people to not read my blog.

    1. I never thought I’d say this but Tom Wiens is actually looking like a leader here.  Where is the Governor?  Where is Tancredo and Lamborn on this issue?  Wiens looks like the only guy who cares that the state is facing an imminent environmental disaster that could greatly affect the livelihood of thousands of people with potential deadly consequences.  

      Thanks Tom for championing this issue.  

      1. Not only was this a pathetic attempt to bash other elected officials, but it was an equally pathetic attempt to make Tom Wiens look like a good politician.

        You ask “Where is the Governor?” When the website links to a story titled Gov. Ritter joins Sen. Wiens in emergency appeal to Bush. But all you did was link Gov. Ritter’s letter to President Bush, adding Wiens name to the title (which should have read Wiens joins Ritter’s emergency appeal to Bush).

        From Governor Ritter’s Office.

        GOV. RITTER URGES PRESIDENT BUSH TO TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION ON LEADVILLE MINE DRAINAGE TUNNEL SITUATION

        Gov. Bill Ritter today urged President Bush to take immediate action concerning the build up of contaminated water from the California Gulch Superfund site in the underground Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel.

        “Your immediate action is needed to assure that we have done all we can to avert a catastrophic event,” Gov. Ritter wrote in a letter to President Bush.

        And part of the leader says:

        The issue is now approaching a crisis stage. Therefore, I am requesting that you immediately request the Secretary of the Interior to direct the Bureau of Reclamation to fully and responsibly engage with state and local efforts to alleviate this potential crisis and take the following steps with the greatest possible urgency:

        * Expedite the drilling of extraction wells into the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel to draw down the mine water pool behind the collapse;

        * Treat the water pumped by these wells at the Bureau’s water treatment plant prior to discharge into the Arkansas River;

        * Construct a bulkhead within the tunnel and backfill the mouth of the tunnel to prevent future blowout events;

        * Reduce the water level within the mine workings until surface seeps that have developed in recent months disappear, and maintain mine water levels to minimize the risk of a future catastrophic blowout; and

        * Review and test all Bureau of Reclamation emergency procedures necessary to protect the health and safety of Lake County residents living in proximity to the tunnel in the event of a blowout.

        I am confident that Colorado’s Congressional delegation would be fully supportive of any and all efforts needed to mobilize the Bureau’s response to this situation. The people of Colorado, and especially the people of Lake County, would be immensely grateful for your immediate intervention. And I stand ready to assist in any way.

        Sincerely,

        Bill Ritter, Jr.

        Governor

        1. Tom Wiens and Senator Allard and the Lake County Commissioners took the action that no other elected official, including Govenor Ritter and Doug Lamborn had the guts to take.  Dragging the EPA, BOR, FEMA and the Colorado Department of Health and Environment into a public meeting before the media was necessary to stop the bickering and finger-pointing and to force action to protect people and the Arkansas River.  

          The reality is that good government is good politics.

    2. I can think of several possibilities but I’m probably missing the real one:

      (1) Tom Wiens is running for something

      (2) The Republicans have finally discovered their true tree-hugging nature

      (3) The Republicans (Allard, Wiens, etc) have a new strategy – get AHEAD of the Dems on environmental issues

      Here’s another question: How come “save the arkansas river” has a website that’s 1,000 times better than the state Republican Party website (which is atrocious)?

      And one more question: Are there any Dem elected officials at the state or national level who would like to explain why the Lake County train has left the station without them?

      1. with the Governor aboard solving problems, and a few Republicans were left back at the station creating a nifty little website to make Wiens “look” good.

      2. I wonder why the EPA and the State Department of Public Health and Environment, which have both had an enormously strong presence in Lake County for the past quarter century, took so long to identify this problem?  They have spent tens of millions of taxpayer and ASARCO money studying to death California Gulch and the Yak tunnel,  and 2 miles away, ignored this almost identical problem.  The two tunnels drain  the same mining district-one drains north, the other south.  Is it perhaps because the Yak was owned by the evil mining industry, and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel is a Bureau of Reclamation Facility?  Is it perhaps because these agencies are populated by idiots accountable to no one.

         

        1. it’s the usual problem – bureaucracies don’t move unless kicked in the knee (or something like that).  I’m glad the spotlight is finally shining on the issue.  The Commissioners and others will need to continue to keep the public’s and press’s attention on this, or things will slip back to where they were – agencies arguing with each other month after month.  It can be very difficult to get state and federal agencies to do what the law seems to imply they are supposed to do – I know from past experience with a serious environmental issue in another part of the state.

  10. http://www.foxnews.com/project…

    very interesting internals.  Very tough headwinds for Mcain against Obama, but this poll was testing themes to use against Obama for the fall.

    On a related not the headline for this story was 1 Out of 3 Americans Approve of Bush’s Job Performance If that isn’t a twisted hadline I don’t know what is.

     

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

122 readers online now

Newsletter

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

Colorado Pols