President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(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
January 22, 2015 11:19 AM UTC

Cory Gardner and Climate Change: What Did You Expect?

  • 12 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Sen. Cory Gardner.
Sen. Cory Gardner.

As FOX 31's Eli Stokols reports:

After campaigning successfully last year as a "different kind of Republican," Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner is under fire from conservationists for voting Wednesday against an amendment stating that humans contribute to climate change, something 69 percent of his constituents believe to be a fact.

Fifteen Senate Republicans, including 2016 presidential contender Sen. Rand Paul, joined Democrats in backing the amendment, but not Gardner…

During a competitive U.S. Senate race last year, Gardner ran a TV ad shot in a wind farm touting himself as a next generation conservative who supports clean energy and an all of the above energy plan; however, during debates, he was reluctant to state a clear position on the role of humans in causing climate change.

"During this fall's campaign, Senator Gardner declared himself to be a different kind of Republican," Maysmith said. "Instead, his vote today shows that he is not yet ready to stand up to those in Washington DC who deny that people play a role in climate change.  He ducked this issue during the campaign and now on the floor of the U.S. Senate." [Pols emphasis]

Sen. Cory Gardner's campaigns have long been heavily funded by the oil and gas industry, and Gardner has consistently returned the favor as a reliable vote for the industry's bottom-line interests. What we're talking about here was a token concession to the scientific consensus that humans are contributing to global climate change–nothing that would have changed any policy, as an amendment to a bill President Barack Obama has already promised to veto to build the Keystone XL pipeline.

The vote took place amidst a flurry of amendments to the Republican bill to build the Keystone XL pipeline and were part of an effort by Senate Democrats to bait Republicans into a number of politically risky votes on the subject of climate change.

Meaning that there was absolutely no reason to vote against it, and if Gardner had voted for it, he could have avoided the negative press that comes with voting against something 69% of his constituents believe. It would have been a significant validator of his campaign slogan, "A New Kind of Republican."

So why didn't he? That's simple–he's not up for election for six years, and there's no need for any of that kind of pretense for at least four or five of those years. On abortion, on immigration, and now climate change, the Cory Gardner you always knew was there is shining pearly-white bright.

Comments

12 thoughts on “Cory Gardner and Climate Change: What Did You Expect?

      1. As an attorney who has lived his entire adult life inside the government machine, he should know that words have meaning.  Now I understand it makes all the angry old white guys want to run to the mens room and play with themselves each time they get to barf up the words 'radical environmentalist', but that word doesn't mean what he thinks it means.  A radical is someone who is trying to change the fundamental nature of something; to be a radical environmentalist, clean energy folks would have to be working against nature.  In reality, it's the junior senator and his oily gang that are the radical environmentalists.  But then, he thinks the Laffer Curve and Trickle Down are real things. I said I'd judge him on his votes and not is rhetoric, thinking they wouldn't be consistent with one another now that he represents folks outside of the 51st state.  Not surprised, but disappointed (naively so).

  1. "The threat is real".  He's not talking about climate change, he's talking about radical environmentalists…or as he might start referring to them as, 'constituents'…or people who understand that clean energy is the real job creator?  

    Kock addiction manifests itself in very odd (and predictable) ways.

     

  2. In truth, this is EXACTLY what Gardner said on the campaign trail: climate change is happening, but we don't know if man is the cause.

    No inconsistency. This is the same Gardner Colorado voted for, sorry if you don't like it Pols.

    1. He won't win twice. His next election is six years away and in a presidential year. He may well only have two years to be part of a GOTP majority. So enjoy while you can.

      1. Cory is probably counting on the Roberts Court to completely remove campaign contribution limits in the next few years, so he only needs one or two contributors, like the Koch Brothers.  

        He's counting the unlimited funds from those two to get him re-elected.  Who needs to worry about constituents after that?

  3. Gardner did not vote against just two amendments that would put the Senate into reality land. No, the man from Yuma voted against four amendments that merely recognized the fact of human influence on the climate, even one sponsored by his GOP colleague from North Dakota.

    I think Gardner's actions this week not only show him to be insincere in his claim to be a "different" sort of Republican. They also show him to be very unlikely to be much of a leader.

    Full rant here.

  4. Anyone who is surprised by this has been in outer space. Corys' spots haven't and are not going to change. If you ever thought so, then you can answer yes on the questionnaire where it says , "have you ever been delusional?".

  5. So Gardner being predictable means we should just sit back and just STFU?  I say NO, call him out as the science-denier Koch sucker he is everytime he does their bidding at the expense of Colorado or the American public.  

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

50 readers online now

Newsletter

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