February 05, 2009 10:50 PM UTC

Colorado to Get Them A Slice of Lobbyist?

•  
• by: Haners

That’s right folks, due to the relative youth of our Congressional delegation, the Colorado legislature is considering hiring a lobbyist to be an extra voice for the state in Washington D.C.

“My fear is that, because of our lack of seniority, it will make it harder for us to get our fair share of legislation,” McFadyen said.

Fair share of legislation, Rep. McFadyen?  Can we get some bureaucratic translation there, please?

Translation:  “Pork”

Sen. Shawn Mitchell offered something in the way of opposition, saying that he hopes the state will resist.

“If it’s necessary, it’s a necessary evil,” Mitchell said. “It probably acknowledges some of the twisted reality in Washington. But working that system probably makes the system worse overall, even if it gets Colorado a few more bucks.”

More after the fold

The story does have a point though as Colorado’s Congressional delegation is on the young side.  Out of the nine people we send to Washington D.C., five are in their first term in their respective chambers.

But doesn’t our delegation also have a lot of sway in Salazar I & II, DeGette (ok, maybe not), Perlmutter and Polis?  

So here is what I’m wondering:

1)  Do you think that it is a wise use of money for the state to hire a lobbyist?  If so, how long would we need one?

2)  Could this issue backfire on…well, anyone who votes for it.  Imagine the commercial:  “At a time when lobbyists are the problem, Representative X voted to send another one to Washington during the worst budget crisis in recent memory.  You’re job might be in jeapordy, but Representative X is looking out for their lobbyist pals.  Vote against Rep. X on Tuesday.”

http://www.denverpost.com/legi…

 Loading ...