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%
March 16, 2009 08:56 PM UTC
37 Comments
http://sev.prnewswire.com/bank…
I guess she’s taking what she accomplished in healthcare reform to washington to make sure that the same thing that happened in Colorado happens in Washington.
Could someone remind me what has happened in Colorado, because I am discomforted by the corporate interests she seems to represent.
TR Reid would be a great addition to the Legislature. I can think of no one in that District better qualified.
He has only been a registered Dem. since Aug. 08. He was a Lib. before that.
The statutes are a little vague if the 12-month affiliation rule that applies to candidates going though the normal election year processes also applies to people filling vacancies.
I’ve pointed out this vagueness to the State Party and have asked them to consult their Rules Chair and perhaps an attorney. I’ll post the findings if I get any.
Dan,
This is an interesting issue in two ways.
First, I know that for years, Reid’s employer, The Washington Post, would NOT ALLOW reporters to register with a political party. Indeed, I think there are stories that some editors would not allow their reporters to vote! So, Reid was not allowed to register as a D and he instead chose to register as an L. Put differently, he was a D at heart by not allowed to express himself that way because of his job.
Second, as I am a lawyer, I checked the statute regarding political affiliation. The statute applies to primary candidates. It reads:
I checked the cases dealing with this statute, and they do not stretch to cover appointment by vacancy committees. So, I don’t think that the registration limitation affects whether Mr. Reid could be appointed to the spot.
Interesting issues, though.
Tom Russell
trussell@law.du.edu
Previous attempts at appointing by a vacancy committee to fill a vacancy in the General Assembly have been held to the one year minimum in district. IIRC a few years ago, maybe in the 1990’s, it was looked at and upheld.
Ultimately, Mike Cerbo ended up holding off on resigning until it was no longer an issue.
I know Pam is correct — that the one year residency requirement has been held to apply to a vacancy committee (there was a case in HD 26 just a few years ago) — but did that extend to party registration as well? The statute cited by Tom above would seem to indicate that there might be a loophole there.
Everything else in statute explicitly requires 12-month affiliation: major party candidates, petition cnadidate, minor party candidates and unaffiliated candiates. But all the clause on vacancy says is they must meet the constitutional requires and be affiliated with the party, but no time limit is mentioned or even referred too.
It appears to be an oversight in the legislation, so I expect it will soon be addressed.
Dan,
I agree with you that with regard to appointment to a vacant seat in the legislature, there is no statutory time-limit concerning affiliation. However, I do not agree that this is a gray area. The law is clear.
Today, I wrote an opinion about the matter. I applied the conclusion to T.R. Reid’s situation. (He’s definitely in the race.)
If anyone wants the opinion, feel free to send email to me at trussell@law.du.edu
Best,
Tom Russell
Can you do a rundown of potential candidates for us over at Denver Pols?
“Big news, both sad and exciting
Dear . . .
It is with very mixed emotions that I am announcing my resignation as representative of House District 3, effective March 27. I especially want to thank all of the fabulous precinct committee people in my district. I tried to reach all of you yesterday to tell you the news myself. Thank you for giving me the privilege to serve our wonderful district.
I have rejoined the law firm of Akerman Senterfitt, and will work in the firm’s Government Affairs and Public Policy group, assisting clients locally and nationally from Akerman’s offices in Denver and Washington D.C. Since I will be in Washington about half the time, it will be impossible for me to continue as a Representative.
I’m very proud of what we have accomplished, especially in the field of health care. The creation of the 208 Commission provided us with a clear and reliable picture of alternative models of health care reform, with the costs and benefits of each model calculated by objective experts in the field.
We also modernized public health, and we made significant progress on reforming the delivery of behavioral health. I am proud of the significant progress we are making in providing access to quality, affordable health care for many Coloradans.
I will not be abandoning the cause for which I have passionately worked in the General Assembly, but will pursue it on the national level.
Akerman Senterfitt is the firm I joined right after leaving law school. I worked there for several years, in the field of banking law, before joining a Washington, D.C. firm and subsequently moving to Denver. I have lived in Denver for the past 20 years and am devoted to the city and the State of Colorado.
Again, it has been my privilege to serve the residents of House District 3. I’m sad to be leaving the General Assembly and the many admirable colleagues with whom I’ve worked.
Thank you,
Anne”
House Speaker Terrance Carroll’s official statement is as follows:
“It has been a true privilege and honor to work alongside Rep. Anne McGihon. We started out as freshmen legislators together, and I have been witness to her many victories throughout her tenure. She has been a pioneer in health care reform for all Coloradans, and a champion to ensuring quality health care coverage. I was especially impressed with her leadership in guiding the recent oil and gas rules revision through the House – and I think it shows her commitment to the process that she delayed her resignation until most of her bills and the rules had passed through the House.
I know this was not an easy decision for Rep. McGihon, but I wish her all the best in her many future endeavors.”
PCPs were contacted over the weekend. The delayed effective day insures that the seat will not remain vacant long. There is a minimum ten day waiting period before a vacancy committee can meet.
Multiple people expressed interest in the seat before the vacancy was announced, as term limits prevented Anne from running again in 2010. It is unclear how many will make a bid at the vacancy committee meeting.
The vacancy committee is comprised mostly of precinct committee people and Democratic party elected officials who reside in House District 3. Governor Bill Ritter lived in House District 3 prior to his election, although it isn’t clear if he counts as an elected offical of HD 3 at this time, as the Governor’s mansion is not in HD 3.
Other Akerman Senterfitt lawyers in the firm’s Denver office (including me) handle consumer finance litigation, corporate law and estate planning. All of McGihon & Oh-Willeke, LLC’s lawyers have joined the new firm, except Tim Knaus (former state party chair) who was “Of Counsel” to McGihon & Oh-Willeke and will continue to practice at the same location independently.
So he is not on he HD3 vacancy committee.
In addition to the Precinct Committee People (PCP’s), there are also a smattering of party officials of varying levels (county, district and subdistrict officers), and one elected official: City Councilman Chris Nevitt.
The district is roughly 60% Denver and 40% Arapahoe in terms of voters, but because Denver has smaller precincts, there are quite a few more Denver PCPs than Arap. ones.
If they designated the central committee, it would not include the PCPs, as they are not on the central committee of a district with overlapping counties.
All of the districts that are in or partially in Denver used the same formula: The central committees of the county or counties involved who live in the district.
In Denver, this includes just about anyone with any kind of title, even the non-partisan elected officials who happen to be registered as Dems. We also have a fairly elaborate system of subdistricts each with captains, co-captains, and finance chairs. All of these are also included, along with captains-at-large (my current title).
From a little “d” democratic standpoint it is great having a very inclusive vacancy committee. From the standpoint of those who have to organize the meeting, it is a little nerve-wracking. If you don’t get at least 50% of the vacancy committee there, the vacancy is then filled by gubnatorial appointment.
Does that mean there’s a web site and table at the JJ dinner on the way? I mean, even if it’s a vacancy committee appointment, that’s not a special election. Somebody’s bound to be disappointed!
I agree with your point there. I’ve seen a few vacancy committees of as few as 5 people, where the outcome was pre-ordained. That’s a horrible way to choose replacements. I think both parties have been trying to get away from small vacancy committees, but some type of statutory minimum of a significant number would make sense.
Are Arapahoe County voters being disenfranchised? On another note, whoever wins this vacancy might be a short-timer. Census estimates show that Denver would drop to about 8 House seats in the next reapportionment and this seat would seem to be in jeopardy.
continuity between redistricting events is not really the most helpful way to think about the issue.
All places have some state rep and some state senator both before and after the redistricting, and there is some flexibility in the state statutes to accomodate residency issues.
If there are eight seats in Denver and all eight represenatives in place going into the 2012 elections are from Denver (not necessarily so as Denver has several multi-county seats), then whoever chooses to will run for those eight seats and someone will win.
The bottom line is Denver currently has 9 seats wholly or mostly within its boundaries. After redistricting, it will have 8. In the game of musical chairs, someone loses out, and District 3 (a center district that isn’t majority minority and already stretches well into Arapahoe) would seem to get the squeeze.
Why would a world-renowned author take a massive pay cut to work for our little ‘ol State Legislature?
Is this any more than wild speculation since he may happen to live in the district?
While some are speculating about multiple candidates, I can think of no better person to represent the 3rd that Scott Wasserman. He has years of experience at the Capitol and would represent the district well.
He would be great, I didn’t realize that he was in the district.
Wasserman would be able to step in without missing a beat.
Why did her desire to become a lobbyi$t suddenly outweigh her de$ire to represent her district? $he couldn’t wait until her term was over before she $eized this opportunity? Didn’t $he just run for office, promising to represent the district, only a few months ago?
new$, de$ire, $uddenly, repre$ent, wa$, ju$t, promi$ing and month$.
But what was your point? Not sure it was entirely clear.
…sometimes I leaving it laying about and forget about it. I guess my point was: why now? She was formerly a member of this law firm….and presumably she could be in the future (or some other similar law firm thingy). So why did she choose to abandon her legislative term now? Shortly after being elected again? That bugs me.
It seems that her announcement said nothing more than: “Even though I ran for office only months ago, I decided that I don’t want this job and will instead will take a job that pays. Later!”
I have no info besides the released info higher in the thread, but I was wondering if maybe a particular case/issue is happening now and needs her now?
At any rate, best wishes to her!
…if I lived in her district (especially since she did not provide such a reason). But since I don’t live in her district, I’ll let it go now.
I do live in her district, so turns out you were insinuating on my behalf. Good work.
Not bloody likely.
I mu$t concur with dear Jambalaya in wondering what earthly rea$on$ $he would have for making $uch an abrupt change….
She’s always been a bit ummm erratic. I wish her the best but I’m glad she’s out of the legislature.
But that was also when she was under the mistaken opinion that she might be able to become Speaker of the House.
are you implying that she would not have taken this fabulous new law firm job if she had been elected Speaker? Elections have consequences!