CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
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*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
April 14, 2009 05:18 PM UTC
32 Comments
Your hard on for Penry has no limits. Follow this set of events (according to MY reading of news accounts): 1. Ritter inserts himself and scuttle’s Groff and Penry’s plan to send the budget bill back to the JBC. THEN he says in the Denver Post that cuts to higher ed are off the table WITHOUT HAVING A PLAN OF HIS OWN! The guy is unbelievable. Ritter has no plan and the first floor of the Capitol is being run by a bunch of amateurs. It looks to me that Penry’s comments WERE consistent and the GOP does have a plan.
Bill Ritter needs to stop deep throating windmills and try LEADING. According to my reading of events, THAT was Penry’s point.
Your reading of events:
Josh Penry = Golden Child
Bill Ritter = The Devil
Gotcha.
Actually, that’s not MY reading of events, just take a look at where the Sentinel, the Chieftain, the Denver Post, etc. have sided in this budget fight. They’re lining up with Senate Republicans during this fight because they actually have ideas and are willing to lead. Bill Ritter sits on the sidelines waiting for someone else to come up with a plan that he can claim credit for. Ask Peter Groff about Bill Ritter’s capacity to lead. After he stops laughing he’ll probably have some good insight.
Josh Penry is a mediocre leader all the time.
The only man to have spent TWO YEARS having coffee with average voters across Colorado only to have no concept how to govern.
Nor does he have any concept how the legislative process even works… He’s the only Governor to have a veto overridden by the legislature in 25 years. He’s the only Governor to have a veto overridden by his OWN PARTY in a century.
His budget people couldn’t predict sunrise with an almanac.
He hasn’t been bothered to outline to anyone, anywhere, what exactly his budget priorities are and where the revenue is going to come from.
For a bunch of people who love to mindlessly quote the talking points from DailyKOS about the “Party of No” it sounds like you need to talk to your Governor.
First, around the first of December every year the Governor submits his proposed budget to the Joint Budget Committee (JBC). Governor Ritter did that late last year. All you need do is consult that document to read and analyze the governor’s budget priorities.
The Colorado Promise. There were four main proposed policies in the Colorado Promise.
First, the New Energy Economy which the Governor has fulfilled.
Second, repairing and modernizing our transportation system. This year he fought for and passed a bill to increase transportation funding by $250 million per year. Many politicians would have run and hid behind the declining economy before taking on this issue. He showed superior leadership and courage.
Third, additional funding for education which he fulfilled when he successfully supported the mill levy freeze which, if it hadn’t been done, would have caused a funding shortfall in K-12. Again this was a courageous action. He also, as promised, expanded the early childhood education program but this has come under heavy pressure due to the economic downturn and the decline in state revenues.
Fourth, Gov. Ritter promised to establish a state health insurance system for the uninsured. This has not been undertaken because of the cost and the decline in state revenues. There simply isn’t any money to do this at this time.
Please, next time, at least have some facts to back yourself up. Even if we took all your assertions at face value, that doesn’t obviate the fact that the Republicans are the Party of No her ein Colorado and in Washington, DC.
Where are The Bell, Progress Now Action, etc?
If this set of blunders wasn’t the Dems, you’d have Colorado Ethics Watch, et. al. screaming in from left field to file all kinds of civil actions and ethic violations.
Can a state nationalize something?
Easy there, don’t get all Brokeback Mountain on us, Mesa boy.
Ritter said specifically that a lot of options are on the table, including Pinnacol. Negotiations are ongoing.
What the Pols are pointing out (correctly), is that Penry is totally inconsistent in his public statements and is not a serious player in the actual negotiations. He’s better off roasting pigs with Michelle Malkin and standing on the crazy-stage with “Swastika Guy,” because he is not being taken seriously under the Dome.
The premise is wrong. Penry’s comments ARE consistent. First he said that Ritter was inserting himself in the fight over whether or not to send the budget back to the JBC. He was right. Ritter stuck his nose in…slapped Groff and Penry…and then proposed NO solutions of his own. Now Ritter’s standing on the sidelines waiting for someone to come up with something. How are those comments inconsistent? Do you think that Penry’s comments to the press might change based on what’s happening at the time?! This debate highlights the problem with Ritter. He doesn’t know where to insert himself and where to stay out. That’s the problem with people in leadership positions that don’t know how to lead.
Okay then, your gratuitous use of CAPS has convinced me: that your MINDLESS SELF-CONTRADICTING BULLSHIT is not to be taken seriously.
Ritter is being careful as yesterday’s statement indicates, since negotiations are ongoing and everyone agrees it would be better for Pinnacol to come to the table willingly. But Penry’s two statements are, sorry pal, hopelessly inconsistent, help discredit him (as if he needed it), and no amount of insistent CAPS is going to change that.
I guess I don’t understand what negotiations your referring to, those between the 1st and 2nd floor?
Foregoing federal matching dollars by holding hostage HigherEd has proven to be a train wreck, nationalizing a private firm could be unconstitutional and you’ll need to think that one out some more.
You assume that Gov. Ritter isn’t involved with these negotiations just because he hasn’t made a public statement about the budget. How do you know that? Are you personally involved with the negotiations at the state capitol? Do you have first hand knowledge of who has talked to whom between the legislative and executive branches?
How do you know Gov. Ritter hasn’t proposed any solutions? Have you talked to Gov. Ritter?
I was involved with the state budget process for many years in the 1980’s during the last (prolonged) recession and there were many negotiating sessions that never made the papers because these are very sensitive and complex issues that take time to work through and make sure they will work.
I’ll make you a wager. I’m betting that when the Long Bill is finally adopted and signed by Governor Ritter, we will find that Gov. Ritter was deeply involved throughout the process and throughout the negotiations, and once that comes to light, Sen. Penry is going to have some more explaining to do since in his most recent assertions he said the Governor isn’t involved. Instead of making what will turn out to be false statements, why doesn’t Sen. Penry propose where we should get the $300 million to fund higher education. After all, as one of our ‘legislative leaders’ doesn’t he have the responsibility to help lead us out of this fiscal crisis by proposing substantive solutions?
Since, to date, he hasn’t told us how he would solve this budget problem, isn’t he guilty of exactly what he accuses Gov. Ritter of – doing nothing.
Who are the Parties at the table?
The only thing that is guaranteed is the Guv will be forced to call a special budget session due to a failure to cut across the board or selected new discretionary spending that have become line items since 2005.
Again, who are the parties negotiating?
I’ll wager the parties negotiationg include the members of the JBC because they understand the budget better than the other members, the leadership of the House and Senate (leaders from both parties are invited), Governor Ritter, Todd Saliman, the Governor’s budget director and other members of the executive branch as needed.
By the way, do you have any idea what the GOP leadership’s plan is to solve the higher education fudning problem? No one seems to know what it is and they certainly, as one group of our leaders, have the responsibility too to solve these problems.
That plan will cost Colorado some serious federal monies.
I don’t know the inner working of the minorities policy positions or strategies. My guess is those will be communicated to the other leaders at this negotiation meeting you are purporting to say will occur.
So what are they negotiating a 10-30% across the board cut or how they might nuance the nationalizing of Pinnacol and how the CSC, acting as 3rd base coach, has sent in the offensive signals?
These meetings have been going on since January when the legislative session opened due to the continuing decline in state tax revenues that has occurred over the past three months.
Second the governor did not create the Higher Education funding problem. It was inevitable that higher education would be on the chopping block because of the combination of TABOR, Amendment 23 and Arveschoug-Bird. Because of this hodge podge of constitutional and statutory provisions the only two places where the budget can be cut is transportation and higher education. The JBC had already cut the transportation budget to around $800 million, down from over $1 billion. This year is just another reason why TABOR and these other laws must go.
Across the board cuts may sound fair and equitable but becasue of provisions like Amendment 23, which requires annual increases to K-12 funding, it can’t be done.
Please let me be blunt and this is not aimed at you personally, but when all is said and done, Senator Penry is going to be exposed as a liar. Budget negotiations have been ongoing all year between the Governor, his staff, all the members of the JBC and the Democrat and Republican leadership, including Senator Penry. For Penry to say Gov. Ritter hasn’t been involved and hasn’t done anything on this issue is nothing more than a bald faced lie.
Tax revenues have been in decline since early 2008, failure to plan for these implications is well, failure.
What about all the ref C money and all the new programs that have been created. To continue to hike tax revenues by 6% annually is obscene … what family besides Madoff’s has that ability, certainly not the 3 million Colorado households.
How is that nationalizing of Pinnacol going Hugo?
There was no way to plan for the kind of declines we’ve experienced in the last six months. No one predicted or expected this steep of a recession.
What Ref. C monies? When tax revenues decline that includes Ref C revenues.
Who is “Hugo?”
The good people of Minnesota saw this coming in early 2008.
At least that’s what the ads that had Hank Brown on them said….
Oh, waaaaaaiiit, fast forward four years and Ritter and the democrats in the capitol have used Ref C for almost everything in the general fund EXCEPT securing higher ed. What excuse are you going to come up with next?
When revenues decline that causes budget cuts and becasue of the combination of TABOR, Amendment 23 and Arveschoug/Bird, most of the cuts have to be made in higher education and transportation. Those two areas suffer a disproportionate percentage of the cuts. Ref C money has nothing to do with that and Ref C renevnue has declined at the same rate as other revenue sources.
Ref C monies have nothing to do with where the cuts are made.
can you inform us about what plan the Republicans have put forward to solve Colorado’s budget problems? People have asked for it all day and none of the Republican posters have been able to state what it is beyond saying there is one. there doesn’t appear to be one.
So what, pray tell, is that plan?
that only add up to $150,000,000 of the $300,000,000 needed. They would cut essential services (they like to call them “social programs”) for thousands of Coloradans, and it wouldn’t even add up to the amount necessary to save higher ed.
Some plan.
Their plan is to cut just under 3% of state departments’ budgets instead of using the money from Pinnacol.
I have a chart on my wall outlining all the state government departments and divisions within those. Sixteen departments exist with at least four divisions or offices (often double that) within each department. Elected offices in the state also have offices and programs they are in direct control.
We shouldn’t hack off 3% of state jobs, just anywhere; however, Dept heads should be able to identify cost savings measures that go beyond what they already ID’d last year.
Take Pinnacol’s money this year but by this time next year we need to have a better plan on how to reduce the state’s spending and cutting state government should be part of the solution.
Requiring the people who actually run the departments they’re talking about cutting to propose cuts is logical.
Across the board cuts sound good, but it’s using a hatchet when we should be using a scalpel.
Thanks for sharing your insight, as always, Car 31.
First of all, suggesting the Long Bill be sent back to committee isn’t a substanive idea. That does nothing to close the $300 million gap in higher education funding. Please describe with specificity the Republicans substantive suggestions to fund higher education. Put another way, please describe where the Republicans intend to get the money to solve this funding problem.
Second, Sen. Penry can’t say one day that Gov. Ritter is heavily involved and calling the shots on the budget, and three days later say he hasn’t been involved but should be. Sen. Penry looks silly.
Third, no legislature, even one dominated by the same party as the governor, will allow the Governor to tell them they can’t recommit a bill to committee whether its the Long Bill or any other bill. Recommitting bills to committee is an internal decision of the legislative branch. If you read the stories last week, even the Republican members of the JBC said there wasn’t any point in sending the Long Bill back to their committee because they had cut as much as they could.
is just embarrassed that on the same day MM claimed Governor Ritter was AWOL and wrote “Where the hell is Bill Ritter hiding?”, Penry contradicted him saying that Ritter is “pulling the strings.” MM and Penry really do need to get on the same page before their making fools of each other gets much worse.
If Penry or the goofy MM have a viable plan, let’s hear it. Otherwise, your simple whining just grows tiresome and embarrassing.
Let’s see the plan.
2002…Governor Owens sees revenues tank and has his departments start contingency planning for across the board cuts that hold K-12, Corrections and Human Services/HCPF harmless. Then Owens outlines these plans in his state of the state and actually spends much of the session working with the legislature to make it happen.
2009…Governor Ritter…does…nothing, and when faced with a $300 million shortfall wants to raid Pinnacol because it’s politically expedient. I mean who actually CARES about business anyway? They can’t vote right?
What happened to that beautiful partnership between Bill Ritter and state employees now that they have joined CAPE? I’m still waiting for all of those recommendations on how to decrease the cost of government and improve service to the public. Wasn’t that going to save the state hundreds of millions of dollars a year?
climbed on board the Democratic wagon and supported Ref C. Which Penry opposed. Could you imagine the septic tank we’d be in if we followed Penry preference?