Democrats vowed to take back former state Senator John Morse’s seat almost immediately after he lost it. Too bad for them, the man, Sen. Bernie Herpin, who replaced him has demonstrated himself to be quite the skilled legislator. So much so that The Colorado County Clerks Association, who are gathered together for a few days, just voted him the Colorado legislator of the year. As Joey Bunch at The Denver Post reports:
State Sen. Bernie Herpin didn’t waste any time making a name for himself in Denver. Elected in the wake of the recall of Sen. John Morse last September. Herpin on Monday was chosen Legislator of the Year by the Colorado County Clerks Association.
According to a press release from Herpin’s re-election team, he won the prize “because of his ability to lead and reach across party lines to get things done in Denver.”
As a legislature mostly built on bipartisanship and bonhomie (hence, the need for extremists like Morse, who forced his personal agenda on the state, to be booted out), Herpin’s commitment to working across the aisle should be rewarded with another term. Over the past few years, Gov. John Hickenlooper’s failed leadership led to some nasty partisan battles; hopefully more legislators like Herpin can step up and fill the bipartisan leadership void Hickenlooper has let fester in our state.
Time for a new campaign manager for Andrew Romanoff (D- Winnebago)? For a man many were touting as the silver bullet to the industrious Rep. Mike Coffman, Romanoff really hasn’t gained any traction. Then again, when you have to learn a whole new part of a city that you’ve never been to (but, are just using as a way to further your political ambitions), it might make it hard to have solid footing to attack from. Yet, Romanoff’s latest wild swing is just downright embarrassing. Yesterday morning, Romanoff attacked Coffman for voting against what Romanoff’s campaign alleged were protections against sexual assaults in the military; in reality, it was just a procedural vote. Much to Romanoff’s chagrin and embarrassment, at the same time his campaign dropped this wild accusation, Coffman was completing a deal to make such protections a reality. Who’s trying to make political hay out of a very serious issue now, Mr. Romanoff?
As Jon Murray at The Denver Post reports:
The Romanoff campaign’s news release assailing Coffman for the Friday vote came out Monday morning, just as the VA deal was being announced. “Congressman Coffman recently spent thousands of taxpayer dollars to send glossy brochures about sexual assault in the military, but given the opportunity to back up his words with actions, he failed,” Romanoff campaign spokeswoman Denise Baron charged in the release.
Coffman campaign manager Tyler Sandberg called the accusation “sleazy Washington politics at its worst.” Coffman voted against what he saw as a partisan motion Friday, he said, while working to ensure the sexual assault provisions survived through the conference committee. [the Peak’s emphasis]
Bad timing much? If you’re Baron at Romanoff’s campaign, having to be the face of such a sleazy attack surely makes you want to turn to either Romanoff or your campaign manager and ask them point blank, “What is this, amateur hour here? Get your sh*% together.”
But, here’s the dirty little secret of Colorado Democrats this election cycle: they are the only ones trying to score political points off of women. Insultingly, they think women only care about abortion and birth control. They think women don’t care about how President Obama has tanked our economy with his inexperience and failed policies. They think women don’t care about how Romanoff believes more layers of bureaucrats needed to be added to our health care industry to make it even more inefficient. They think women don’t care how Sen. Mark Udall has utterly failed to represent the true, independent spirit and voice of Colorado when he is in Washington D.C. rubber stamping Obama’s failed agenda.
Seriously, how stupid do Colorado Democrats think Colorado women are?
What do you do to fundraise if you’ve become way too extreme for the constituents you’re actually supposed to represent? If you’re Sen. Mark Udall, you just turn to Hollywood and various other bastions of far-left liberals along the coasts. Sure, these rich donors don’t have beliefs anywhere near to what the average Coloradan thinks, but that just must be because we’re still too busy banging rocks together to even know how to create roads. As The Colorado Observer reports, more than half of Udall’s donations this last reporting period came from states other than Colorado; with New York, California, and Virginia (aka: the D.C. Beltway) heavily represented:
Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, and Barbra Streisand topped the list of liberal Hollywood legends donating money to Colorado Democratic Sen. Mark Udall in the last reporting period.
… Udall’s success at raising money from Hollywood luminaries helped give him a fundraising advantage over his Republican challenger Rep. Cory Gardner. Udall has raised more than $13 million for the closely contested race with just under $6 million left in the bank.
Udall’s supporters are mostly from out of state — 58 percent of his contributors were located in New York, California, Virginia and other states. [the Peak’s emphasis]
Hasn’t Udall been paying any attention to how Coloradans feel about out of state-ers coming in here with their millions just to tell us how to live our lives? *cough* Bloomberg *cough*
Udall looks especially bad when you factor in that around 70% of Rep. Cory Gardner’s donors are domestic:
Comparatively, 70 percent of Gardner’s campaign contributions were from donors living in Colorado, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
That Udall has to go out of state to reach a majority of his donors is no surprise; he has spent the last six years accumulating a voting record in the Senate that is much more suited to California or New York than us here in Colorado. Surely, if Udall didn’t live in his insulated, liberal bubble that is Boulder, he would have left us Neanderthals a long time ago for our betters: the enlightened few who live among the Sierra Nevadas.
PeakNation™, don’t be surprised if he finally moves out that way once he loses reelection; that way, he can hang out with his BFF Tom Steyer whenever they want. “Hey Tom, let’s go hike a mountain and talk about how the U.S. would be a better place if everyone was as smart and enlightened as us!”
PeakNation™, it’s Monday, we’re feeling frisky (had some Taco Bell for lunch), so let’s get a little wonky. You may have heard the Environmental Protection Agency is rolling through tomorrow (if Sen. Mark Udall is such a fan of it, can we expect him to be here in person to personally advocate for them?), and today the top climate advisor to President Obama claimed the tougher EPA regulations would be a boon for Colorado. The only problem for Udall and him is that their statements aren’t based in reality whatsoever.
Gov. John Hickenlooper and former Gov. Bill Ritter have already forced stringent regulations on us Coloradans to expand the use of wind and solar (but, not hydro, because in Hickenlooper’s world, hydro doesn’t count as renewable. Yep, someone tell Isaac Newton gravity just became a finite resource). According to the proposed EPA regulations all that reduction in emissions won’t matter. There has been no indication that the proposed 35% reduction in carbon emissions will factor in reductions already achieved. This means all those states that haven’t done anything to reduce carbon emissions will still have some low-hanging fruit to pick, while we here in Colorado have already snatched up the easy reductions. Any further reductions will be quite painful; thanks Udall.
From this, it is easy to see how some estimates have the price of electricity in Colorado going up a whopping 49% under these Udall-endorsed, EPA regulations. Not to mention, a loss of 24,000 jobs related to Colorado’s coal-industry. Hickenlooper’s war on rural Colorado continues with these proposals as a full 9,000 of the jobs lost are based in western Colorado. Those jobs only pay $116,000 in wage and benefits; surely, they can just be replaced by increasing the minimum wage to $10.10.
The real kicker for the EPA, is an article The Economist wrote last week that shows even factoring in carbon emission reductions, wind and solar are still a net loser when compared to coal. As it wrote:
If all the costs and benefits are totted up using Mr Frank’s calculation, solar power is by far the most expensive way of reducing carbon emissions. It costs $189,000 to replace 1MW per year of power from coal. Wind is the next most expensive.
… all this assumes a carbon price of $50 a tonne. Using actual carbon prices (below $10 in Europe) makes solar and wind look even worse. The carbon price would have to rise to $185 a tonne before solar power shows a net benefit.
…At the moment, most rich countries and China subsidise solar and wind power to help stem climate change. Yet this is the most expensive way of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.
That’s right, the price of carbon would have to increase by an incredible 1750% for us to see a total net benefit from attacking carbon emission reduction this way, and that’s including the cost of carbon itself.
Now, if you’re Udall and the faux-hippie bourgeoisie of Boulder, the enormous costs foisted on us by these brutal EPA regulations might amount to just one less kale-fed, karma-injected, locally-grown, Buddhist-massaged, tofu lambchop a week, but for the rest of us that money is our kid’s tuition. The U.S. already leads the world in carbon emissions reduction; it’s ludicrous for us to even consider importing their failed policies. Too bad Udall is too busy hanging out with eco-extremists to recognize that.
Tomorrow, July 29, Americans for Prosperity will co-host a rally at Lincoln Park to protest the latest Environmental Protection Agency’s “far-reaching and controversial” new emission regulations. The event will be at Lincoln Park in Denver from 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. The event promises a star-studded line-up, including:
- Former Congressman Bob Beauprez
- State Rep. Ray Scott – NW CO legislator (Mesa County)
- Dustin Zvonek – Americans for Prosperity
- Michael Sandoval – Independence Institute
- Ray Beck – Craig City Council/Club 20
- Frank Moe – Craig, CO businessman
- Mary Frontczak – Peabody Energy
- Tony Gagliardi – NFIB Colorado-Wyoming
- Jess La Buff – Boilermakers Montana
- Jason Dean Small – Boilermakers Montana
- Greg Kohn – Montana Chamber of Commerce
- Mark Gordon – Wyoming State Treasurer
- Bill Schilling – Wyoming Business Alliance
- Kim Floyd – AFL-CIO Wyoming
This issue promises to have an impact on families across Colorado. We railed against the EPA’s attempts at a listening tour on this issue back in October for the following reasons:
- The “townhalls” were occurring in places that didn’t produce coal (e.g., San Francisco).
- The proposed regulations would increase energy costs for the middle class.
- The regulations would kill jobs in the coal industry, which employs some 750,000 through the country.
Come out to show your support for Colorado’s middle class tomorrow.
This morning, Complete Colorado‘s Todd Shepherd dropped a bombshell – despite acknowledging that new health plans were illegal under the Affordable Care Act, Colorado’s Department of Insurance greenlighted them anyway. Here’s a snippet from his story:
“According to internal emails from late March, DOI Commissioner Marguerite Salazar was certain the state would be breaking the law if it allowed the sale of some older health insurance plans which didn’t meet all of the ACA requirements.
The March 26 email summarized a meeting between a few of the highest officials and stakeholders involved with the implementation of the ACA in Colorado. Michelle Patarino, a consultant with “Collaborative Health Solutions,” created a post-meeting summary, which included a bullet point: ‘No specific timeframe was given, but Commissioner Salazar made it clear that allowing sale of non-ACA [compliant] plans would require legislative action.’”
Following that meeting, they asked for legislative action, right? Wrong. Just five weeks later, the Department of Insurance announced the sale of non-ACA compliant plans. Insurance Commissioner, Marguerite Salazar, already in hot water for her response to accusations of fudging numbers, used her “rulemaking” power to make the plans legal. Yes, it’s magic like that.
But, what does this have to do with Sen. Mark Udall? His election in 2014 is…contentious, to say the least. One of the major complaints from voters is that he was part of the crew saying if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. That was a big, fat lie. Many have lost the plans they liked – over 335,000 to be exact. Allowing Coloradans to keep non-compliant ACA plans through 2015 gives Udall political cover through the 2014 election. Can you imagine if there was another tidal wave of cancellations due to Obamacare? Exactly.
Look, we’re fine with extending the option for non-Obamacare compliant plans for eternity because telling people what kind of health insurance they “need” is nanny statism at its worst. But, we have to ask whether Salazar’s rulemaking, allowing non-compliant plans to be purchased through 2015, is a cheap political ploy to save her buddy Udall’s hide.
After tanking in the polls despite spending millions of dollars already, PeakNation™, do you think Sen. Mark Udall finally realized most Coloradans care about economic issues this upcoming election? After avoiding the issue of jobs and the economy (as addressing this issue will essentially sink his campaign unless his six seven eight who knows how many press secretaries can keep enough spin on it to obscure his horrible record on it), Udall is now going up on TV attacking Rep. Cory Gardner on it. The problem? It’s essentially 100% horse manure. 9News’s Brandon Rittiman and CBS Denver’s Shaun Boyd, two of Colorado’s foremost fact-checkers must be salivating at all the fat lies Udall will need to tell if he keeps up this strategy. Boyd already got her first shot in this video below:
The Associated Press today reported that the number of background checks stemming from the 2013 law that required background checks on all transactions was far lower than expected. According to Ivan Moreno’s report:
Lawmakers drafting the background check requirement, aimed at keeping firearms away from those with a criminal history, relied on information from a non-partisan research arm of the Legislature that predicted about 420,000 new reviews over the first two years. Accordingly, they budgeted about $3 million to the agency that conducts the checks to handle the anticipated surge of work.
But after a year of operating under the new system, Colorado Bureau of Investigations officials have performed only about 13,600 reviews considered a result of the new law – about 7 percent of the estimated first year total.
In order to pass this ill-conceived and largely unenforceable law, Democrats leaned heavily on a statistic that said that 40% of all gun transactions were not subject to a background check, a fact proved false over and over and over again. Here’s the Washington Post take on it:
“In the meantime, we have documented that (a) the survey numbers are about two decades old, so they include purchases that predate any background checks; (b) the survey sample is rather small; and (c) the results are significantly different when adjusted for “purchases” or “sales” — the phrasing used by the president.”
President Obama, perhaps, has been one of the most prolific carriers of this message, saying on March 28, 2103:
“Why wouldn’t we want to close the loophole that allows as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases to take place without a background check?”
The results show that this is clearly not the case, and calls into question all the other information Democrats used to try to scare Coloradans into thinking bills like these were necessary (it didn’t work). Nonetheless, we have a few questions:
- Are all the criminals that were meant to be stopped because of background checks just buying guns under the table?
- Were most of the transactions happening at stores like they are now? So, this law was completely pointless?
- What happened to all the funds directed to paying for the over 400,000 background checks that never happened?
- Did Democrats lie to constituents AGAIN to appease their special interests?
The answer to all of these questions is – Democrats once against foisted government control on Coloradans, only to accomplish absolutely nothing.
It would appear that former Democratic legislator Robert Bowen, running against incumbent Republican Kathleen Conti, has committed a marketing foul in his campaign already. A keen observer directed us to his website shown below, which proudly displays the Colorado State seal with the candidate standing next to an American flag. Besides asking that voters to ignore his political affiliation (HE’S A DEMOCRAT), it’s verboten to use the State seal in campaigning, according to a 2012 memo from the Secretary of State’s office:
“A facsimile of the State Seal – either in part, or in whole – may not be used for campaign purposes, unrelated to the Member’s official duties. In particular, a facsimile shall not be used on the Member’s campaign materials, including a campaign website. Photos of Members used for campaign purposes should not include any prominent display of the State Seal. (Members should also be mindful of the limitations of section 1-45-117, C.R.S., concerning the use of public
resources for campaign purposes.)”
This may seem nit-picky. Other than giving the appearance that he’s the incumbent and/or using state resources for campaign purposes, is this nefarious? Probably not. But, going back to that memo, the penalties are stiff for improper use – and by stiff, we mean a felony. From the memo:
24-80-902. Punishment for illegal use.
Any person who illegally uses or affixes the seal of this state to any written or printed document whatever, or fraudulently forges, defaces, corrupts, or counterfeited seal to any commission, deed, warrant, pardon, certificate, or other written or printed instrument, or has in his possession or custody any such seal, knowing it to be falsely made and counterfeited, and willfully conceals the same, commits a class 5 felony and shall be punished as provided in section 18-1.3-401, C.R.S.
For those who would suggest that we should have pity on this poor sap for this error (and for his ugly website), remember this guy served in the Colorado state legislature a while back. He should really know better.