BREAKING: Democrats To Probably Kill Republican Bills, Republicans Very Unhappy About It

From left: Sens. Owen Hill, Ted Harvey, Vicki Marble, Greg Brophy, Kevin Lundberg, George Rivera, and Kent Lambert. Photo by Colorado Senate GOP

Oh my stars!

In a remarkable press conference at noon today in the Colorado Capitol press room, Republican Senators complained bitterly that many of their bills are being sent to the Senate State Affairs Committee, known as the "kill committee" for its longstanding role as the place majority leadership in both parties sends unwanted bills to die.

.@ColoSenGOP holds noon presser to say Dems are sending their bills to "kill" committee.Can you say majority? #coleg #copolitics

— Lynn Bartels (@lynn_bartels) January 15, 2014

What's remarkable about this press conference, especially coming on the heels of Senate Minority Leader Bill Cadman's bizarre freak-out yesterday over what turned out to be absolutely nothing, is that Republicans are now complaining about one of the most routine practices in our legislature. Every majority in both the House and Senate regardless of party sends unfavored bills to the State Affairs committee. Sometimes a legislator does a really good job advocating, and they pass despite this–as they sometimes do in other committees. We've seen no evidence that any higher proportion of bills are being sent to "kill committee" this year than other years.

Either way, it does appear that this press conference to complain about a routine development is connected to Cadman's embarrassing tantrum yesterday. They are both petty, belligerent reactions, wholly out of proportion to actual events. Based on the response by even our fair-to-a-fault local political journalists, they are wildly overplaying their hand. Even relatively green reporters know better. If there is a strategy among Republicans to artificially ramp tensions to a fever pitch early in this year's session, they need to rethink it.

Because that only works if it's believable, folks.

View the original article here

Conservative talk-radio host gets all excited about critique of Republican Senate candidate

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

KFKA talk-radio host Amy Oliver urged Republicans last week to read a Facebook post by former State Senator Shawn Mitchell, in which Mitchell wrote that he's "somewhere between distressed and appalled that GOP luminaries think it's a good idea for [Rep. Amy Stephens] to bear the party's standard into a campaign for federal office in 2014."

Stephens is one of six GOP candidates vying to take on Democratic Sen. Mark Udall next year.  Also running are Tea Party favorite and recycled Senate candidate Ken Buck, mustachioed state Senator Randy Baumgardner from northwestern Colorado's District 8, state Senator from El Paso County Owen Hill, as well as Jamie McMillan and Tom Janich.

Oliver, who doubles as a staffer for the libertarian Independence Institute, was really excited about Mitchell's Dec. 9 Facebook post, telling listeners that "the entry of Amy Stephens in the race, and some of the subsequent endorsements that she has received, have got conservatives saying privately what Shawn Mitchell put out publicly."

Oliver dedicated two segments of Tuesday's show to the Facebook post, pouring over Mitchell's writing, like you might read a religious text, slowly and respectfully analyzing it in loving detail, re-reading portions of it, pausing, and building up to what she called on of Mitchell's "most important lessons:"

Mitchell: "Pushing Amy Stephens to the nomination will guarantee bitter debate and resentment that demoralizes the base, escalates recrimination, and urging toward party fracture, and accelerates the GOP's recent death wish to impersonate the Whigs.

And that speaks only of the primary. If the elders and donors can carry her across the line to the nomination, what exactly do you think the Media Democrat team will do to the former employee of Focus on the Family, the co-architect of the infamous end-of session civil-buster, that killed dozens of bills on the calendar, in order to block a vote on civil unions? Whatever the merits of that move, it will be blood in the water come October. And it will be just about the only thing that unpolitical, tv-watching Coloradans ever hear about Amy Stephens."

Oliver accurately provided context, pointing out that Mitchell's post, which has amassed 264 comments on Facebook, states that Stephens is not a "bad Republican," but she agreed with Mitchell's view:

Mitchell: "In sponsoring SB-200, the Obamacare exchange, Amy Stephens bet wrong in a big way on a defining, existential battle, perhaps the biggest of the decade, maybe in our lifetime. She sided with party appeasers and corporate accomodationists against a vital, surging grass roots movement for liberty and smaller government. Even at the time she made her bet, the picture was murky, and ambitious politicians could be forgiven for being uncertain. (Once upon a time, it took me days to sort out right from wrong when Referendum C's assault on TABOR was put before the people.)."

"I highly recommend that Republicans read it," Oliver told listeners, even after she's already said Mitchell's post is a "must read" and "a great read."

Oliver should obviously have Stephens on the show to get her side of the story.

View the original article here

Republican Amy Stephens Will Run for Senate

Rep. Amy Stephens (R-Focus on the Family).

And then there was…Amy.

It was just a few weeks ago that Democrats locally praised state Rep. Amy Stephens for her help in creating the state's piece of the Affordable Care Act, while Republicans in Washington D.C. were busy drawing silly lines in the sand over defunding Obamacare. Given those very different storylines, and with the entry of Weld County D.A. Ken Buck in the race for Senate, it was beginning to look like Stephens had decided against running for Senate despite being courted to take the leap in June (as Pols first reported). But now, according to The Denver Post, the former House Majority Leader has decided to jump in the race for Senate after all:

Stephens will formally announce her candidacy Saturday to challenge Democratic U.S. Sen. Mark Udall in 2014 — a move that increases the GOP primary field to four candidates vying to unseat an incumbent who, for now, many political observers view as relatively safe.

"Coloradans are exceptional people and we deserve a federal government that reflects our values by upholding the Constitution, exercising fiscal discipline and respecting the privacy of law-abiding citizens," Stephens said in a statement to The Denver Post.

Stephens, alongside former Republican U.S. Sen. Hank Brown, will make her announcement at the Classical Academy in Colorado Springs, before embarking on a four-stop tour along the Front Range this weekend to meet with voters.

The fact that Stephens is being backed by former U.S. Senator Hank Brown, one of the most respected Republicans in Colorado, says a lot to us about Republican concerns over the current field of candidates (Buck, state Sen. Owen Hill, and The Mustache). In fact, we wouldn't be surprised if the Q3 fundraising reports for Buck and state Sen. Owen Hill turn out to be unimpressive, an impetus for Stephens to enter the field with confidence that she can secure the GOP nomination.

View the original article here

Gov. Chris Christie (R) Slams Colorado Republican “Hypocrites”

Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ).

The red-on-red hits just keep coming in the wake of Colorado GOP representatives' request for disaster relief monies for last month's floods in Colorado, after having voted against those same funds in January as attached to the Hurricane Sandy relief bill. As the Washington Post's Reid Wilson reports:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on Thursday called out four Colorado Republicans in Congress who opposed a bill to fund disaster relief programs in his state, then turned around and pushed for federal aid when their state was hit by devastating floods.

“They’re hypocrites. That’s what they are,” Christie said of the Colorado Republicans during a telephone town hall meeting Thursday night, in comments first reported by the Newark Star-Ledger. But, he added: “We can’t be vindictive. Because we have to be concerned about the actual people that are being hurt.”

Reps. Cory Gardner (R), Scott Tipton (R), Doug Lamborn (R) and Mike Coffman (R) all voted against a $50 billion supplemental appropriations bill that would have funded relief programs aimed at helping New York, New Jersey and Connecticut in the wake of last year’s devastating Hurricane Sandy. The measure passed with 192 Democratic votes and only 49 Republican votes; 179 Republicans and one Democrat voted against providing aid.

As reported this week by New Jersey media outlets, the money sought by the Colorado delegation originally came from the Sandy relief legislation that Colorado Republicans voted against last January. As the Denver Post's Allison Sherry reports today, Rep. Cory Gardner is standing by his original explanation that he voted against the Sandy relief bill as retaliation for the stripping of funds for Colorado from the bill–while Rep. Mike Coffman and Doug Lamborn say they voted against on simpler ideological grounds.

Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs, said the final Sandy bill was "overly generous," and that's why he voted against it.

As Wilson at the Washington Post reports, New Jersey Sen. Jeff Chiesa, recently appointed by Christie, put a hold on Colorado's request until transportation officials assured him that they could get the money to fund some $400 million for road repairs in Colorado from a source other than the Hurricane Sandy legislation that Colorado Republicans voted against. That hold has been lifted, says Wilson, but Sherry reports a final reconciliation of House and Senate versions is on hold until the shutdown impasse is resolved.

We've said it several times now: this is a horrifying embarrassment, not just for these four persona non grata Republican representatives, but for the whole state–an example of blatant hypocrisy and selfishness now linked to "the state of Colorado" more than any individual politician. Obviously there is a partisan distinction that can be made, but is that really enough for the people of Colorado from both parties who would never have approved of this hypocrisy? What can Colorado Republicans with any sense of community say? Or, dare we say it…Colorado Republican flood victims?

Folks, this matters. It matters to all of us. And it isn't about partisanship. It's about being better neighbors and citizens than this. We know the last thing we can expect from the Colorado Republican congressional delegation is an apology to the victims of Hurricane Sandy, including their fellow Republicans who are rightly criticizing them. But on a level that transcends politics, we really wish they would.

View the original article here

Media omission: GOP recall spokeswoman says she fought Republican Party more than Morse

(Schadenfreude – Promoted by Colorado Pols)

In an interesting Spot Blog Post Sunday by The Denver Post's Kurtis Lee, Republican State Chairman Ryan Call defends himself against recent accusations from Republican activists that he did not support the recall campaigns of Democratic State Senators Angela Giron and John Morse. Call told The Post that the State GOP, in fact, supported Republican recall candidates with cash, legal backing, get-out-the-vote activities, and other ways. The Post also reported:

"In an e-mail exchange, Call offered to attend a news conference in support of the recalls, but he was turned down by a spokeswoman for the recall organizers."

The spokeswoman for the recall organizers was Jennifer Kerns, and she was apparently not given the chance respond to Call's allegation. Either that or she deferred to Victor Head, the Pueblo activist, who was quoted in the article, slamming Call. But, in any case, on KLZ radio Friday afternoon, Kerns said:

Kerns: "This is my first time speaking out as the spokesperson for the recalls, and I'm doing it right here first on Grassroots Radio to say that the [Republican] Party blocked us every step of the way, whether it was phone calls into Pueblo from Ryan Call to suggest that they shut down those recalls, and they not aid and assist the guys from Pueblo Freedom and Rights, or if it was our chairman calling into Pueblo again the night of the elections telling George Rivera that he ought to prepare a gracious concession speech before the polls even closed…." "I've often said to my colleagues, and I'll say it first here publicly. As much as we fought John Morse and Angela Giron, the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and OFA, I have to say I actually fought my own Republican Party more, and I'm so sad and disgusted that I actually have to say that. But it's the truth." [BigMedia emphasis.]

Partial transcript of comments by Jennifer Kerns and KLZ host Ken Clark on KLZ's Grassroots Radio Colorado, Friday, Sept. 20:

Jennifer Kerns: This is actually my first time publicly peaking out about this, in regards to the [Republican] Party. But the fact that Ken is taking his vacation time to call in about this. One person inspires another. Ken is exactly right. We just came off a very historic recall. Both of those recalls were driven by the grassroots and people who had never been involved in politics. And I have to say this. This is my first time speaking out as the spokesperson for the recalls, and I'm doing it right here first on Grassroots Radio to say that the Party blocked us every step of the way, whether it was phone calls into Pueblo from Ryan Call to suggest that they shut down those recalls, and they not aid and assist the guys from Pueblo Freedom and Rights, or if it was our chairman calling into Pueblo again the night of the elections telling George Rivera that he ought to prepare a gracious concession speech before the polls even closed…. I encourage everyone who's listening to get involved or else there will be no Party…. I've often said to my colleagues, and I'll say it first here publicly. As much as we fought John Morse and Angela Giron, the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and OFA, I have to say I actually fought my own Republican Party more, and I'm so sad and disgusted that I actually have to say that. But it's the truth. We have to stay involved in the fight. And, again, it's the Party that has to make peace with us…. They need us more than we need them, and we just proved it in two different races. Ken Clark: We are all Andrew Breitbart. And we understand one thing that I don't think the Republican Party understands at all: We are at war. And we will not back down. We understand what's at stake in the United States of America. We understand what's at stake in Colorado…. Republicans are supposed to stand for something. When I was a kid, they did. It was called the Reagan revolution. And Ronald Reagan was able to articulate his principles in such a manner that the entire country wanted to follow him. And follow him they did…. As a Republican, I stand for principles. What the Hell do you stand for? I really want to know. Do you stand for the Party itself? Is it the Party that you're trying to protect. Is it your own power that you're trying protect? Or is it principle? Is it fighting for the very life of this country? Because that is what is at stake, ladies and gentlemen, that is what is at stake.

View the original article here

Will Republican state chair be scolding Pueblo GOP county chair?

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

A couple years ago, GOP Chair Ryan Call suggested that Sarah Arnold, who was an El Paso County GOP Secretary, resign because Republican office holders are not supposed to publicly criticize Republican policies–or favor one GOP primary candidate over another.

Call wrote that if Arnold "does not feel she can separate her personal opinions from her role as a County Party Secretary than she should consider resigning her position as a Party officer and thereby be free to speak out and be an advocate for whatever issues or causes, or for or against whatever candidates or Republican officeholders, she felt was most appropriate, free of the duty of loyalty and obligatory support that is a necessary corollary to official Party leadership." [BigMedia emphasis]

Pueblo County GOP Chair Becky Mizel should be hearing from Ryan Call soon, if he's consistent, because Mizel showed clear support for Tom Tancredo during an Aug. 16 radio interview.

At least that's what I take away from this discussion among Mizel, KNUS' Peter Boyles, and Jennifer Kearns, who's a spokesperson for the recall effort.

BOYLES: You guys can’t expect somebody with at least a room temperature I.Q. to go, “Boy, that Republican Party in Colorado, those are my guys!”

MIZEL: Yeah, but Peter, look at the people like Tom Tancredo, who are Republicans. You know, we’ve got Tom Tancredo, Cruz, people like that. [BigMedia emphasis]

BOYLES: Huh-uh. Tommy is the red-headed stepson of the Republican party, and all three of us know it. They just wish Tom would go away. I mean, that’s the truth. You know it. I know it. Becky knows it. I think smart people listening to this radio show wish – I mean, they believe,– not believe, they know the Republican Party of Colorado would just as soon Tancredo go soak his head.

KERNS: Well, that’s why –

MIZEL: Well, the same goes for Ted Cruz and Ted Cruz isn’t going to go away.

BOYLES: No. I agree.

MIZEL: So, you know, it’s — I think you do have to take it over from the inside.

You'd think that Mizel, who's found herself in the media spotlight due to the attempted recall of State Sen. Angela Giron, doesn't like Ryan Call much, given that she wants to take over the state GOP "from the inside." And she's certainly not scared of him, as she's violating rules that Call clearly supports. 

I shared Mizel's Boyles' interview with Arnold, and she wrote me that she's not surprised by Call's inconsistency in enforcing the thou-shalt-not- criticize-Republicans rule:

Arnold: Ryan Call is perfectly consistent in his inconsistency. He arbitrarily and capriciously applies the by-laws as it suits him (for example, it's okay if he contributes to a Democrat while a party officer, which is a clear violation of the by-laws, but not okay for someone to have a policy disagreement with the House Majority Leader while a party officer, as in my case–a topic on which the by-laws are silent). In fact, he's happy to change the bylaws so he could endorse Romney for President, an unprecedented act. The irony would be even more incredible since many Party officers (including Ryan) turned a blind eye in 2010 to the numerous endorsements of Tancredo as a third party candidate made by other party officers across the state, if he were to choose to pursue removal for mere comments about a candidate that don't appear, to me at least, to be an endorsement.

View the original article here

Pew Report: Tea Party Still Controls Republican Primaries

A new poll from Pew Research is bad (BAD) news for Republicans in Colorado and around the country:

Move in a more conservative or moderate direction on policy? By 54% to 40%, Republican and Republican-leaning voters want the party’s leaders to move further to the right. Not surprisingly, conservatives and those who agree with the Tea Party overwhelmingly favor moving in a more conservative direction, while moderates and liberals would like to see the party take more centrist positions. Yet the more moderate wing of the party is a minority generally, and makes up an even smaller share of the likely primary electorate. [Pols emphasis]

Everybody in the crazy pool!

That's not good — not if you are a rational Republican, anyway. As we've written time and again in this space, the greatest threat facing the Republican Party continues to be the outsized influence of the Tea Party. When only the most right-wing candidate can win a Primary, the Republican moving on to a General Election is essentially fighting with one hand tied behind his or her back.

Republican Party officials are well aware of this problem, but there's not a whole hell of a lot they can do about it — particularly when the Tea Party is a collection of a bunch of different groups.

Both local and national Republican Party officials recognize the need to moderate their policy positions and try to appeal to voters other than, well, old white guys. They are correct in their read of the situation, but they can't do a damn thing about it when the Tea Party wing of the Party refuses to play along.

Check out the sobering statistics from the Pew study in the box at right. The big news, obviously, is that the Tea Party continues to exert the most influence over the Republican Primary process:

Tea Party Republicans have influence in the GOP partly because of their high level of political engagement. Overall, they make up a minority (37%) of all Republicans and Republican-leaning independents nationally. Yet this group is more likely than other GOP voters to say they always vote in primary elections; as a result they make up about half of the Republican primary electorate (49%).

In Colorado, this could be good news for someone like Sen. Greg Brophy, who wants the GOP nomination to challenge incumbent Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper. Nationally, it means Democrats have a definite advantage in the 2016 race for President as it is likely that the GOP will put forth a right-wing candidate.

View the original article here