Public Service Announcement – Yes, the Arizona Court had Jurisdiction to Hear the SB1070 case.

by Elliot | 9:36 pm, July 31, 2010

Over facebook today a series of posts have exploded implying that Judge Bolton, who recently enjoined portions of Arizona’s new immigration law, was without jurisdiction to do so: “Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our [...]

Colorado Faces Medicaid Induced Budget Cliff

by PerlStalker | 8:04 pm, July 31, 2010

First, the good news. According to the Denver Post Colorado tax revenues have increased enough that no additional budget cuts will need to be made this fiscal year. The bad news is that Colorado is facing a potential $211 million budget cliff.

The sh…

Looking Under Colorado Seat Cushions for $142mm/year

by Rich Bratten | 6:24 pm, July 31, 2010

The GAO has confirmed that we are WASTING $142,209,675 per year of our Colorado citizens’ money through the federal surface transportation program. The GAO has identified Colorado as one of 27 “Donor” states that pay more in federal taxes and fees than they receive in federal-aid. No surprise there, since reports from ALEC show that [...]

How bloggers, lobbyists can cover Congress from home

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 4:21 pm, July 31, 2010

Back in the 1970s and 1980s when I was editor of Modern Healthcare and had one and then two reporters working for me in our Washington bureau, I pined to be there. I wanted to dig for stories that I knew we were missing and not breaking. I couldn’t do that from our Chicago office, but now that would be possible, thanks to the Internet and increasing transparency in Congress. 
In How to cover Congress without leaving home, Kelly McBride reports on how a few left wing bloggers are using technology to get ahead of their competitors who are covering Congress on the ground. Her article is must reading for anyone who’s trying to follow important legislation for an employer, trade association or a blog.
Even with the new technology, covering Congress or a state legislature is as hard as it’s ever been. You have to read bills, testimony, letters, articles blogs and anything else, including books, that will help you understand, say ObamaCare, and cap and trade bills. This takes time, but for wonks, it can be a lot of fun, especially when you uncover nuggets that you can use to advance a story or cause or to stop a bad amendment or bill. LINK: How to cover Congress without leaving home. By Kelly McBride.

Tea Party ‘bible’:The Star Fish and the Spider

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 3:56 pm, July 31, 2010

The Starfish and the Spider supposedly is must reading for politicians trying to understand the power of the Tea Party and how it may self-destruct, according to Kenneth P. Vogel. Read his story and then download the book to your Kindle or Kindle reader.
Tea Party, 9-12 and similar groups get their power from their leaderless decentralization. If they accept national leaders and start running candidates, they’ll be easy targets for the major parties.
 

The party never ends…

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 7:48 am, July 31, 2010

The Saturday Denver Post teases a story appearing tomorrow:Debate the costs, but two economists say bailouts probably prevented a depression.And as long as a drunk keeps drinking, he’ll prevent a hangover.BlueCarp

Colorado Governor’s Race: Endorsing Nobody

by Rossputin | 6:00 am, July 31, 2010

After thinking about the pluses and minuses of Scott McInnis and Dan Maes, and taking no pleasure in my conclusion regarding the Colorado Republican primary for Governor of Colorado, I have decided to endorse Nobody.

Let me be very clear here:  I’m not saying that I’m not endorsing anybody.  Rather, I am actively endorsing Nobody, endorsing the view, also taken by some friends who have created a Facebook page entitled “Undervote Colorado’s GOP Governor Primary” (whose logo I have appropriated not once, but twice, below), that the best course of action for Colorado Republicans in this election is not to cast a vote in this race.  (I encourage you to “like” the Facebook page and send it around to your friends.)

I am, with some sadness but more resignation to a Republican Party that needs reworking inside and out, endorsing Nobody.

The only chance to get the primary winner to drop out of the race is if he can be made to believe, strongly enough to overcome the ego which all candidates do and must have, that he does not have enough support to win the general election and that he should therefore get out.  The GOP would then fill the vacancy.

If that were to happen, it still might not help unless Tom Tancredo then drops out of the race, which he has said he won’t do.  And, given Tom’s gambit here, I take him at his word.

It’s a longshot, but perhaps the GOP wouldn’t fill the vacancy, and just subtly support Tancredo, though I think Tancredo has angered too many to expect that outcome.  Another possibility, as suggested by reader Ken S. is that Tancredo might be offered the Lieutenant Governor slot with specific authority over immigration-related issues.  Seems like an interesting idea, but I wouldn’t bet the ranch on Tancredo accepting such an offer.  It could depend on who the GOP governor nominee is.

At the end of the day, this election is probably lost; John Hickenlooper is probably our next governor.  This thanks to a GOP establishment which pushed the best candidate, Josh Penry, out of the race to leave us with Scott McInnis, a man who offered a partly-plagiarized paper to a foundation – and that’s the good part of that story for McInnis.  And thanks, I continue to believe despite many protestations from Tea Party and other friends, to a Tea Party movement which was so smitten by Dan Maes’ new guy, ordinary guy, fresh face that they forgot that experience matters.  Any really relevant experience.  Dan Maes is a nice enough guy upon a first meeting, which is all most people will have, but my interview with him made it clear to me that he should have run for the state legislature or some other achievable goal, not for governor.  He has a decent basic foundation, but nowhere near a deep enough understanding of issues, politics, or the business of governing to make his first campaign the race for the top elected position in the state.

Arguments that it’s about the “team” he puts around him are not compelling.  A good team is of course important, but the team captain should be a very strong player and Dan Maes is not that, at least not yet.  It’s not meant as an insult to Mr. Maes who seems like a sincere person (as does his wife, Karen).  What he’s doing is like me trying to play for the Denver Nuggets just because I played a little basketball in high school.  (Actually, Maes’ relevant experience to be governor is probably even less than my relevant experience to play in the NBA.)

While I understand Tea Party and 9/12 groups’ desire to elect a true outsider, it can’t be at the expense of competence.  Dan Maes is simply not ready to be governor of a state.  And Scott McInnis is unfit in both temperament and history to be governor of a state.  Let me be clear:  I mean no insult to Dan Maes, and I do mean insult to Scott McInnis who should (1) have handled the “Musings on Water” fiasco much better, including (2) dropping out of the race.

The whole situation reminds me of my blog note of January 5th of this year when Bill Ritter announced he would not seek re-election (I bet he’s regretting that decision now!) in which I predicted that Hickenlooper would be the Dems’ nominee and I said that McInnis (the clear front-runner at the time) “would rather run against anyone but John Hickenlooper.”  And more: “If I were the GOP, I’d hope that John Hickenlooper finds, yet again, a reason not to run for governor.”  We weren’t so lucky.  And at this point, the Republican candidates are so damaged that they might even lose to Ritter if he were running.

As crazy as it sounds, I still think McInnis might be more electable than Dan Maes, even though after one meeting with each I like Dan Maes better than I like Scott McInnis.  But by more electable, I mean maybe McInnis loses by 12 and Maes by 15. And those might be optimistic, which is a remarkable thing to believe in what is shaping up to be the best Republican year since 1994.

With looming redistricting and potential State Supreme Court vacancies, it’s so important to win this seat that I really considered holding my nose and voting for Scott McInnis, not so much based on electability but on the possibility of being convinced to get out of the race. (I don’t think Dan Maes will drop out under any circumstances.) But some smells are too strong to stomach, even holding one’s nose and I just can’t vote for a man who cheated a foundation and whose reputation among people who have known and dealt with him for a long time is “Scott is all about Scott.”  I have to be able to live with myself.  It’s why I didn’t vote for John McCain.  This is a different sort of problem than I had with McCain, but it leads me to the same place.

In short, I can’t vote for Dan Maes for this race at this time, and I can’t vote for Scott McInnis for any race at any time.

In the 2010 Colorado Republican primary for Governor of Colorado, I endorse Nobody and I encourage you to leave blank both governor choices on your Republican primary ballot.

Politically incorrect Ken Buck losing to Jane Norton?

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 11:52 pm, July 30, 2010

Ken Buck’s politically incorrect complaint about a few birthers who gave him hard times at Tea Party events and his allegedly sexist quip about Jane Norton’s high heels may cost him the GOP’s Aug. 10 Senate primary, according to an unnamed pollster cited by a Washington Post political blogger.
Birthers say President Obama wasn’t born in the U.S. and isn’t legally qualified to serve as president, but most Americans discount their claim and, like Buck, don’t want to hear anymore about it.
Of course, I’ve been predicting that Buck’s high heels quip could cost him, especially because Norton came up with a great ad that implies that Buck is sexist because he made the dumb joke. That Norton has joked about her gender in the campaign apparently hasn’t softened the negative impact of his comment or of the ad. And that the Norton campaign made the ad using an unattributed film clip without the permission of its owner, http://www.peoplespresscollective.com, probably isn’t on voters’ radar screens. The Buck campaign is making a big issue of the web site’s complaints about how Norton improperly used its clip, but so far, it’s an insiders’ debate.
How Buck’s complaint that a few people who attended Tea Party events were disruptive could hurt him is a bit hard to understand. The complaint may be a problem for Buck because it initially looked like he was calling everyone involved with Tea Parties dumbaxx “birthers.” 
Most curious is that WaPo’s The Fix would report the results of a poll conducted by an unnamed pollster. That pollster is saying that Norton leads Buck by five percentage points. Who the pollster is and works for and how and when the poll was conducted are not reported by Chris Cillizza who writes The Fix.
However, the poll results have some credibility in light of the latest Rasmussen Reports’ poll. It shows Norton with a nine point lead over appointed Obama Democrat Sen. Michael Bennet, compared with Buck’s six-point lead. But Buck has a six-point lead over Bennet’s primary challenger, Andrew Romanoff. Norton leads Romanoff by four percentage points. Both primaries look like toss-ups.
So while I’ve been saying that it appears that Norton has the momentum and that Buck is on defense, I’m not ready to declare Norton the winner of the primary. This mildly negative personality contest is still a toss-up until we get better information or until the primary is held.
LINKs:
Colorado primary provides fireworks a-plenty. By Chris Cillizza.
Norton attack ad [film clip] improperly taken from Peoples Press Collective video. 
Election 2010: Colorado Senate. By Rasmussen Reports.

Unplug.

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 4:53 pm, July 30, 2010

“The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a …

Tancredo says Hickenlooper “a wild-eyed liberal”

by Kelly Maher | 3:57 pm, July 30, 2010

Following former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo’s announcement that he’s running for governor of Colorado as the American Constitution Party candidate, he answered my question about his view of the Democratic nominee, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper. “He is a wild-eye liberal, left-wing ideologue,” said Tancredo.

Price for State Board to Adopt Common Core Standards Is Simply Too High

by Eddie | 10:54 am, July 30, 2010

Well, Monday is the State Board of Education’s moment of truth: the decision whether or not to adopt Common Core standards. What once looked like an outcome not in doubt has changed in recent days. A great Ed News Colorado story today by Todd Engdahl lays it out well.
Some of the decisions made by the [...]

Governor endorsement at 6 AM tomorrow

by Rossputin | 10:41 am, July 30, 2010

As I’ve said before, I don’t think there are hundreds of people anxiously awaiting to know who I will endorse in the Republican primary for Governor of Colorado.  But for those who are interested in my opinion, I’ve made my decision, written up the article, and it will be posted on these pages at 6 AM tomorrow (Saturday, 7/31).

Backbone Radio, August 1, 2010: All Colorado Politics, All the Time

by Rossputin | 10:40 am, July 30, 2010

All Colorado Politics, All the Time

From Ross Kaminsky:

Backbone Radio listeners, being among the most politically astute people in Colorado, don’t need to be told what an interesting political season we’re having, especially on the Republican side of the primary ledger.

I hope to make it a little more interesting with an informative show this week, focused entirely (or at least almost entirely) on Colorado politics.

In our first hour, we’ll be joined by Republican candidate for the 7^th Congressional District, Ryan Frazier. We’ll talk politics and policy and take questions from callers. After Ryan, going into the show’s second hour, we’ll be joined by Ryan’s Republican challenger, Lang Sias, with whom we’ll also have as wide-ranging a discussion we can have in half an hour.

Each candidate has submitted two questions to me to ask the other. Since Ryan is on first, he’ll get the questions from Lang. If he doesn’t answer one or both, then I won’t ask Lang the questions Ryan sent me for him.

Although the initial idea for having them on the radio was a debate, I’m pleased we’re doing it this way. I think a more substantive discussion with each will be possible without the usual back-and-forth sniping of a debate.

I want to discourage campaign operatives from calling and asking “gotcha” or other non-substantive questions. Serious questions by voters, especially 7^th CD voters who may as yet be undecided, would be most welcome by phone, e-mail, or instant message.

At 6:30, we’ll be joined by Colorado GOP Chairman Dick Wadhams to talk about a range of Colorado Republican issues, most importantly the Governor’s race and the potential impact of Tom Tancredo, as well as the Senate race and some other races around the state which aren’t getting the attention they otherwise might because of the chaos and entertainment value surrounding plagiarism and high heels.

Again, I look forward to taking calls from you, our listeners.

We’ll spend the last hour discussing various races around the state, with a bit of a foray into other races around the country. I’ll also discuss my endorsement in the Colorado Republican primary, which I’ll release first on my web page at http://rossputin.com a day or two before the show.

Please join me by listening to (and calling in to) this week’s Backbone Radio program from 5 PM to 8 PM on 710 AM KNUS in Denver and 1460 AM KZNT in Colorado Springs.

If you’re not in range of the radio waves, you should be able to listen to the show online by clicking HERE.

I hope you’ll actively participate in the conversation with me: Call the studio at 303 696 1971, e-mail me at ross(at)710knus.com, or instant message from my site at http://rossputin.com or through AOL Instant messenger to screen name Rossputin.

 

Getting to know Dan Maes

by Rossputin | 5:43 am, July 30, 2010

I had the opportunity to meet with Dan Maes for about 90 minutes on Wednesday evening, Dan graciously honoring our prior agreement to meet even after my rather large error regarding where he went to college, an error for which I apologized (again) directly to Dan.  Dan’s wife, Karen, also sat down with us for some of our meeting but, except for just one or two sentences which I got specific permission to write about, Mrs. Maes’ conversation with me will be held in confidence.

Following is the write-up of our meeting, based on 8 pages of notes I took (and filling in a bit more from memory.)  In the interest of not overly coloring this interview, and not laboring under the assumption that many people are anxiously awaiting hearing the Word of Ross, I will not post my endorsement in the Colorado GOP governor’s primary race until Saturday morning, 24 hours after posting this note.  That said, I will still offer occasional commentary within this note, as I did with my write-ups of meetings with Jane Norton and Ken Buck.  I hope you find the interview informative.

My meeting with Dan Maes could hardly have been any more different from my meeting with Scott McInnis.  Indeed, meeting with Scott left me so uninspired that I didn’t even write it up for these pages.  Most of the time was spent with Scott asking me questions, the answers to which I don’t think he really cared about, in what struck me as an attempt to get through our short time together without having to answer many of my questions and while trying to make me feel like he really cared to know me.  I felt like I was talking to a wind-up wax figure of a politician.

Dan Maes, for better or worse from a political point of view, answered – at least to some degree – every question I asked him.  It’s a mark of a political novice, perhaps both part of his appeal and one of his Achilles heels.  Similarly, there is a refreshing earnestness about him, with the potential downside of being more frank than a candidate should.

Before Dan arrived at our meeting place, I wrote down about 20 questions.  Following is our discussion as we had it, which was roughly in my original question order.  I will put direct quotations in quotes.  Dan spoke pretty fast so I might have a word or two wrong, even in direct quotes, but nothing that would change the meaning or intent of his statements.  Where I do not use quotes to convey something Dan said, I am probably still using quite a few of his own words, but I missed enough that I do not feel comfortable saying it’s a direct quote.

I’ll put my questions in bold, with Mr. Maes’ response (quote or my description) in regular text immediately afterward.

Question: What do you see as the pluses and minuses (if any) of the Tea Party movement, and are you the “Tea Party candidate”?

DM: “I never claimed the ‘Tea Party’ label, but every Tea Party which has endorsed in this race has endorsed me.”  “People are sick and tired of what the ‘machine’ is trying to do in this race.”  Maes believes people are passionately involved and organized, “more so than the media understands”, and that “their motives are good and right.”  He couldn’t think of any negatives regarding the Tea Party movement as it exists in Colorado and says he’s yet to see anything radical about it.  He also noted that over 40% of the audience at the state assembly was there for the first time, and figures he got 90% of those delegates.

Question: What do you think the chances are of the GOP taking back either part of the state legislature?

DM: 70% chance of taking back the State Senate, 80% chance of taking back the State House, though he admits he’s a naturally optimistic guy.  So far, no quantification of impact of Democrat “Four Horsemen”.  Maes also noted that “their portfolios have dropped like everyone else’s”, so they may be less willing to throw money around.

Question: What’s your view of the State Supreme Court and Clear The Bench Colorado?

DM: After twice complimenting Matt Arnold on the remarkable job CTBC has done so far, including forcing the retirement of one liberal justice, Maes gave an amusing analogy: “Bill Ritter mugged us several times in an alley. At each end of the alley were two liberal State Supreme Court Justices watching the alley for Ritter.”

Question: What would you  look for in a justice if you got to replace one or more?

DM: “Experience balanced with a conservative viewpoint, someone who would apply law rather than perform judicial policy making.”  On this answer, it seemed to me that Mr. Maes had a few good conservative buzzwords but really hadn’t thought about it much.

Question: What are your thoughts on redistricting?

DM: “My opponents are trying to make it an issue of experience, trying to use it against me.”  Maes said that it’s just a “numbers game” and that he could manage the process as well as anyone despite never having dealt with the issue hands-on.  He added that he is “not in this to manipulate things to the Republicans’ advantage.  I realize that may be heresy with some conservatives.”  My problem with Maes’ answer is that it didn’t really convey an understanding of how redistricting works nor how critical it is.  I also wish he had said that if he were governor and the Dems had the legislature that he would make sure they didn’t manipulate the outcome to their advantage.

We drifted to the topic of Roe v Wade (I can’t say I precisely remember the transition to that topic, but it came from Mr. Maes, not from me).  He said he “won’t fight Roe v Wade” (because it’s a federal issue and he’s running for a state office, and therefore it’s a bad use of his time) but also emphasized that he supported and voted for the “personhood” amendment.

Question: What do you think of Tancredo’s entrance into the governor’s race?

DM:   “I don’t know what his motives are.  He rattled his saber in November but then didn’t get in.  Something similar might happen again this time, though that may be a bit of naive hopefulness.  I told Tom “You told me how to do this, to use e-verify, and you put me in touch with others” for several discussions on immigration issues.

One person “made a case about sustainability of immigration – environmental and economic”.  Maes was also told about the issue if verifiable identification.

[This led to a somewhat broader discussion of immigration, including my asking Maes why his policy changed from what was essentially amnesty in early 2009 to a much more hard-line anti-illegals position now.]

“When I used the phrase ‘path to citizenship’, I didn’t know it was common terminology for amnesty.”  Maes described his current 3-point plan on the subject of immigration:

1) e-verify
2) maximize SB90 enforcement, i.e. report likely illegals to ICE
3) verifiable identification at social services gateways

He does support an Arizona-style law.  From the Arizona discussion, and after I told him about the judge’s ruling a couple of hours earlier overturning part of Arizona’s law, Maes brought up the 10th Amendment: “A new movement around the 10th Amendment will cause many lawsuits between states and the federal government, but we’ll push and push and push.  We’ll win some and lose some but we won’t give up” in an effort to recover legitimate states’ rights within the concept of our federal republic.  Maes believes it’s “time states started taking action” to recover these rights.

Regarding his change in position on amnesty, Maes says it came from talking to experts.  He named a few of the people he spoke to (presumably at Tom Tancredo’s urging) and they are indeed people well-known around the conservative side of the immigration discussion – serious thinkers whom I don’t always agree with but serious nonetheless.  (I won’t name the people here.)  Maes says that talking to experts is “what we do as public servants” and that regarding his initial pro-amnesty position he “wasn’t married to it, but wanted something on the issue to put on the web site.”

We had a related discussion about the 2nd Amendment.  Maes said he is “all for gun ownership and possession.”  We talked about a questionnaire which he’d filled out after which the gun rights group who gave him the questionnaire got pretty upset with a couple of the answers.  One was about a “Vermont-style carry law”, which Maes described as essentially unfettered concealed carry with no permit required.  He said that when he was answering the question, his “first reaction was ‘I don’t know what you’re talking about’ and his second reaction was “we’re not Vermont or Alaska.”  Still, he answered the question “no” without understanding it; he explained elsewhere that he defaults to “no” on questions he doesn’t understand.  There was a similar issue with a question about repealing a Brady-related law, to which he also defaulted to “no” without really understanding the question.  Maes also said that he “had very little time to answer” the questionnaire.

I asked him if he did indeed support unfettered concealed carry without permits. He said “If the people want it, if they vote for it by initiative or it passes the legislature, then as governor I will support it. But I won’t champion it.”

Regarding changing positions generally, Maes said “I am the new guy and I am learning.  I was told by some people ‘don’t respond to questions or questionnaires from special interest groups’ But I still believe people deserve straight answers.

[While I appreciate Dan Maes’ apparently sincere willingness to sit down and listen to people who know more about an issue than he does, I was concerned about how a candidate for governor could have spent so little time thinking about an issue as important to the state as immigration (even before the Arizona law made the issue even bigger) that he could start at amnesty and end up at or near Tancredo.  Maes tries to emphasize his open-mindedness but it’s still hard for me to think that someone with more experience and having spent more time thinking about issues wouldn’t need to be quite so malleable because he’d have a good grasp on a subject, even though it’s always wise to listen to experts.  Just the idea that he (says he) didn’t know that “path to citizenship” was the leading code phrase for amnesty is troubling.]

Question: What are your best ideas for boosting employment in Colorado?

DM: “We need to take some medicine first – meaning we have to shrink government.  The economy in the state is based on energy first.  We need to leverage that industry and bring it back better and stronger than ever.  We need a lower tax burden with smaller government.”  He re-emphasized bringing back energy jobs “more than ever” as well as “lightening the regulation burden and cutting taxes.”  “We can’t just click our heels together and say ‘jobs, jobs, jobs’ and have them fall from the sky.”

Maes turned the jobs discussion toward a broader political point: “I’m a conservative first, then a Republican.  It’s time for Republicans to start acting like Republicans again, and that means smaller government and lower taxes.”

I asked about balancing the budget through spending cuts.  Maes said “Ritter did it because he had to.  But I believe smaller government is just the right thing.  It doesn’t take a genius; it just takes the will to do it.”

[My take on this, like much of the conversation, was that Maes understood and seemed truly to believe the basic conservative talking points – and that’s good as far as it goes, but I’m not convinced that his understanding of the issues is deep enough.  That said, a solid foundational belief in small and inexpensive government is a good touchstone even, or maybe especially, for someone with no political experience.]

Question: What is your view on climate change?

“I don’t believe in man-made climate change. Policy people at the federal level spend a lot of time debating it. But I think it’s pretty arrogant for government to think they can impact something so immense and out of our hands as the temperature of the earth.  With that said, we do have to be good stewards of what we have, and I do support conservation to a reasonable degree.”

[I thought this was Maes’ best answer of the evening…]

Maes spoke about a UN program (which I can’t find, but I’ll take his word for it) which he says “is being implemented by city mayors” and which includes things like the “free” (shared) bicycle programs popping up in Denver and elsewhere.  Maes’ big objection (which I share) is that an “argument can be made that pledges (by mayors to implement UN policy) are replacing our Constitution.”

He added that “biking to work and things like that sound fun and green, but we’re losing our freedom under the guise of ‘living green.’”

Question: Would you rescind Governor Ritter’s executive order allowing collective bargaining by state employees?

DM: “Yes, week one, maybe day one, as well as eliminating state funding for Planned Parenthood.” Maes continued: “People are desperate for moral leadership, for character and integrity.  I want to be a moral leader, but not dictating morality.”

Question: What should be done to balance the state budget?

DM: “Start with head count reductions.  We have to examine closely where we have the right to do that.  Also, can we consolidate or eliminate any departments?  We have to be able to reduce costs and grow revenue.”

Again, this answer showed me an understanding of one good idea, but not a deeper understanding of the issue or the budgeting process.

Question: Would you support a tax hike to balance the budget?

DM: “I have pledged not to raise taxes. In fact, my goal is to cut the state’s income tax rate by 1/10th of one percent in my first year in office.”

Question: John Hickenlooper will undoubtedly make experience an issue in the race.  How will you respond?

DM: I’d tell the story of John Love versus Governor McNichols. Love was the new guy, a complete outsider, who ran against the incumbent insider, McNichols.  “Love was a small-office lawyer from Colorado Springs who became the first and only three-term governor in Colorado history.”

“It’s about integrity, character, leadership.  Business-to-business experience is more important than selling beer over the bar.”

Maes said something about sitting in the board room with Fortune 500 CEO’s, but when I pushed on that question a bit, he changed it to “what we call C-level” executives, such as CIO and CFO, people to whom he was trying to sell expensive telecommunications equipment.  I understand his wanting to emphasize interaction with big business, but I thought his gambit fell short when his “board room” meetings with CEOs turned into sales meetings with other executives.  I had hoped that he meant – as it sounded at first – that he had served on the Board of Directors of a big company.  But that wasn’t the case, or at least he didn’t say so.

“I’ve never claimed to be a big businessman or millionaire.  I’ve been a small to medium-size businessman but have interacted with small, medium and Fortune 500 companies throughout that business.”

When I suggested to Maes that the Love versus McNichols thing was a nice story but wouldn’t really answer the question of experience when Hickenlooper pushed it, Maes said in a typical moment of perhaps-rookie candor that he would try to move away from the experience issue quickly.  I would too in his situation.

Question: If Hickenlooper tries to make a campaign issue of your mileage reimbursements, will you provide the records to prove that the reimbursements were properly calculated?

DM: I’ll show our records if Hickenlooper shows his charitable contributions.

I pushed pretty hard on this one, suggesting that if he put it like that, it would suit Hick just fine because he’d then say “Good, I won’t show mine and you don’t show yours.”  Maes then seemed to say that he’d be willing to show everything, but I wouldn’t go so far here as to say he promised that.  And he made it clear that he is “not here to be used.  I’ll do it (show records) when I believe it’s the right time.” He noted that he’s given his tax returns even though as a matter of privacy they didn’t really want to.

I pushed more about the mileage issue, asking about the mileage records which back up the reimbursements.  Maes said that “some cars were used for the campaign only” and that all the miles on the vehicle, starting with the odometer reading when they were first brought to use in the campaign, are reimbursable.  For other vehicles, such as his daughter’s and wife’s records have been kept.  Maes certainly puts a lot of miles on vehicles, getting around the state as much or more than any other politician I’m aware of.  He says he has 60K miles on the second truck he’s used during the campaign.  I was somewhat concerned when he said that it would be a lot of effort to “recreate mileage records” from his schedule but that he’d do it if he had to.

Question: Why did you pay yourself reimbursements instead of hiring staff?

DM: “From March ‘09 through January 2010, we advanced funds and resources to the campaign with little or no reimbursement.  Most candidates would have put $50,000 or $100,000 in their campaign up front.  We did it differently.  We still weren’t getting a lot of contributions.  As revenue started coming in, we took reimbursements.  We haven’t gotten a paycheck since February, 2009.  We’ve been living off savings and the profit from selling the business.”

Dan and his wife said almost simultaneously, “We’ve made major sacrifices.”  Karen added “There’s a reason only millionaires run for office.”

When I pressed again on why taking reimbursements instead of hiring staff, Mr. Maes said “we made what we thought were fair reimbursements; a balanced approach.”

At the end of the day, the answer to the question is that between the money the Maeses put into the campaign and the lack of income during the campaign, running for office has been a significant financial hardship for them and they needed the reimbursements to reduce some of that pressure.  I don’t begrudge them that at all.  Nevertheless, the fact that they needed the money and didn’t use it to hire staff has probably hurt them, not least if that staff could possibly have helped them avoid $17,500 in fines for improper campaign finance reporting.  (Dan Maes pointed out to me when he read this interview write-up that he actually had a paid accountant to do the campaign reporting, but the person left 2 days before the report was due.  So, that particular fine might not have been alleviated by having cash to spend on staff.)

Maes added “Another amateur mistake we made” was repeatedly taking $5,000 at a time in reimbursements.  The repeated round number caught the attention of Erik Groves, the attorney who filed the complaint with the Secretary of State, and the round number allowed people to charge that Maes was “paying himself a salary” from campaign funds.  Maes argues that he just picked a convenient number that seemed close to what he was due to be reimbursed monthly, for mileage, campaign office rent (office no longer being rented), telephone, etc.

I asked Karen Maes if she would still encourage Dan to run if it were two years ago but she knew then what she knows now.  She answered “I knew when we were dating (that he’d run for office). If I don’t like it, I have only myself to blame.”

Dan added “I’m a Christian. I believe things are meant to happen when they are meant to happen.  When I started the business it was with the intent of selling it and running for office.”  He added that this run is therefore part of his plan even though they didn’t sell it for as much as they had hoped for.

Dan noted again, with Karen nodding in agreement, that the delay in showing their tax returns “was truly about privacy.”  I asked if there was at least some concern on their part that the low income numbers would be held against them and they did acknowledge that fear: “We did talk a little about ‘bad numbers.’”  Part of the reason they say they disclosed the information was that “we did believe it would cause others to have to show theirs.”

I told Maes that in my opinion he had played it very badly, that people would not have held low incomes against him if he had positioned himself as an ordinary guy, a man of the people, in an economic sense, from the beginning rather than implying or at least letting people infer that he was a bigger business success than he was.  I made it clear that in my view the political problem is not the numbers themselves (though some might argue that’s an issue in itself) as much as the fact that many people believed – and he didn’t correct them – that the numbers were substantially larger.  People don’t mind modest success; they mind being misled.

Question: What do you make of the recent (Rasmussen) poll numbers showing you doing no better against Hickenlooper than McInnis does, even after McInnis’ plagiarism problem?

DM: “I was excited because it showed us pretty much head to head. Even after the snafus, we were only down 2 or 3 points. For months we’ve only heard about ‘Maes can’t win’ but this poll shows we can.”  In terms of showing McInnis doing 1% better than Maes against Hickenlooper, Maes also took a jab at Rasmussen as a tool of the Republican machine, though he offered no basis for that charge.

I pressed Maes on whether he thinks he’s more electable than Scott McInnis to which he said “absolutely.”

Question: What was your reaction to the Denver Post’s basically saying you aren’t ready for the job of governor?

DM: “They’ve gotten into this routine of what a politician is supposed to look like…but the revolution is telling them otherwise.”

We drifted back into the electability question.

Questions: Will establishment Republicans who leave McInnis will go to Dan Maes?  And how much money do you think you can raise?

DM: “The Denver-proper business community might go in part to Hickenlooper.  But two miles outside Denver, nobody wants Hick.”  As far as how much money he needs, Maes said he thinks “we can do it on $500,000 to $1,000,000.”  I suggested he might need to raise half of what Hickenlooper raises to win.  Maes noted that Hickenlooper has already raised $4 million; he did not seem confident that he would be able to raise half that much.

When asked how he could win if he is massively outspent, Dan Maes said – and clearly believed – “Nobody knows the hearts and minds of the Colorado voters like I do.  Several of them have told me ‘Dan, don’t worry about the money…we’ll take care of that.’  Of course, I still do take raising money very seriously.”

And finally, when it came to potential further bombshell sort of news (regarding any potential candidate) and how that might play into the race, Maes ended the interview with one of his best lines of the evening: “Hey, my baggage is unpacked.”

—————————-

My reflections on the interview:

Dan Maes is, in his own way, a breath of fresh air after interviewing so many more experienced politicians.  He’s earnest and direct, perhaps more than he should be.  He seems to care about the state and has a certainly-conservative fundamental make-up.

That said, the fact that he’s never run for office – never even been particularly involved in politics or the political process – also shows through in his less-than-deep answers to serious policy and nuts-and-bolts politicking questions.

I understand why he would appeal to many Tea Party activists, especially those many people who are new to political activity.  I also understand why many people think that Dan Maes has bitten off more than he can chew here – although he would be the first to disagree.

I’m going to end my commentary here as my primary purpose with this note is to inform, not pontificate.  I’ll ponder this as well as the McInnis situation and come up with an endorsement (or not) within 24 hours. Again, I don’t say this trying to sound as if I think people are waiting with baited breath asking “What’s Ross going to do?”  I don’t think I’m that important.  I do know, however, that there is at least a small handful of folks who find my views interesting and for them (and for me) I’ll come to some sort of conclusion post haste.

Tom Tancredo EXCLUSIVE on Seng Center

by Jimmy Sengenberger | 9:38 pm, July 29, 2010

Below is our 7/29 college radio EXCLUSIVE with just-announced candidate for Colorado Governor Tom Tancredo in what appears to be his very first as-candidate interview on the radio.  The interview took place less than two hours after his press conf…

Ad blasts Scott McInnis’ plagiarism

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 6:06 pm, July 29, 2010

If Colorado Republicans and Scott McInnis think that Coloradans won’t hear about his plagiarism until he is defeated in the primary or general election or until he drops out, they need to watch this ad from Colorado Freedom Fund five times. The ad isn’t great, but it shows how the Democrats will deal with a plagiarist. h/t ColoradoPols.
The ad stresses the importance of integrity in government. That’s the point I’m trying to make. 
What I don’t agree with is that the ad concludes that McInnis is a “typical politician.” No, the reason that he’s in trouble is that he has shown that he’s more unethical than anyone who’s run for governor in this state for decades. He’s not typical. He’s a sorry outlier.
Who’s behind Colorado Freedom Fund? Outraged conservatives? Democrats going for the kill? A secret Republican gang? Betrayed supporters?
My guess: Someone who wants to convince McInnis to get out is sending him a message he might be able to understand.
LINK:
Scott McInnis’ plagiarism. Colorado Freedom Fund ad on YouTube.

What is at stake

by Mr. Bob | 4:35 pm, July 29, 2010

14 Weeks from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.Hat tip to BlueGrass Pundit Mr. Bob is a contributing author at the People’s Press Collective. Your source for Colorado Politics.

FUBAR apologies to the Army

by Rossputin | 4:11 pm, July 29, 2010

Alert reader, long-time US Army Reservist, and Republican candidate for Secretary of State of Colorado, Scott Gessler pointed out to me that I mistakenly implied in my recent Human Events article about Colorado’s GOP primary for governor that the term “FUBAR” was a U.S. Marine expression.

Its creation is indeed, as Scott points out, attributed to the Army.

My apologies to the Army for not correctly attributing this most valuable piece of American linguistics.

Tom Tancredo looks like a casual governor

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 3:57 pm, July 29, 2010

Tom Tancredo’s debut as a formal candidate for governor went off without a hitch. He dressed retired casual.
He sounded like a traditional gubernatorial candidate—with a sense of humor.
Indeed, at his announcement press conference, he did a better job of explaining his platform and agenda than any of the Republicans or Obama Democrat John Hickenlooper ever have explained theirs.
Tancredo came across as authoritative, knowledgeable and a man who’s been in the public spotlight for a long time.
He’s finally capitalizing on his 10 years in the state legislature, his years in Congress and his unsuccessful 2008 campaign for president. Nothing fazes him, and he has fun.
As he has for years, Tancredo spoke about his continuing efforts to protect Colorado workers and taxpayers from illegal immigrants. He said that Colorado taxpayers pay some $250 million to pay for the infrastructure required to support illegal immigrants. And that, he pointed out, is more than the state’s budget deficit.
While promising to roll back taxes that Governor Bill Ritter and his fellow Democrats enacted as fees, Tancredo also said that Colorado’s businesses should not expect hand outs.
They should expect fair treatment, he said.
His platform is on his web site, and I’ve reproduced it and commented on it in a previous post. 
LINKs:
Tom Tancredo posts his platform for jobs, modernizing government, securing Colorado. The Business Word, 7.29.2010.
Tom Tancredo for Governor.

Tom Tancredo would support Jane Norton if she won primary

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 3:42 pm, July 29, 2010

Tom Tancredo said after his announcement press conference today that he could support Jane Norton for Senate if she beats Ken Buck in the Aug. 10 primary. 
When I asked about supporting Norton, Tancredo turned with a sigh, and said ‘Yeah.” And that wasn’t with an exclamation point, but it drew a laugh. Tancredo supports Buck in the primary. 
He said he continues to support all Republicans he’ has endorsed for down ticket offices, and none have asked him to withdraw his endorsements.

Norton Attack Ad Improperly Taken From People’s Press Collective Video

by Julian Dunraven | 3:09 pm, July 29, 2010

By Julian DunravenHonorable Friends:This morning, Eileen Mahony, D.C. Bureau Chief for the People’s Press Collective, put up a very amusing piece about how the Norton campaign borrowed rather liberally from PPC to produce their latest attack ad again…

Tommy “the Tank” Tancredo Visits Your Devil’s Advocate

by Jon Caldara | 2:58 pm, July 29, 2010

If there ever was a can’t miss public access TV show, this is it folks. American Constitution Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo joins me this week for a one on one conversation. Tune in to hear a candid Tancredo on why he jumped into the race for governor, or better yet, just to [...]

Pedaling for Parker

by Jon Caldara | 2:20 pm, July 29, 2010

During the fight for personal and economic freedom it is often hard to take a minute and focus on the non-political fights for life.
It is going on nine years since we lost our only child at the time to a vicious and rare form of cancer. There isn’t a moment that goes by that [...]

Democrats prefer Kool-Aid to Tea?

by Mary Smith | 1:48 pm, July 29, 2010

Get ready for the Democrats’ fear factor in the fall elections: the Republican Party (scary) has been co-opted by the Tea Party (even scarier) and you’ll be so frightened out of your wits that you’ll vote Democratic. Not going to happen. Here’s why…

Human Events’ ridiculous “Obama the Muslim” article

by David Kopel | 12:58 pm, July 29, 2010

(David Kopel) Ronald Reagan once said that the conservative D.C. weekly Human Events was his favorite newspaper. And with good reason. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, there were few significant alternatives to the then-hegemonic MSM. Along with National Review, which was Reagan’s favorite magazine, Human Events was an essential source for stories that the MSM refused to cover, and [...]

R Block Party South, 7/29/10

by Nikki | 12:57 pm, July 29, 2010

Meeting Tonight! – at the Victory Office – see below… Come and hear the latest in Colorado’s ever-changing political landscape. Just in… Scott McInnis will be joining us at the beginning of the meeting. Dick Wadhams, CO GOP Chairman, will be kicking off the meeting… Leondray Gholston, CO GOP Vice-Chair will be wrapping up the [...]

Just curious…

by completecolorado | 11:50 am, July 29, 2010

I know I’m oversimplifying, BUT…
If only the Feds can enforce federal law, does that mean Denver Police should stop making arrests for petty posession marijuana?

The Blueprint is Alive and Well

by Al Maurer | 11:41 am, July 29, 2010

Just when I thought the craziness in the GOP primary had reached its limits, I learn about the left’s attempt to knock a conservative Republican candidate out. This is the same Blueprint that the left used so successfully in Colorado in 2006 and 2008. Dean Boehler is a conservative running for Senate District 6 against [...]

Tom Tancredo posts his platform for jobs, modernizing government, securing Colorado

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 11:31 am, July 29, 2010

Gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo has posted a modestly ambitious plan for making Colorado a strong and prosperous place to run a business and raise a family.
His four-point agenda for Creating Jobs looks like a good conservative, pro-business, pro-worker platform. Unlike Scott McInnis, Tancredo is intellectually honest about how little power a Colorado governor has when it comes to creating jobs. That is, a governor has no power over the nation’s fiscal or monetary policies or its labor laws, environmental laws or international trade agreements. The plan with my comments in italics:

Restore the business sales tax exemptions that were eliminated by the Ritter “Dirty Dozen” Tax hikes, the Senior Homestead Exemption, and roll back the mill levy freeze.
Repeal the job-killing Business Personal Property Tax. This probably would bring more than enough new jobs to Colorado  to cover the lost tax revenues, and it would encourage much more capital investments in the state.
Revisit and revise harmful Ritter-era regulations, including the restrictive new oil and gas regulations. Colorado’s regulations favor huge companies that have staff who deal with such regulations. The Ritter regulations are anti small business and small employer. They discriminate against small, Colorado-based exploration and production companies and drive them to other states.
Protect American workers (and help honest employers ensure that their employees are legally in the country) through the use of a mandatory workplace verification system such as E-Verify. Every honest employer is for this plan. Employers who exploit underpaid illegals and the lawyers, educators, health workers and social workers who profit from helping illegals oppose fixing the system. Illegal immigrants distort American labor markets in favor of unscrupulous employers and against under paid American workers.

His four point agenda for Modernizing Government (instead of Fiscal Conservatism as posted yesterday) looks conservative, but not all independents will go for it. My comments are in italics:

Build a “zero- based” budget. Lots of politicians have proposed this over the years. I don’t know that any legislatures ever went along. Colorado has a weak governor form of government, and I doubt this is doable.
Restore the limit on state spending. This is a really broad statement. Would this be done in cooperation with the General Assembly or by ballot initiative?
Achieve cost savings by contracting with the private sector, where appropriate, to carry out certain state services. This makes a lot of sense provided that the state retains the powers and hires the talent needed to ensure that private contractors improve the quality of state services while containing or reducing expenses. Today, we contract out road building and other construction services in ways that encourage over building. Contractors are major contributors to Colorado’s political campaigns, and they contribute to the candidates who they think will spend the most money on their services and will hire them.
Refuse federal dollars that come with unsustainable, long-term state spending commitments or harmful federal mandates. Nice and idealistic but a not totally practical plan. If we don’t take our dollars from the Fed, New York, Illinois and other unionized and nearly bankrupt states get them. Tancredo needs to explain which dollars he would take and which he wouldn’t. The General Assembly may not go along.

Securing Colorado is the agenda everyone’s waiting to see. It looks great to me. I think it will appeal to most conservatives who aren’t trying to exploit illegal immigrants’ low wage demands, and a lot of independents will like the plan. Republicans who want to see this plan implemented must help the GOP take back the legislature and elect Tancredo. The plan:

Implement tough new Arizona-style interior and employer enforcement laws.
Withhold state funds from local governments that enact so-called “sanctuary policies”
Oppose providing taxpayer subsidized in-state tuition benefits to illegal immigrants.
Audit state and local government compliance with state immigration laws.

LINKs:
Tom Tancredo for Governor.

Michigan: Just Another Case of Phony Alternative Teacher Certification “Reform”

by Eddie | 10:52 am, July 29, 2010

From Michigan comes today’s reminder that education “reform” does not always mean real reform. History teacher Ryan McCarl writes for the Education Report that a new bill in his state designed to promote alternative teacher certification, well, really does very little or anything of the kind. In fact, he calls it “meaningless”:

The text of House [...]

keep looking »

Featured Posts

• Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Testify Against Themselves

  In order to protect our rights, our security must be protected. In order to protect our security, our rights must be invaded. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

• World Economic Forum in Switzerland: Global Elites Celebrating Hypocrisy
• SCOTUS decision on warrantless GPS surveillance produces an expected friend of privacy
• You didn’t want your Fifth Amendment rights, anyway, did you?
• Keynesian Economists Finally Catch Up and Agree: China to Have Hard Landing
• The Beauty of Private Property—from China?
• Regime Uncertainty, Regulatory Surge, and Unemployment Numbers