Q4 2009 Fundraising Totals (Incumbent in Bold)
Michael Bennet - 1,149,091
Tom Wiens - 725,000
Jane Norton - 550,605
Ken Buck - 39,850
John Salazar - 187,160
Scott Tipton - 109,981
Bob McConnell - 12,471
Betsy Markey - 227,442
Cory Gardner - 197,553
Diggs Brown - 61,174
Tom Lucero - 25,824
Ryan Frazier - 218,824
Ed Perlmutter - 215,201
Lang Sias - 30,931
U.S. Senate
Michael Bennet's fundraising continues at a monumental pace and it is starting to look as if he will have a massive advantage no matter who the Republican nominee may be. Jane Norton once again posted strong numbers, though many observers found it troublesome she did not improve much over the last quarter's take.
Though the Wiens campaign is declining to say how much of the $725,000 they are claiming to have brought in came from the candidate himself, it appears safe to assume that Wiens followed through on his previous statement that he would be investing $500,000 of his money into his campaign. Regardless of where the money came from, this means Wiens now has a very well-financed primary campaign.
Ken Buck had an extremely disappointing quarter. The sole consolation here is the massive ad buy by the Campaign for Liberty that can free up some money that may have been allocated by the Buck campaign for media and divert it into organizational costs.
CD-3
Scott Tipton had a strong showing for his first month in the race. If he is able to keep up the pace he should be able to place the seat into play.
CD-4
Cory Gardner had another strong fundraising quarter. Despite being outraised by Makey, CD-4's Republican voter registration advantage means that Makey would have to be raising even more than she is to make it up. Gardner is strongly positioning himself as the leading candidate in both the primary and general elections.
At $61,174, Diggs Brown has enough money to mount a primary challenge, even if it is a long-shot. He will at least be able to afford a working campaign organization, which is more than what most other underdog candidates in these Republican primaries can say.
Tom Lucero again had a lackluster quarter, but even more damaging to his prospects than his low fundraising haul is his astounding 200% burn rate. When a campaign spends twice what they raised in a given quarter, it is a sure sign it is on it's last legs.
CD-7
Ryan Frazier had a strong fundraising quarter and stands as the only Colorado Republican challenger for federal office to outraise the Democratic incumbent. While a narrow victory, Frazier's take places what was expected to be a safe Democratic seat into play.
Ex-Democrat and Mark Udall supporter Lang Sias, despite starting fundraising at the beginning of November and having most of the quarter to fundraise, came in with a dismal $30,931. Nearly half of his money came from Washington DC, as opposed to Frazier who blew him out of the water and raised funds mostly from in-state, and $5,000 of that came from John McCain's PAC. While Sias gave the illusion of being a strong candidate with his McCain backing and much-touted Washington connections, after raising only $30,391 it is hard to see how he is even remotely serious. Sias' funding problems will become even more severe as he is rumored to be planning to bypass the grassroots by running a costly petition campaign in the coming months.
The Steamboat Pilot reports that the candidates in the now-contested CO-03 primary are pledging unity after the primary, and seem like they're actually going to do it:
“You may not actually, for the most part, be able to slip a piece of paper between what any of us are going to be standing for, with the Republican candidates,” Tipton said last week. “I will not delineate differences between myself and them. … I’m not running against them, I’m running against John Salazar, and we’ll let the voters decide who should carry the banner.”
McConnell echoed that sentiment Sunday.
“The policy differences are minimal — we, along with Martin Beeson, are all good conservative Republicans,” McConnell said about himself and Tipton. “I’ve told Martin and Scott, ‘I’m not running against you, I’m running with you.’ We will let the people of Colorado decide.”
This just goes to show that maybe Republicans really can unify when there are no efforts to maliciously sabotage primaries to prematurely end them or to run a campaign entirely out of Washington D.C. over the wishes of local activists. What a concept.
State Representative Scott Tipton is entering the race for the 3rd Congressional District joining Martin Beeson and Bob McConnell in the primary to unseat incumbent John Salazar. Rep. Tipton told the Pueblo Chieftain Salazar's support of the health care bill pushed him into the race.
Tipton said Salazar's support for the House Democratic health care legislation "was the straw that broke the camel's back."
"Now we're moving to a government-run health care system," Tipton said in a telephone interview. "That will be punitive. They are talking about cutting $500 million from Medicare. No one can look me in the eye and tell us how this will create any more efficiency."
According to Tipton, State Senator and former gubernatorial candidate Josh Penry will not be entering the race, although there is no official word on Penry's future plans.
Rep. Scott Tipton has just announced that he intends to run against John Salazar in CD-3. Republicans now have top-tier challengers in CD-4, CD-7, and CD-3 with a clear possibility of taking back all three. The Montrose Daily Press reports:
Tipton, R-Cortez, said he had initially ruled out running against John Salazar for Congress, but the past several months - of growing federal deficit and joblessness - changed his mind.
"Over the past eight months, we've seen the national debt triple," Tipton said. "We've passed a stimulus package that has not created jobs."Comprehensive healthcare reform that recently passed the House gave Tipton the final push.
"The straw breaking the camel's back was government healthcare and the public option. Our congressman has apparently played a part in it," Tipton said.
Of course, all of these congressional candidates (along with every other Republican candidate in the state) could very well be screwed if they end up associated with Tom Tancredo.
Rick Wagner in the GJ Sentinel pushes the idea of a Scott Tipton candidacy in CD-3 to take on John Salazar:
Tipton, who lives in Cortez, is presently a state representative for House District 58, but in 2006 he mounted a campaign against then freshman Rep. Salazar. It was a bad year for Republican candidates and a particularly bad one for underfinanced campaigns like Tipton’s. He was however, viewed as a hard-working and knowledgeable candidate, one who, with the right backing and timing, could present a formidable presence. Political rumblings indicate he might be thinking this is the time.
The 2008 election carried troubling signs for Salazar as he rode the Obama support to victory but won with 2 percent less of the vote than he received in 2006 against an underfunded and outspent regional candidate. In this district, money to spread a message over long distance is a powerful force.
In 2006 Salazar overwhelmed Tipton 2 to 1, spending over $2 million on the campaign. But something happened in 2008. Salazar spent $900,000 on his 2008 campaign compared to regional candidate Wayne Wolf’s $26,000. Still, he could not carry Mesa, Montrose or Delta counties.
Tipton would surely be the strongest candidate Republicans could front in CD-3, but it is fairly unlikely that he would give up his state house seat at this point to challenge Salazar. Should Salazar step aside, he would be as close to a lock to be the next Congressman from that district as anyone could be.
(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)
The U.S. House of Representatives finally released the text of the health care bill called ··America·s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009·· HR 3200 and it can now be read in its 1,018 page entirety. The bill's subtitle is " A Bill to provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes. All the bill's language was written to further this cause, i.e, to provide healthcare to everyone and to reduce the growth in spending. You can link to a pdf of the health care bill here.
Since the bill's public release, a lot of people have gotten fired up in support and in opposition to it. Each side has called the other liars, and worse. One part of the bill in particular has touched a nerve. That is Section 1233, ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION.
Although the section is only ten pages long, it is still hard to digest. Below is a condensed version of this Section with cites to page number and line number. In Section 1233, the person being consulted is an individual over 65 in the medicare program. The Consultant is called a "practitioner".
p. 428, l. 14-19 - A 'practitioner" is a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant. The practitioner is the one who consults on Advanced Care Planning with the individual. There is nothing in the health care bill that states the consultation is voluntary.
p. 425, l. 17-21 - The practitioner first gives an explanation of and counsels on advance directives, living wills, durable powers of attorney and health care proxies.
p. 426, l. 4-8 - The practitioner then explains and counsels end-of-life services, palliative care where they ease pain without curing the underlying disease, hospice programs for meeting the physical needs of the terminally ill and the benefits for such services. The practitioner does not have to explain any drawbacks of these end-of-life services such as death itself.
P. 426, l. 9-16 - The practitioner finally explains the Order Regarding Life Sustaining Treatment and why it is beneficial to the individual and the individual's family. The practitioner does not have to explain any drawbacks of this Order such as death itself.
After the consultation is over, the individual is not involved with any further parts of the Advance Care Planning Consultation. In no part of the process is the individual required to sign anything or execute any planning documents.
p. 427, l. 10-25 - Having a consultation in and of itself, allows the practitioner to formulate an Order Regarding Life Sustaining Treatment without any further input from the individual. The Order just needs to be signed by a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant to be in full force and effect. The Order is an actionable medical order designed to stay with the individual and to be followed by health care professionals for the remainder of the individual's care.
p. 430, l. 1-4 The only input from the individual for the formulation of the Order is that it communicate the individual's preferences regarding treatment. Since the individual doesn't have to sign anything or affirmatively state anything during the consultation, it is up to the practitioner to presume and interpret the individual's preferences.
p. 430, l. 13-24 The Order has the power to limit medical interventions, limit the use of antibiotics, limit nutrition and limit hydration. The Order can address whether an individual goes to the hospital or remains at a hospice or other nursing home.
So where does the language in the Order come from?
p. 428, l. 5-13 The Order is guided by a coalition of stakeholders including state hospice associations, home health association, etc. This is the section that has been decried as a "Death Panel" by Gov. Palin and others.
Since this house bill is written to reduce the growth of health care spending and people over 65 consume health care dollars at the end-of-life, it is pretty easy to see why Section 1233 was inserted into the health care bill.
Older Americans are not stupid. They can read and they can comprehend this health bill. No wonder so many older Americans are turning out in droves at town hall meetings. You would be angry too if the federal government was trying to kill you off.
If you want to vent, below are the phone numbers for our congress members and senators. Give them a buzz.
Dianna Degette - CD1 - 202-225-4431
Jared Polis - CD2 - 202-225-2161
John Salazar - CD3 - 202-225-4761
Betsy Markey - CD4 - 202-225-4676
Doug Lamborn - CD5- 202-225-4422
Mike Coffman - CD6 - 202-226-4623
Ed Perlmutter - CD7 - 202-225-2645
Mark Udall - Senate - 202-224-5941
Mike Bennett - Senate - 202-224-5852
Mike Robinson is Senior Partner at Robinson & Henry P.C., a Castle Rock, CO law firm.
You can get PPP to do polling in Colorado at by voting Colorado at http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/
We are only a few votes down from Arizona, let's get some match-up info for 2010. We need to update from Bill Owens and John Elway
Ryan Frazier and Cleve Tidwell, both candidates for US Senate, are trying real hard to pull a victory in this straw poll. Tidwell had been leading for days when at the last minute Frazier got out the word on facebook and as taken a lead. Over 1150 people have voted. Ken Buck has little support and Bob Beauprez has virtually none.
Update: Tidwell wins with 47% to Frazier's 45%. Ken Buck recieved 6% and Beauprez managed to win 1%.
John Salazar has gotten his first challenger for the CD-3 seat today in district attorney Martin Beeson.
Beeson offers few details on his website, but was elected district attorney for an area covering a large part of the western slope in a 2005 recall election.
Thankfully, the auto-maker bailout plan has been killed by the Senate. It seems some priciples of fiscal conservativism are alive and well in the Republican Party after all. In case you're curious, Wayned Allard voted against the bailout and Ken Salazar voted in favor. (H/T Ben DeGrow) This is great news.
What isn't such great news is our would-be Governor's vote on the auto-maker bailout. Here's how the Colorado Congressional delegation voted on it:
YEA
DeGette
Perlmutter
Salazar
Udall
NAY
Musgrave
Lamborn
NOT VOTING
Tancredo
Tom Tancredo previously voted in favor of the $700 billion bailout plan. Tancredo's defenders immediately called this an isolated incident (even though a $700 billion spending spree arguably cancels out a career of fiscally conservative votes). Tancredo's staff, seemingly catching on to the outrage among fiscal conservatives over the first bailout vote, came out and tried to play damage control by promising opposition to the auto-maker bailout. PolitickerCO reported the following last month:
Tancredo will be voting against the proposal, said spokesman T.Q. Houlton.
"We're bailing out these large auto industry makers where basically they've run their companies really in a bad direction, and we shouldn't be holding the taxpayers responsible for that," Houlton said.
The article went on to say:
Houlton said Tancredo will remain in Washington, D.C. throughout the U.S. House's lame-duck session.
To use a bit of internet slang: WTF, Tom?
Rep. John Salazar appears to have taken himself out of consideration for a posting in Barack Obama's cabinet by accepting a position on the House Appropriations Committee. While Salazar might not be out of the mix for a cabinet posting, the committee assignment hardly suggests he is going to be around the House much longer. In fact, it suggests that House Demoracts might be worried about rumors of Salazar's intent to retire in 2010.
Republicans tried a similar tactic with Bob Beauprez in 2005. When word got around that Beauprez was vacating his seat to run for Governor, he was given a spot on the House Ways and Means Committee in a move viewed by some as an attempt to persuade him to stay in Congress.
Democrats would be in a nearly identical, if not worse, situation to the Republicans in 2006 if Salazar were to step aside. Expect the House Democrats to pull out all the stops over the next few months to try to convince John not to return to the private sector.
(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)
Thursday, December 04, 2008
We must admit we're torn by the news that President-elect Barack Obama is reportedly considering 3rd District Congressman John Salazar for secretary of agriculture.
If Salazar, the San Luis Valley farmer, were sent to Washington, it would open up the 3rd District for a special election and the possibility that someone who is far more dynamic and productive could be elected to replace Salazar in Congress.
But the same reasons we could not endorse Salazar in his re-election bid for Congress this year make him a poor choice for Obama's Cabinet.
He has been a staunch supporter of the Farm Bill, with all of its overly generous subsidies to certain types of farmers. Obama needs an agriculture secretary who will seek real reform in the bloated farm bill.
Salazar has also been an unabashed supporter of earmarks - pork-barrel funding which members of Congress tack onto budget bills to get money for projects in their own district. The Agriculture Department needs someone willing to speak out against that kind of funding.
Finally, Salazar was largely absent from this part of the 3rd District until the final weeks of the campaign, and he was not a leader in some of the critical natural resources debates on the Western Slope. As Agriculture Secretary he would oversee the national forest service and its multitude of contentious natural resource issues throughout the West.
John Salazar unquestionably knows farming, especially in the San Luis Valley. But we believe he would be the wrong choice for secretary of agriculture.
The Rocky Mountain News today quotes unnamed Democratic Party sources making claims that the 3rd Congressional District would be competitive in a special election:
But Democrats say the results of the November election bode well for them. Democratic U.S. Sen.-elect Mark Udall beat Republican Bob Schaffer by about 12,000 votes in the district, and the Democratic state board of education candidate lost by about 3,000 votes.
The article irresponsibly fails to note MSNBC exit polls showing John McCain winning Western Colorado by 9-points and the recent Georgia Senate runoff indicating depressed Democratic voter turnout without Barack Obama on the ballot.
Somebody better call Bill Menezes at Colorado Media Matters, this article is a bonafide orgy of uncriticality!
With John Salazar looking very likely to take a cabinet post in Barack Obama's administration, there is a strong possibility of a 2009 special election in CD-3. What hasn't been reported much in the blogosphere are the rampant rumors from the Western Slope that John Salazar just doesn't like being a Congressman all that much and was considering stepping aside in 2010 anyway.
Here is a quick look at some of the potential candidates on both sides for CD-3.
The Republicans
The Democrats
JOHN SALAZAR MAY BE OBAMA'S AGRICULTURE SECRETARY: Ken Salazar's odds of an Obama appointment may be next to nothing, but things are looking up for John. (H/T: Face the State)
CD-3 would very likely flip back to the Republicans in 2010 without John Salazar around. Bernie Buescher would be the best bet for Democrats to hold on but after he was ejected from his State House seat it is very unlikely that he could carry the entire Third Congressional.
Republicans have a strong bench in CD-3 that could take the seat in a special election. Sen. Josh Penry would handily win in a general election and could probably take the Republican nomination with as much ease as he took the Senate Minority Leader position. If Penry opts to run statewide or stay put in the Senate; likely GOP candidates could include Rep. Scott Tipton, Rep. Ellen Roberts, or Matt Smith.
(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)
Ever stood in line at Target next to that mom who threatens and threatens her bratty little 2-year-old while the kid screams and screams?
Congress has apparently taken the same stance in dealing with the Wall Street mess - only this time it's taxpayers who will be forced to foot the bill or listen to the screaming. Republicans have a chance to demonstrate some tough love with their Wall Street counterparts and tell them to "suck it up."
I, for one, am tired of paying for other people's mistakes and bad gambling habbits. This isn't rocket science - either you have the money and can afford a home or you don't. If a lender decides to take a chance on bad debt, why are taxpayers left making the banking industry whole? You take your loss, 'cause that's how we do it in the NBA.
Most Americans couldn't tell you what is going on in Congress let alone Wall Street - all they know is that things cost more now than they did a year ago.
Most national business groups have thrown their lot in with the Democrats. Don't believe me? If Republicans are smart, they'll simply thumb their nose at Wall Street and stand up against this sort of government takeover. But I'm guessing that most of them haven't the fortitude it will take to let a few bad companies (and investors) die to preserve the rest of the herd.
History has shown us that 'inevitable' and 'emergency' legislation like the Patriot Act or Sarbanes-Oxley is never more popular than on the day it is passed -- and this issue isn't all that popular to begin with.
For general inquiries, tips, and blogroll requests; please email: info@rockymountainright.com
