A spicy discussion on Proposition 131 at SunFest

The Proposition 131 debate at SunFest on Friday got spicy at times.

Here are the highlights from the discussion at the University of Denver about the all-candidate primary and ranked choice ballot measure:

• “Partisanship is absolutely out of control, but an overcomplicated system that will cost tens of millions of dollars to implement, that will have confusing ballots for voters and will invite more and more dark money into Colorado politics, is not the answer,” Colorado Democratic Party Chairman Shad Murib said. When asked why he thought Proposition 131 would lead to more dark money in Colorado politics, Murib pointed to how things have gone in Alaska. He didn’t cite, however, specific policy or political reasons why the election system changes in Proposition 131 would alter the campaign funding environment. 

• Kent Thiry, the former CEO of the Denver-based dialysis giant DaVita, tried to ease election officials’ concerns about implementing the ballot measure by claiming that the legislature would set aside millions of dollars to ensure the changes go smoothly. But when pressed on where in the limited state budget that money would come from, Thiry didn’t have specifics. “In the context of the overall budget of the state, and the importance of elections to a democracy, this is pennies per person per vote,” he said, adding that he’s working with Gov. Jared Polis’ office on a budget proposal.
• Murib and Thiry battled over whether Proposition 131 would make Colorado’s general elections more or less competitive. Murib argued that there’s a Democrat and Republican running against each other for almost every elected office in Colorado, whereas in Alaska, which has adopted a system identical to Proposition 131, something like a third of general election races only have four candidates from the same party running against each other. Thiry pointed out that most Colorado races are decided in the primary because the seats either lean decidedly Democratic or Republican. He argues it’s better to have a higher-turnout general election with multiple candidates from the same party running against each other than one with candidates from opposing parties with what’s essentially a predetermined outcome.
• Boulder County Clerk and Record Molly Fitzpatrick, a Democrat who is president of the Colorado County Clerks Association, said she’s not sure local election officials will be able to implement Proposition 131 by 2026, when it’s supposed to go into effect. She ran a ranked choice municipal election last year in Boulder — after three years of preparation — and while it was successful, she said, it was challenging. “When we talk about these technology systems, they are not ready,” she said. “When we talk about the training that needs to happen for election officials, that is not developed.”

A recording of the event will be available on The Colorado Sun’s YouTube page in the coming days.

WHEN WOULD PROPOSITION 131 ACTUALLY GO INTO EFFECT?

It’s unclear when Proposition 131 would go into effect if it passes.

The measure calls for the changes to be made by the 2026 election, but the legislature amended Senate Bill 210, a broader elections bill, at the end of this year’s lawmaking term to require that 12 Colorado municipalities in counties of a certain size and with a specific demographic makeup conduct ranked choice elections before a ranked choice election could be used statewide. Additionally, the amendment said Colorado could not move to an all-candidate primary system until that requirement has been met.

The governor, who has endorsed 131, begrudgingly signed Senate Bill 210 with the intention of implementing Proposition 131 by 2028 —two years late — if the ballot measure passes. He said that extra time would be enough for local elections officials to get prepared.

However, Thiry told The Unaffiliated last week he still wants Proposition 131 to go into effect in 2026, when the offices for governor, attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer, as well as a U.S. Senate seat, will be up for grabs.

And county clerks are still assuming that they will have to implement the measure by 2026.

Matt Crane, executive director of the Colorado County Clerks Association, didn’t directly answer questions about whether local elections officials felt confident they could comfortably implement Proposition 131 by 2028.

“If the systems are in place, we can run a successful election. But we have great reservation that the systems will be in place by 2026,” said Crane, complaining that the concerns of clerks have been brushed off. “We can do this. We will do this if the voters charge us with it. But people need to be aware of the challenges of implementing this too soon.”

• Kent Thiry won’t give up on reforming Colorado’s elections. But is Proposition 131 the right formula for change?
  — The Denver Post

JOHN HICKENLOOPER ENDORSES PROPOSITION 131

U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colorado, is the latest big-name politician to endorse Proposition 131.

“Open party primaries and ranked choice voting would encourage more voter participation regardless of party affiliation,” he said in a written statement. “A more open system that better reflects public opinion could also encourage more people to run as candidates. This is a win-win to strengthen our representative democracy.”

Hickenlooper appeared alongside Polis at a fundraiser Monday to raise money for the campaign to pass 131. Thiry provided remarks at the event. Denver Mayor Mike Johnston is also supporting the initiative.

WHAT TO WATCH THIS WEEK

• The committee on Treatment of Persons with Behavioral Health Disorders in the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Systems meets at 1 p.m. Tuesday at the state Capitol to consider its proposed bills for the next legislative session.
• The Legislative Audit Committee meets at 9 a.m. Monday at the Old Supreme Court. 

THE BIG STORY

Adam Frisch and Jeff Hurd face off in Pueblo debate

Democrat Adam Frisch and Republican Jeff Hurd faced off Monday night in their second 3rd Congressional District debate.

Here are the highlights from the event, hosted by the Greater Pueblo Chamber of Commerce and moderated by Colorado Politics reporter Ernest Luning:

• The candidates clashed over abortion, with Hurd saying he’s “pro-life with exceptions,” and Frisch saying “women need to be left alone to make their own health care decisions.” Frisch attacked Hurd for his stance, asking “isn’t it conservative to support the family and let the family make that decision instead of politicians?” Hurd said it was Frisch who wants government interference — but in the energy sector, shutting down coal plants in the district. “My opponent is very much in favor of government making decisions that hurt you and your family,” Hurd said.
• When asked what their first bill would be if elected, Frisch said he would “try to do everything I can to make sure that our local Colorado water leaders have the tools that you need to protect Colorado’s water.” Hurd said he would propose making agricultural workers in the U.S. on H-2A visa exempt from state overtime requirements. “That’s killing our ag community,” he said, calling Frisch’s broad water proposal nonsensical. 
• The candidates were asked whether they would support eliminating the federal debt ceiling. Frisch said yes, calling it a “fakery.” Hurd said no, adding “I think we need some guardrails.”
• When asked about raising the minimum wage, Hurd said he’s “inclined to let the market make that decision.” Frisch said he’s not opposed to an increase.
• Hurd refused to divulge how he would vote on Colorado’s ballot measures this year, while Frisch said he would vote “no” on Proposition 127, the initiative to ban big cat hunting, and “yes” on Proposition 131, the all-candidate primary and ranked choice general election initiative. “You do know you’re applying for a job where you actually vote in public?” Frisch asked Hurd, attacking him for refusing to share his opinion. Hurd said “that’s completely different.”

FRISCH’S PAC ATTACK PICKED APART

Frisch frequently attacks Hurd for taking so-called corporate PAC money —like donations from Home Depot, the National Automobile Dealers Association and the US Energy PAC — but on Monday night, Hurd took Frisch to task over that offensive.

Hurd pointed out that some of the partisan PACs Frisch has received money from are funded by corporations.

For instance, Frisch’s campaign received $2,500 in June from the Blue Dog PAC. That committee has received donations from many corporations, including the pharmaceutical companies Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly and Company. Donors to Blue Dog PAC also include the National Venture Capital Association, the American Financial Services Association and the Synchrony Financial Employees PAC.

Bridge the Gap PAC, which gave Frisch’s campaign $1,000 in June, has received donations from Home Depot, UnitedHealth Group and investment giant BlackRock.

Hurd likened Frisch’s criticism to him claiming he’s not eating Taco Bell because he received the fast food via Uber Eats instead of directly from the restaurant.

Luning asked Frisch if he had been taking money through go-betweens. “Only one of us takes corporate PAC money,” Frisch replied, not answering the question.

STORY: Where Adam Frisch and Jeff Hurd stand on the big issues in Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District

THE POLITICAL TICKER

3RD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

A super PAC called “A Strong Innovation Economy Requires Strong IP Protection,” which was formed in October 2023, has spent $100,000 in support of Republican Jeff Hurd in the 3rd Congressional District.

8TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

The Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC tied to Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, is running a new attack ad against Democratic U.S. Rep. Yadira Caraveo in the 8th Congressional District. The ad features Liz Hardy, a Colorado mom whose 25-year-old daughter died of fentanyl overdose, criticizing Caraveo’s votes on drug and immigration policy.

The Congressional Leadership Fund has reported spending $1.7 million in the district so far.

Meanwhile, the Mainstream Colorado Fund, a federal super PAC, reported Sunday that it had spent another $121,000 in the district to help Caraveo. It has spent more than $400,000 in the district so far.

PERA

Citing state budget concerns, Colorado’s Pension Review Commission on Friday voted unanimously against drafting a bill to increase the state’s $225 million annual contribution to the Public Employees’ Retirement Association by inflation each year. However, the commission voted to bring back a proposed tax credit for low income PERA retirees.

READ MORE

• Amendment 79: An attempt to preserve abortion access in Colorado’s constitution
• Amendment G: Should more disabled veterans qualify for Colorado’s homestead property tax break?
• Ordinance 309: Measure seeks to ban existing and future slaughterhouses in Denver
• Utah is still fighting Biden over Bears Ears. Court arguments in Boulder showed a state desperate to take “its” land back
• Cities in the West are booming. But will they actually need a lot more water?
• Would cutting agricultural water use in Colorado prevent future shortage? Well …
• Diana DeGette on her next steps
  — Politico
• Denver voters face two tax increase questions. Will they support both housing and the city’s safety-net hospital?
  — The Denver Post 🔑
• A Western Slope election could determine whether Colorado Democrats reach a tier of power they haven’t had in 90 years
  — The Aspen Times

🔑 = source has article meter or paywall

ELECTION 2024

Two state-level super PACs start a spending spree in competitive legislative races

All Together Colorado, a state-level super PAC that supports Democrats running for state Senate, is starting to drop some serious cash in two competitive races.

The group reported spending about $250,000 between Sept. 12 and Sept. 25, all of it in support of Democratic state Rep. Marc Snyder, who is running to represent Senate District 12, and Glenwood Springs businessman Cole Buerger, a Democrat running to represent Senate District 5. The spending was roughly split between the races.

All Together Colorado also received $200,000 from Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains during the reporting period. It also received cash from DoorDash, Lumen and Sunnova Energy. Previously, it has received big infusions from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; Occidental Petroleum; Conscience Bay Research; DaVita; Comcast; Anheuser-Busch; Allstate; Altria Client Services; and Merle Chambers. Chambers is a former oil and gas executive who is a major Democratic donor.

All Together Colorado has raised about $1.75 million this election cycle. It had roughly $900,000 in campaign cash on Sept. 26.

Meanwhile, Colorado Way Forward, a state-level super PAC supporting Democratic candidates for the state House, spent about $220,000 between Sept. 12 and Sept. 25. That money went toward helping a list of incumbents in their reelection bids, including Reps. Stephanie Vigil of Colorado Springs; Tammy Story of Conifer; Meghan Lukens of Steamboat Springs; Tisha Mauro of Pueblo; Mary Young of Greeley; Sheila Lieder of Littleton; and Bob Marshall of Highlands Ranch. The group also spent money to help Durango 9-R School Board member Katie Stewart, a Democrat, win her House District 59 race in southwestern Colorado.

Colorado Way Forward has raised just short of $1.2 million this election cycle and started Sept. 26 with $725,000 in the bank. Its major donors include Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Environmental Defense Fund Action Votes, Education Reform Advocacy, Anheuser-Busch, Amazon and Chambers.

The context: Democrats have a 46-19 supermajority in the House. That means they can afford to lose only two seats to keep their two-thirds advantage in the chamber. In the Senate, Democrats have a 23-12 advantage, one seat shy of a supermajority.

If Democrats have supermajorities in both chambers next year, they would be able to refer constitutional amendments to the ballot without Republican support and ask voters to make lasting changes to the tax system and around social issues. Supermajorities would also give Democrats in the legislature the ability to override vetoes by Gov. Jared Polis, who has been a persistent roadblock to progressive bills.

Pay attention to where Colorado Way Forward and All Together Colorado are spending their money. Those are the districts where Democrats feel they can add to their ranks or need to play defense — and think they can do so successfully.

• Colorado Democrats will battle in November to keep the Republican-leaning legislative districts they won in 2022

THE BIGGER PICTURE

• Illinois voters will consider whether millionaires should be taxed more to fund property tax relief
  — The Chicago Sun-Times
• House Republicans take new approach on abortion: Talk about it
  — Politico
• Pennsylvania’s richest person is pumping millions of dollars into the race for attorney general
  — Spotlight PA
• As antiabortion protests escalate after Dobbs, new California law will crack down on harassers
  — The Los Angeles Times 🔑

🔑 = source has article meter or paywall

Corrections & Clarifications

Notice something wrong? The Colorado Sun has an ethical responsibility to fix all factual errors. Request a correction by emailing corrections@coloradosun.com.

Link to original article