State Rep. Marc Snyder, D-Manitou Springs, joins other members and guests in the House chambers as the second regular session of the 72nd Colorado General Assembly convenes at the Colorado State Capitol on Jan. 8, 2020, in Denver. (Kathryn Scott, Special to The Colorado Sun)
State-level super PACs reported spending nearly $13 million on Colorado House and Senate races through Thursday morning, according to a Colorado Sun analysis of campaign finance reports.
That’s about $5 million more than was reported spent through Oct. 22. And the list of races where the most money has been spent has changed quite a bit, reflecting shifting priorities and competitiveness.
A reminder: If Democrats lose three House seats Nov. 5, their supermajority in the House will be kaput. In the Senate, Democrats need to flip just one seat to secure a supermajority.
The highlights:
- The Colorado legislative race with the most state-level super PAC spending is now Senate District 12 in El Paso County, where state Rep. Marc Snyder, D-Manitou Springs, is running against El Paso County Commissioner Stan VanderWerf, a Republican. About $3.4 million has been dropped on the contest, roughly evenly split between the candidates. The race was No. 2 on the list last week.
- The Senate District 5 race between state Rep. Marc Catlin, R-Montrose, and Democrat Cole Buerger, a small business owner who lives in Glenwood Springs, fell one spot on the super-PAC-spending list since last week. More than $3.2 million has been dedicated to the contest, with the majority of that — $2.3 million — to help Catlin.
- No. 3 on the state-level super PAC spending list is House District 25, where state Rep. Tammy Story, D-Evergreen, faces a challenge from Republican George Mumma, a former police chief. About $860,000 has been spent on the contest, with $570,000 of that going to help Mumma. The district has moved up one spot on the list since last week.
- Nearly $770,000 has been spent in House District 16 in Colorado Springs, where Democratic state Rep. Stephanie Vigil faces Republican Rebecca Keltie, a Navy veteran and self-described anti-establishment candidate. About $550,000 had been spent to help Keltie, and about $175,000 had been spent to Vigil’s benefit. The race moved up the list by one spot.
- Senate District 6 moved down two spots on the list. At $717,000 in spending, this race between Sen. Cleave Simpson, R-Alamosa, and Democrat Vivian Smotherman, a Durango farmer and Navy veteran, appears to be losing its importance. All of the spending in the district has been on Simpson’s behalf. The sum increased by only $100,000 since Oct. 22.
- The race in House District 43 between Rep. Bob Marshall, D-Highlands Ranch, and Republican activist Matt Burcham in Douglas County is No. 6 on the list after not breaking the top six last week. More than $700,000 has been spent on this contest by state-level super PACs, about $460,000 of which has been to Burcham’s benefit.
Colorado Sun correspondent Sandra Fish contributed to this report.
SHOW ME THE MONEY
Here are state-level super PACs ranked in terms of spending:
- The Senate Majority Fund, the state Senate Republican campaign arm, had reported spending $4.5 million through Thursday morning. The PAC’s single largest donation this cycle so far was $1.4 million from GOPAC Election Fund, a Virginia-based federal PAC that works to get Republicans elected to legislatures across the country. The Senate Majority Fund has also received $3.1 million this election cycle from the Senate Majority Fund 527 Committee, which has received donations from a number of businesses.
- All Together Colorado, the state Senate Democratic campaign arm, has spent as least $2.3 million. The PAC’s single largest donation this cycle so far was $250,000 from the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a Washington, D.C.-based political nonprofit that supports liberal candidates and causes and doesn’t report its donors. The PAC has also received large donations from Colorado Fine Wine & Spirits, Everytown For Gun Safety, Fair Share Action, the Colorado Education Association, Planned Parenthood, the Sports Betting Alliance and Conservation Colorado.
- Colorado Way Forward, the state House Democratic campaign arm, reported spending $2.1 million through Thursday morning. The group’s single largest donation this cycle came from Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, at $200,000. The PAC has also received large donations from Conservation Colorado, Fair Share Action, the Sixteen Thirty Fund, Colorado Education Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
- Coloradans for Accountable Government has spent about $1 million supporting Republican candidates and opposing Democrats. The Colorado Oil and Gas Association has given $530,000 to the committee, while the Colorado League of Charter Schools Action has given $200,000.
- New Day Colorado Fund, the state House Republican campaign arm, reported spending about $800,000 through Thursday morning. Much of the PAC’s money has come from the New Day Colorado Fund 527 Committee, which has received its donations from a range of business interests. The PAC has also received major donations from Phillips 66, the Sports Betting Alliance, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America and Reynolds Services Company.
Spending on Colorado’s 14 statewide ballot measures eclipses $42 million
Signs direct voters to a ballot drop-off location Oct. 25 in Washington Park in Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)
More than $42 million has been spent supporting or opposing the 14 measures on Colorado’s statewide ballot this year.
That’s according to a Colorado Sun analysis of campaign finance reports filed with the state that reflect issue committee spending through Oct. 23 and political nonprofit spending through midday Thursday.
More money has surely been raised and spent by issue committees since then. In fact, nearly $4 million in major donations to issue committees has been reported since Oct. 23. Any future spending and donations under $1,000, however, won’t have to be reported until after Election Day. Final fundraising and spending totals don’t have to be reported until Dec. 10.
The measure that has been the target of the most spending is Proposition 131, which would change most of Colorado’s primaries so candidates from all parties run against each other, with the top four vote-getters advancing to a ranked choice voting general election. About $14.5 million has been spent in support of the initiative, $14.5 million of it by the issue committee Colorado Voters First, while about $300,000 has been spent opposing it.
Kent Thiry, the wealthy former CEO of the Denver-based dialysis giant DaVita and one of the biggest proponents of Proposition 131, donated $750,000 on Monday and another $700,000 on Wednesday to Colorado Voters First. That brings his total support to the committee to $3.9 million.
Chevron donated $500,000 to the committee Oct. 25.
Most of Colorado Voters First’s recent spending has been on ads as the group floods the airwaves ahead of Election Day.
Voter Rights Colorado, the committee opposing Proposition 131, spent $200,000 on a voter guide it sent out encouraging people to reject the measure, as well as Amendment 80, which would place a right to school choice in the state constitution. The guide asked recipients to support Amendment 79, which would preserve abortion access in the state constitution, and Amendment J, which would strike a prohibition on same-sex marriage from the state constitution.
Voter Rights Colorado received $10,000 on Tuesday from Colorado WINS, the state employee union, and $5,000 from the Colorado AFL-CIO.
Amendment 79 has been the target of the second most spending, including more than $8 million in support from Colorado For Protecting Reproductive Health Care. About $306,000 has been spent in opposition to the measure.
In third place in terms of spending is Amendment 80, at some $6 million in spending. Public Schools Strong, which is funded by teachers unions and public school advocates, has spent more than $4.6 million in opposition to the measure.
The campaign in support of the initiative has been funded by conservative political nonprofits that don’t disclose their donors. Those groups have spent about $1.5 million.
No. 4 on the spending list is Proposition 127, which would ban the hunting of mountain lions, bobcats and lynx in Colorado. About $5 million has been spent on the measure, including more than $3.1 million from the issue committee Cats Aren’t Trophies to support the initiative.
Colorado’s Wildlife Deserves Better has spent nearly $1.9 million opposing the measure. The Western Heritage Conservation Alliance has spent $450,000 in opposition to Proposition 127. Its main funder is Building America’s Future, a Washington, D.C.-based conservative political nonprofit that doesn’t disclose its donors.
Colorado Sun correspondent Sandra Fish contributed to this report.
Want to reach Colorado political influencers and support quality local journalism? The Sun can help get your message attention through a sponsorship of The Unaffiliated, the must-read politics and policy newsletter in Colorado. Contact Sylvia Harmon at [email protected] for more information.
AMERICA PAC
Denver-based Blitz Canvassing has received some $50 million from the super PAC funded by billionaire Elon Musk, according to a Colorado Sun analysis, representing about a third of the committee’s total reported independent expenditures this election cycle.
Blitz Canvassing is an offshoot of the 76 Group, a conservative political consulting firm that is led by a number of big-name Colorado operatives, including former state Sen. Josh Penry.
America PAC is supporting Donald Trump’s reelection campaign. It has also spent millions supporting Republican congressional candidates, including state Rep. Gave Evans in Colorado’s 8th Congressional District.
Wired magazine reported Wednesday that door knockers hired by Blitz say they “have been subjected to poor working conditions” in other states. Wired said “a number of them have been driven around in the back of a seatless U-Haul van … and threatened that their lodging at a local motel wouldn’t be paid for if they didn’t meet canvassing quotas.” Blitz didn’t respond to a request for comment from Wired.
8TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
U.S. Rep. Yadira Caraveo, D-Thornton, is running a new ad in Colorado’s 8th Congressional District in which she tries to defend her record on fentanyl amid attacks from Republicans. In the 30-second spot, Caraveo claims she broke with her party to back tougher fentanyl penalties.
That claim is based on Caraveo’s vote in favor of the HALT Fentanyl Act, a Republican bill. She was one of 74 Democrats in the U.S. House that voted yes on the bill. There were 132 Democratic no votes.
The bill wasn’t brought up in the U.S. Senate, which is controlled by Democrats, for further debate. A long list of human and civil rights groups, as well as addiction recovery advocacy organizations, urged Congress to reject the measure, saying it would impose policies similar to those adopted during the crack cocaine epidemic.
3RD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
The Congressional Leadership Fund, the Republican super PAC tied to House Speaker Mike Johnson, is continuing its spending in Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District to help Republican Jeff Hurd. With another infusion Oct. 24, the group has now spent about $225,000 to boost Hurd in his race against Democrat Adam Frisch.
On Friday, the Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan election prognosticator, moved the race’s rating down a rung in favor of Democrats. It’s now rated as “lean Republican,” down from “likely Republican.”
“Frisch … has a real shot at pulling off an upset,” Cook wrote in an analysis of the race, citing the Democrat’s big campaign war chest.
PROPOSITION 131
Former Colorado Gov. Roy Romer, a Democrat, is the latest big-name politician to endorse Proposition 131, the all-candidate primary and ranked choice general election measure on the November ballot.
“I’m voting yes on Proposition 131 because it gives every voter the freedom to vote for any candidate in every election, and encourages candidates to appeal to a majority of voters — not just the extremes,” Romer said in a written statement. “Opening our primaries, and advancing four candidates to the General Election gives every Colorado voter a voice that matters in all elections.”
READ MORE
🔑 = source has article meter or paywall
The 8th Congressional District race remains tied. But here’s what the details of a new poll tell us.
From left: State Rep. Gabe Evans, R-Fort Lupton, and U.S. Rep. Yadira Caraveo, D-Thornton. (Colorado Sun file photos)
The race between Democratic U.S. Rep. Yadira Caraveo and Republican state Rep. Gabe Evans in Colorado’s 8th Congressional District remains statistically tied, according to a new poll.
The Emerson College/The Hill poll of 485 likely voters Oct. 24-26 showed that Caraveo had 48% of the vote to 46% for Evans, with 7% undecided. That may appear to show a lead for Caraveo, but when you factor in the survey’s 4.4 percentage point margin of error, the contest is a dead heat.
A race is considered a statistical tie when neither candidate leads by more than a poll’s margin of error. The margin of error in the Emerson College poll means that Caraveo’s lead could be larger or that Evans could even have a narrow advantage.
The poll’s crosstabs provide some indication of why the race is so close:
Keep in mind that the margin of error for some of these may be higher because they are smaller sample sizes.
- Only 3% of the voters who cast their ballots for Caraveo in 2022 said they would be backing Evans this time around, while 95% said they would vote for her again this year. The rest were undecided. Meanwhile, 5.5% of those who voted for Republican state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer in 2022 said they would vote for Caraveo this time, while 94% said they were backing Evans and the rest were undecided.
- Of the voters who didn’t cast a ballot in the 8th District in 2022, 36% said they were voting for Evans this year, while 41% said they were voting for Caraveo. The rest were undecided.
- The presidential race in the 8th District is also statistically tied, according to the poll, with 48.5% of survey participants saying they are backing Kamala Harris, while 48% said they are backing Donald Trump. Three percent said they would be voting for someone else while 1% said they were undecided.
- Some 94% of 8th District voters who said they are backing Harris this year said they would also be supporting Caraveo, with 5% undecided. Meanwhile, 92% of the voters backing Trump this year said they were also supporting Evans, with 8% undecided in the 8th District race.
- There was only one Harris voter in the 8th District who said they were planning to back Evans, while Trump voters said they planned to back Caraveo.
- About 48% of the unaffiliated or third-party voters who participated in the poll said they’ll be backing Caraveo, while 46% said they’ll be supporting Evans. Seven percent were undecided.
- The number of decided voters polled by Emerson College decreased to 7% from 12% from an earlier survey in the district conducted by the pollster.
The bottom line: This race remains an absolute toss-up heading into Election Day. Don’t be surprised if it takes several days before a winner is known.
Also, beware of incorrect interpretations of this poll. It would be statistically incorrect to say the survey shows that Caraveo has a lead.
The Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan election prognosticator, this week called Caraveo one of the 10 most vulnerable House incumbents this year.
PRESIDENTIAL RACE IN COLORADO
Vice President Kamala Harris heads into Election Day with a big polling lead over former President Donald Trump in Colorado.
A survey of 600 likely voters by Keating Research found that 53% said they had either voted for or planned to vote for Harris, compared with 41% for Trump. That’s a 12-point gap. Two percent of those polled said they planned to vote for someone else, while 5% said they remain undecided in the race.
“Harris’ strong position heading into the final weekend of voting is due to a commanding 18- point lead with unaffiliated voters (53% Harris, 35% Trump) and a decisive 29-point lead with women (61% Harris, 32% Trump),” the Democratic firm wrote in a polling memo.
The pollster also asked participants about Amendment 79, which would preserve unfettered abortion access in the Colorado Constitution. Sixty percent said they have or planned to vote yes on the measure, while 32% said they planned to vote no. The initiative needs 55% support to pass because it would amend the constitution. The margin of error could mean the poll reflects that just 56% of the electorate really supports the measure.
“Amendments are very hard to pass,” said Chris Keating, the principal at Keating Research, “but I think this one is in as good a shape as you could expect on any amendment.”
Proposition JJ, which would let Colorado keep all of the sports betting tax revenue it collects, is also poised to pass. Sixty-eight percent of those polled said they planned to vote for it, while 24% said they planned to vote no. The measure needs a simple majority to pass.
The poll was conducted via live telephone interviews and through text messages from Oct. 28 to Oct. 30. It had a margin of error of 4 percentage points.
🔑 = 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 [email protected].
Link to original article