-
-
Joe Biden is one of the nation’s most experienced public servants, having served as a U.S. senator from Delaware for 36 years and the U.S. vice president for eight years. Biden is running on a comprehensive progressive platform.
Biden has championed individual rights throughout his career — from spearheading the Violence Against Women Act to passing laws that expanded the definition of hate crimes to include those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Biden led the fight to pass the Brady Bill, which established the national firearms background check system, and helped secure a 10-year ban on assault weapons from 1994-2004. As vice president, Biden oversaw the implementation of one of the largest economic recovery plans in American history in 2009, saving the American automobile industry and millions of American jobs in all sectors of the economy. During the Obama/Biden administration, the United States made significant progress toward a clean energy economy and provided health coverage to millions of Americans via the passage of the Affordable Care Act — a law Biden has vowed to expand and improve.
If elected president, Biden has pledged to work to reverse the damage from the last four years of partisan obstruction and executive branch policies solely benefiting the wealthy and well-connected. Biden supports a $15-per-hour minimum wage and 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all workers. He also seeks to address the country's racial wealth disparity, equal opportunity, and jobs gaps by empowering small-business creation and expansion in economically disadvantaged areas. On the climate crisis, Biden proposes net-zero CO2 emissions in the U.S. by 2050 and rejoining the Paris climate accords. On the immediate front, Biden has proposed a national crisis response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden’s experience handling the economic recovery with Obama after the Great Recession of 2009 will inform his actions to help individuals, families, small businesses, and local and state governments that are struggling badly as a result of the botched response to the pandemic. Biden will restore the long-standing precedent that public health decisions are best made by public health professionals.
Biden has pledged to defend abortion rights, expand and protect union membership, bring together an equitable and diverse group of experts to handle the nation’s institutional racism crisis, and restore dignity to the office of president of the United States.
Biden is the clear presidential choice for progressive voters.
In this election, he faces Donald Trump — considered by progressives to be the most corrupt, incompetent, anti-progressive president in recent memory and perhaps in American history. Trump’s biggest achievement as president was forcing through a massive tax cut that overwhelmingly favored the wealthiest Americans, making the nation’s historic income-disparity problem even worse. Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Paris Climate Accords, making the U.S. one of very few countries that are not signatories. Trump’s administration has encouraged repeated unsuccessful attempts by Congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which has provided health coverage to millions of Americans, including a federal court challenge in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic to dismantle the law. Trump has supported racist immigration practices that contravene international law on the treatment of refugees.
Trump’s decisions have trickled into even the most mundane things, affecting Americans on a daily basis. Trump scrapped a bill requiring airlines to disclose bag fees, blocked consumers from suing banks, ignored the growing crisis over student loans, lifted bans on transferring military equipment to local law enforcement which has exacerbated police-citizen conflicts, particularly in relation to Black Lives Matter protests, and has set off a trade war with China that has done tremendous economic damage to American agricultural producers and manufacturers.
Controversies involving Trump’s presidency are too numerous to list here but include lying about mail voting to such a degree that social media platforms have been forced to remove his misinformation, racist, sexist, and defamatory statements against his political opponents, dispatching federal police to attack protesters in unmarked vehicles, installing corrupt and incompetent tools of special interest into every level of government, nominating federal judges and Supreme Court justices who seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, banning transgender Americans from military service, helping spread baseless conspiracy theories, defending the actions of overt white supremacists and racist nationalists, downplaying the severity of the coronavirus pandemic to the public despite detailed foreknowledge of the coming disaster, pursuing diplomacy with dictators while scorning traditional American allies, and changing federal guidelines to undermine racial equality. For a more comprehensive list, we encourage you to visit the Wikipedia page for Trump administration controversies.
Evidence abounds showing that Trump never disassociated himself from his businesses and has used his office for personal enrichment. And let’s not forget he was impeached over revelations he first blocked military aid to Ukraine and then pushed its president to dig up damaging info on his political opponent as a “favor.”
Trump must not only be defeated, but the margin of victory must be so resounding as to prevent him from calling the results of the election into question as he has already pledged to do.Joe Biden is one of the nation’s most experienced public servants, having served as a U.S. senator from Delaware for 36 years and the U.S. vice president for eight years. Biden is running on a comprehensive progressive platform.
Biden has championed individual rights throughout his career — from spearheading the Violence Against Women Act to passing laws that expanded the definition of hate crimes to include those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Biden led the fight to pass the Brady Bill, which established the national firearms background check system, and helped secure a 10-year ban on assault weapons from 1994-2004. As vice president, Biden oversaw the implementation of one of the largest economic recovery plans in American history in 2009, saving the American automobile industry and millions of American jobs in all sectors of the economy. During the Obama/Biden administration, the United States made significant progress toward a clean energy economy and provided health coverage to millions of Americans via the passage of the Affordable Care Act — a law Biden has vowed to expand and improve.
Joe Biden is one of the nation’s most experienced public servants, having served as a U.S. senator from Delaware for 36 years and the U.S. vice president for eight years. Biden is running on a comprehensive progressive platform.
Biden has championed individual rights throughout his career — from spearheading the Violence Against Women Act to passing laws that expanded the definition of hate crimes to include those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Biden led the fight to pass the Brady Bill, which established the national firearms background check system, and helped secure a 10-year ban on assault weapons from 1994-2004. As vice president, Biden oversaw the implementation of one of the largest economic recovery plans in American history in 2009, saving the American automobile industry and millions of American jobs in all sectors of the economy. During the Obama/Biden administration, the United States made significant progress toward a clean energy economy and provided health coverage to millions of Americans via the passage of the Affordable Care Act — a law Biden has vowed to expand and improve.
If elected president, Biden has pledged to work to reverse the damage from the last four years of partisan obstruction and executive branch policies solely benefiting the wealthy and well-connected. Biden supports a $15-per-hour minimum wage and 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all workers. He also seeks to address the country's racial wealth disparity, equal opportunity, and jobs gaps by empowering small-business creation and expansion in economically disadvantaged areas. On the climate crisis, Biden proposes net-zero CO2 emissions in the U.S. by 2050 and rejoining the Paris climate accords. On the immediate front, Biden has proposed a national crisis response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden’s experience handling the economic recovery with Obama after the Great Recession of 2009 will inform his actions to help individuals, families, small businesses, and local and state governments that are struggling badly as a result of the botched response to the pandemic. Biden will restore the long-standing precedent that public health decisions are best made by public health professionals.
Biden has pledged to defend abortion rights, expand and protect union membership, bring together an equitable and diverse group of experts to handle the nation’s institutional racism crisis, and restore dignity to the office of president of the United States.
Biden is the clear presidential choice for progressive voters.
In this election, he faces Donald Trump — considered by progressives to be the most corrupt, incompetent, anti-progressive president in recent memory and perhaps in American history. Trump’s biggest achievement as president was forcing through a massive tax cut that overwhelmingly favored the wealthiest Americans, making the nation’s historic income-disparity problem even worse. Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Paris Climate Accords, making the U.S. one of very few countries that are not signatories. Trump’s administration has encouraged repeated unsuccessful attempts by Congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which has provided health coverage to millions of Americans, including a federal court challenge in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic to dismantle the law. Trump has supported racist immigration practices that contravene international law on the treatment of refugees.
Trump’s decisions have trickled into even the most mundane things, affecting Americans on a daily basis. Trump scrapped a bill requiring airlines to disclose bag fees, blocked consumers from suing banks, ignored the growing crisis over student loans, lifted bans on transferring military equipment to local law enforcement which has exacerbated police-citizen conflicts, particularly in relation to Black Lives Matter protests, and has set off a trade war with China that has done tremendous economic damage to American agricultural producers and manufacturers.
Controversies involving Trump’s presidency are too numerous to list here but include lying about mail voting to such a degree that social media platforms have been forced to remove his misinformation, racist, sexist, and defamatory statements against his political opponents, dispatching federal police to attack protesters in unmarked vehicles, installing corrupt and incompetent tools of special interest into every level of government, nominating federal judges and Supreme Court justices who seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, banning transgender Americans from military service, helping spread baseless conspiracy theories, defending the actions of overt white supremacists and racist nationalists, downplaying the severity of the coronavirus pandemic to the public despite detailed foreknowledge of the coming disaster, pursuing diplomacy with dictators while scorning traditional American allies, and changing federal guidelines to undermine racial equality. For a more comprehensive list, we encourage you to visit the Wikipedia page for Trump administration controversies.
Evidence abounds showing that Trump never disassociated himself from his businesses and has used his office for personal enrichment. And let’s not forget he was impeached over revelations he first blocked military aid to Ukraine and then pushed its president to dig up damaging info on his political opponent as a “favor.”
Trump must not only be defeated, but the margin of victory must be so resounding as to prevent him from calling the results of the election into question as he has already pledged to do.Joe Biden is one of the nation’s most experienced public servants, having served as a U.S. senator from Delaware for 36 years and the U.S. vice president for eight years. Biden is running on a comprehensive progressive platform.
Biden has championed individual rights throughout his career — from spearheading the Violence Against Women Act to passing laws that expanded the definition of hate crimes to include those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Biden led the fight to pass the Brady Bill, which established the national firearms background check system, and helped secure a 10-year ban on assault weapons from 1994-2004. As vice president, Biden oversaw the implementation of one of the largest economic recovery plans in American history in 2009, saving the American automobile industry and millions of American jobs in all sectors of the economy. During the Obama/Biden administration, the United States made significant progress toward a clean energy economy and provided health coverage to millions of Americans via the passage of the Affordable Care Act — a law Biden has vowed to expand and improve.
City of Centennial
Not in City of Centennial? Click here to choose your customized guide.
-
-
Joe Biden is one of the nation’s most experienced public servants, having served as a U.S. senator from Delaware for 36 years and the U.S. vice president for eight years. Biden is running on a comprehensive progressive platform.
Biden has championed individual rights throughout his career — from spearheading the Violence Against Women Act to passing laws that expanded the definition of hate crimes to include those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Biden led the fight to pass the Brady Bill, which established the national firearms background check system, and helped secure a 10-year ban on assault weapons from 1994-2004. As vice president, Biden oversaw the implementation of one of the largest economic recovery plans in American history in 2009, saving the American automobile industry and millions of American jobs in all sectors of the economy. During the Obama/Biden administration, the United States made significant progress toward a clean energy economy and provided health coverage to millions of Americans via the passage of the Affordable Care Act — a law Biden has vowed to expand and improve.
If elected president, Biden has pledged to work to reverse the damage from the last four years of partisan obstruction and executive branch policies solely benefiting the wealthy and well-connected. Biden supports a $15-per-hour minimum wage and 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all workers. He also seeks to address the country's racial wealth disparity, equal opportunity, and jobs gaps by empowering small-business creation and expansion in economically disadvantaged areas. On the climate crisis, Biden proposes net-zero CO2 emissions in the U.S. by 2050 and rejoining the Paris climate accords. On the immediate front, Biden has proposed a national crisis response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden’s experience handling the economic recovery with Obama after the Great Recession of 2009 will inform his actions to help individuals, families, small businesses, and local and state governments that are struggling badly as a result of the botched response to the pandemic. Biden will restore the long-standing precedent that public health decisions are best made by public health professionals.
Biden has pledged to defend abortion rights, expand and protect union membership, bring together an equitable and diverse group of experts to handle the nation’s institutional racism crisis, and restore dignity to the office of president of the United States.
Biden is the clear presidential choice for progressive voters.
In this election, he faces Donald Trump — considered by progressives to be the most corrupt, incompetent, anti-progressive president in recent memory and perhaps in American history. Trump’s biggest achievement as president was forcing through a massive tax cut that overwhelmingly favored the wealthiest Americans, making the nation’s historic income-disparity problem even worse. Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Paris Climate Accords, making the U.S. one of very few countries that are not signatories. Trump’s administration has encouraged repeated unsuccessful attempts by Congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which has provided health coverage to millions of Americans, including a federal court challenge in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic to dismantle the law. Trump has supported racist immigration practices that contravene international law on the treatment of refugees.
Trump’s decisions have trickled into even the most mundane things, affecting Americans on a daily basis. Trump scrapped a bill requiring airlines to disclose bag fees, blocked consumers from suing banks, ignored the growing crisis over student loans, lifted bans on transferring military equipment to local law enforcement which has exacerbated police-citizen conflicts, particularly in relation to Black Lives Matter protests, and has set off a trade war with China that has done tremendous economic damage to American agricultural producers and manufacturers.
Controversies involving Trump’s presidency are too numerous to list here but include lying about mail voting to such a degree that social media platforms have been forced to remove his misinformation, racist, sexist, and defamatory statements against his political opponents, dispatching federal police to attack protesters in unmarked vehicles, installing corrupt and incompetent tools of special interest into every level of government, nominating federal judges and Supreme Court justices who seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, banning transgender Americans from military service, helping spread baseless conspiracy theories, defending the actions of overt white supremacists and racist nationalists, downplaying the severity of the coronavirus pandemic to the public despite detailed foreknowledge of the coming disaster, pursuing diplomacy with dictators while scorning traditional American allies, and changing federal guidelines to undermine racial equality. For a more comprehensive list, we encourage you to visit the Wikipedia page for Trump administration controversies.
Evidence abounds showing that Trump never disassociated himself from his businesses and has used his office for personal enrichment. And let’s not forget he was impeached over revelations he first blocked military aid to Ukraine and then pushed its president to dig up damaging info on his political opponent as a “favor.”
Trump must not only be defeated, but the margin of victory must be so resounding as to prevent him from calling the results of the election into question as he has already pledged to do.
-
-
Former Colorado Gov. and incumbent U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper did not take the usual path into public office. After being laid off from his job as a geologist, he opened a successful brewpub. But as a small-business owner, he became involved in his community, and he ran for office. He served two terms each as mayor of Denver and governor of Colorado, using his unique perspective to bring people together to get things done.
When Hickenlooper was sworn in as governor in 2010, Colorado ranked 40th among the states in job creation. By the time Hickenlooper left office eight years later, Colorado had the #1 economy in the nation. Under Hickenlooper, when he was governor, Colorado’s economy grew without leaving Coloradans behind. Hickenlooper expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 400,000 Coloradans and cut the uninsured rate by nearly two-thirds. He signed three landmark gun safety laws in 2013 that banned high-capacity magazines and required background checks for any firearm transfer. On the environment, Hickenlooper made Colorado the first state to limit methane pollution from oil and gas wells. Working with the General Assembly, Hickenlooper signed legislation to ensure every eligible registered voter in Colorado gets a mail-in ballot, made voter registration more accessible, and pushed for numerous other election reforms that have made Colorado a model for election innovation. He also signed historic legislation granting in-state tuition to DREAMers.
Hickenlooper has vowed to improve and build on the Affordable Care Act and supports a federally administered public health coverage option. Hickenlooper recognizes the existential threat of climate change and favors a bold, science-based approach. He supports commonsense policies on gun violence, including restoring an assault weapons ban. Hickenlooper was the first governor of Colorado to apologize for the Sand Creek Massacre and has committed to listening to the voices of marginalized communities and rooting out systemic racism where it lurks in our society, from police brutality to immigration laws to racial disparities in economic status to access to quality education.
Hickenlooper is the progressive voter’s best choice for U.S. senator.
He faces incumbent U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner in this election. While in the Senate, Gardner has been a reliable Republican vote on the overwhelming majority of issues. He has supported Donald Trump’s position on votes 89% of the time, and Politico notes that Gardner is “reliably conservative on most issues.” In 2014, Gardner promised in a campaign ad to speak out when his party is wrong and called on Donald Trump to pull out of the race for president in October of 2016. Since then, however, Gardner has fully embraced Trump and was one of the first senators to endorse Trump’s reelection.
From his earliest votes in Congress, Gardner has consistently sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He has voted to repeal the ACA and to replace it with a bill that would dramatically decrease health care coverage and increase the cost of coverage. He was quoted at a private luncheon that failing to repeal the ACA would result in fewer donations to Republicans, suggesting he is not motivated by the common good.
Gardner has rejected most gun safety legislation throughout his career and is a top recipient of donations from the National Rifle Association. He has voted against expanding background checks to include gun show sales, which has been the law in Colorado since just after the Columbine High School shooting in 1999. He even voted against banning gun sales to people on the terrorist watch list.
In a historic change of heart, The Denver Post editorial board declared in 2019 they made a mistake in their 2014 endorsement of Gardner, stating he “has been too busy walking a political tight rope to be a leader.”
This race also has a Libertarian candidate: Raymon Doane. Doane is a Denver native who currently works for the Colorado Department of Revenue as a property tax specialist and business analyst. He previously ran for the state senate in 2016 as a Republican, and in 2018, he first filed to run for state treasurer and then for Congress against Democrat Diana DeGette as a Libertarian.
Doane’s few public statements should give voters pause. While the country has been dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, Doane was quoted as saying, “The federal government should not have to intervene on behalf of local municipalities and states that make poor decisions during a pandemic.” He also has said he thinks public health mandates should be more like “suggestions.” Additionally, among the four policy positions Doane takes on his website, one statement endorsing an unregulated Second Amendment stands out: “The government should NEVER have a monopoly on force. The U.S. Senate must … refuse to vote for any legislation which limits an American’s right to self-defense.” These kinds of statements don’t represent Colorado progressives.
Former Colorado Gov. and incumbent U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper did not take the usual path into public office. After being laid off from his job as a geologist, he opened a successful brewpub. But as a small-business owner, he became involved in his community, and he ran for office. He served two terms each as mayor of Denver and governor of Colorado, using his unique perspective to bring people together to get things done.
When Hickenlooper was sworn in as governor in 2010, Colorado ranked 40th among the states in job creation. By the time Hickenlooper left office eight years later, Colorado had the #1 economy in the nation. Under Hickenlooper, when he was governor, Colorado’s economy grew without leaving Coloradans behind. Hickenlooper expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 400,000 Coloradans and cut the uninsured rate by nearly two-thirds. He signed three landmark gun safety laws in 2013 that banned high-capacity magazines and required background checks for any firearm transfer. On the environment, Hickenlooper made Colorado the first state to limit methane pollution from oil and gas wells. Working with the General Assembly, Hickenlooper signed legislation to ensure every eligible registered voter in Colorado gets a mail-in ballot, made voter registration more accessible, and pushed for numerous other election reforms that have made Colorado a model for election innovation. He also signed historic legislation granting in-state tuition to DREAMers.
Former Colorado Gov. and incumbent U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper did not take the usual path into public office. After being laid off from his job as a geologist, he opened a successful brewpub. But as a small-business owner, he became involved in his community, and he ran for office. He served two terms each as mayor of Denver and governor of Colorado, using his unique perspective to bring people together to get things done.
When Hickenlooper was sworn in as governor in 2010, Colorado ranked 40th among the states in job creation. By the time Hickenlooper left office eight years later, Colorado had the #1 economy in the nation. Under Hickenlooper, when he was governor, Colorado’s economy grew without leaving Coloradans behind. Hickenlooper expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 400,000 Coloradans and cut the uninsured rate by nearly two-thirds. He signed three landmark gun safety laws in 2013 that banned high-capacity magazines and required background checks for any firearm transfer. On the environment, Hickenlooper made Colorado the first state to limit methane pollution from oil and gas wells. Working with the General Assembly, Hickenlooper signed legislation to ensure every eligible registered voter in Colorado gets a mail-in ballot, made voter registration more accessible, and pushed for numerous other election reforms that have made Colorado a model for election innovation. He also signed historic legislation granting in-state tuition to DREAMers.
Hickenlooper has vowed to improve and build on the Affordable Care Act and supports a federally administered public health coverage option. Hickenlooper recognizes the existential threat of climate change and favors a bold, science-based approach. He supports commonsense policies on gun violence, including restoring an assault weapons ban. Hickenlooper was the first governor of Colorado to apologize for the Sand Creek Massacre and has committed to listening to the voices of marginalized communities and rooting out systemic racism where it lurks in our society, from police brutality to immigration laws to racial disparities in economic status to access to quality education.
Hickenlooper is the progressive voter’s best choice for U.S. senator.
He faces incumbent U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner in this election. While in the Senate, Gardner has been a reliable Republican vote on the overwhelming majority of issues. He has supported Donald Trump’s position on votes 89% of the time, and Politico notes that Gardner is “reliably conservative on most issues.” In 2014, Gardner promised in a campaign ad to speak out when his party is wrong and called on Donald Trump to pull out of the race for president in October of 2016. Since then, however, Gardner has fully embraced Trump and was one of the first senators to endorse Trump’s reelection.
From his earliest votes in Congress, Gardner has consistently sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He has voted to repeal the ACA and to replace it with a bill that would dramatically decrease health care coverage and increase the cost of coverage. He was quoted at a private luncheon that failing to repeal the ACA would result in fewer donations to Republicans, suggesting he is not motivated by the common good.
Gardner has rejected most gun safety legislation throughout his career and is a top recipient of donations from the National Rifle Association. He has voted against expanding background checks to include gun show sales, which has been the law in Colorado since just after the Columbine High School shooting in 1999. He even voted against banning gun sales to people on the terrorist watch list.
In a historic change of heart, The Denver Post editorial board declared in 2019 they made a mistake in their 2014 endorsement of Gardner, stating he “has been too busy walking a political tight rope to be a leader.”
This race also has a Libertarian candidate: Raymon Doane. Doane is a Denver native who currently works for the Colorado Department of Revenue as a property tax specialist and business analyst. He previously ran for the state senate in 2016 as a Republican, and in 2018, he first filed to run for state treasurer and then for Congress against Democrat Diana DeGette as a Libertarian.
Doane’s few public statements should give voters pause. While the country has been dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, Doane was quoted as saying, “The federal government should not have to intervene on behalf of local municipalities and states that make poor decisions during a pandemic.” He also has said he thinks public health mandates should be more like “suggestions.” Additionally, among the four policy positions Doane takes on his website, one statement endorsing an unregulated Second Amendment stands out: “The government should NEVER have a monopoly on force. The U.S. Senate must … refuse to vote for any legislation which limits an American’s right to self-defense.” These kinds of statements don’t represent Colorado progressives.
Former Colorado Gov. and incumbent U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper did not take the usual path into public office. After being laid off from his job as a geologist, he opened a successful brewpub. But as a small-business owner, he became involved in his community, and he ran for office. He served two terms each as mayor of Denver and governor of Colorado, using his unique perspective to bring people together to get things done.
When Hickenlooper was sworn in as governor in 2010, Colorado ranked 40th among the states in job creation. By the time Hickenlooper left office eight years later, Colorado had the #1 economy in the nation. Under Hickenlooper, when he was governor, Colorado’s economy grew without leaving Coloradans behind. Hickenlooper expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 400,000 Coloradans and cut the uninsured rate by nearly two-thirds. He signed three landmark gun safety laws in 2013 that banned high-capacity magazines and required background checks for any firearm transfer. On the environment, Hickenlooper made Colorado the first state to limit methane pollution from oil and gas wells. Working with the General Assembly, Hickenlooper signed legislation to ensure every eligible registered voter in Colorado gets a mail-in ballot, made voter registration more accessible, and pushed for numerous other election reforms that have made Colorado a model for election innovation. He also signed historic legislation granting in-state tuition to DREAMers.
-
-
Former Colorado Gov. and incumbent U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper did not take the usual path into public office. After being laid off from his job as a geologist, he opened a successful brewpub. But as a small-business owner, he became involved in his community, and he ran for office. He served two terms each as mayor of Denver and governor of Colorado, using his unique perspective to bring people together to get things done.
When Hickenlooper was sworn in as governor in 2010, Colorado ranked 40th among the states in job creation. By the time Hickenlooper left office eight years later, Colorado had the #1 economy in the nation. Under Hickenlooper, when he was governor, Colorado’s economy grew without leaving Coloradans behind. Hickenlooper expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 400,000 Coloradans and cut the uninsured rate by nearly two-thirds. He signed three landmark gun safety laws in 2013 that banned high-capacity magazines and required background checks for any firearm transfer. On the environment, Hickenlooper made Colorado the first state to limit methane pollution from oil and gas wells. Working with the General Assembly, Hickenlooper signed legislation to ensure every eligible registered voter in Colorado gets a mail-in ballot, made voter registration more accessible, and pushed for numerous other election reforms that have made Colorado a model for election innovation. He also signed historic legislation granting in-state tuition to DREAMers.
Hickenlooper has vowed to improve and build on the Affordable Care Act and supports a federally administered public health coverage option. Hickenlooper recognizes the existential threat of climate change and favors a bold, science-based approach. He supports commonsense policies on gun violence, including restoring an assault weapons ban. Hickenlooper was the first governor of Colorado to apologize for the Sand Creek Massacre and has committed to listening to the voices of marginalized communities and rooting out systemic racism where it lurks in our society, from police brutality to immigration laws to racial disparities in economic status to access to quality education.
Hickenlooper is the progressive voter’s best choice for U.S. senator.
He faces incumbent U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner in this election. While in the Senate, Gardner has been a reliable Republican vote on the overwhelming majority of issues. He has supported Donald Trump’s position on votes 89% of the time, and Politico notes that Gardner is “reliably conservative on most issues.” In 2014, Gardner promised in a campaign ad to speak out when his party is wrong and called on Donald Trump to pull out of the race for president in October of 2016. Since then, however, Gardner has fully embraced Trump and was one of the first senators to endorse Trump’s reelection.
From his earliest votes in Congress, Gardner has consistently sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He has voted to repeal the ACA and to replace it with a bill that would dramatically decrease health care coverage and increase the cost of coverage. He was quoted at a private luncheon that failing to repeal the ACA would result in fewer donations to Republicans, suggesting he is not motivated by the common good.
Gardner has rejected most gun safety legislation throughout his career and is a top recipient of donations from the National Rifle Association. He has voted against expanding background checks to include gun show sales, which has been the law in Colorado since just after the Columbine High School shooting in 1999. He even voted against banning gun sales to people on the terrorist watch list.
In a historic change of heart, The Denver Post editorial board declared in 2019 they made a mistake in their 2014 endorsement of Gardner, stating he “has been too busy walking a political tight rope to be a leader.”
This race also has a Libertarian candidate: Raymon Doane. Doane is a Denver native who currently works for the Colorado Department of Revenue as a property tax specialist and business analyst. He previously ran for the state senate in 2016 as a Republican, and in 2018, he first filed to run for state treasurer and then for Congress against Democrat Diana DeGette as a Libertarian.
Doane’s few public statements should give voters pause. While the country has been dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, Doane was quoted as saying, “The federal government should not have to intervene on behalf of local municipalities and states that make poor decisions during a pandemic.” He also has said he thinks public health mandates should be more like “suggestions.” Additionally, among the four policy positions Doane takes on his website, one statement endorsing an unregulated Second Amendment stands out: “The government should NEVER have a monopoly on force. The U.S. Senate must … refuse to vote for any legislation which limits an American’s right to self-defense.” These kinds of statements don’t represent Colorado progressives.
Congress
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below congressional districts on your ballot.
-
-
Ike McCorkle is challenging the Republican incumbent for Colorado’s 4th Congressional District. The single father of three kids believes the people in the district deserve a representative who is dedicated to them, not the elite. In order to get Big Money out of politics, he supports a publicly funded, transparent system of campaign financing and wants to see the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling overturned to limit the influence of special interest groups that are buying much of our governmental leadership.
McCorkle is also an unabashed environmentalist who intends to fight for a Green New Deal not just to address the existential threat of climate change and rapidly transition energy production but to reinvest in rural America and create thousands of good-paying jobs in his district. Other policies he supports are ones that will expand equity and opportunity for everyone, including Medicare for All, tuition-free public college, reducing college debt by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators, and a universal basic income system.
A retired Marine Corps officer and special operator who served for 18 years, six deployments, and four combat tours, McCorkle seeks to bring dignity and integrity to Congress and restore trust and confidence in government. He is a clear progressive choice who, if elected, plans to bring people with diverse backgrounds and beliefs together to build an American society where we lift each other up so that we all benefit together.
The incumbent he faces is U.S. Sen. Ken Buck, a former prosecutor and district attorney in Weld County who has been in Congress since 2014. His legal career has been marred by numerous ethical scandals, including compromising a case against Republican donors and declining to prosecute a sexual assault, instead blaming the victim. Since he has been in Congress, Buck has toed the party’s extreme right-wing line. He is anti-choice, opposes reasonable gun safety legislation, and has said that being gay is a choice. Buck also voted in favor of the 2017 tax reform bill, which heavily favored the wealthy and corporations while increasing tax burdens on the middle class. With all this in mind, Buck must not remain in office.
Ike McCorkle
Ike McCorkle está desafiando al titular republicano por el 4º distrito congresional de Colorado. El padre soltero de tres hijos cree que la gente del distrito se merece un representante que se dedique a ellos, no a la élite. Para sacar a las grandes cantidades de dinero de la política, apoya un sistema transparente y financiado con fondos públicos de financiamiento de campañas y quiere que se anule el fallo de Citizens United de la Corte Suprema para limitar la influencia de grupos de intereses especiales que están comprando gran parte de nuestro liderazgo gubernamental.
McCorkle también es un ecologista descarado que tiene la intención de luchar por un Green New Deal no solo para abordar la amenaza existencial del cambio climático y hacer una rápida transición de la producción de energía, sino para reinvertir en las zonas rurales de Estados Unidos y crear miles de empleos bien pagados en su distrito. Otras políticas que apoya son las que ampliarán la equidad y las oportunidades para todos, incluido Medicare para Todos, la universidad pública gratuita, la reducción de la deuda universitaria al imponer un impuesto a los especuladores de Wall Street y un sistema de ingresos básicos universales.
Un oficial retirado de la Infantería de la Marina y operador especial que sirvió durante 18 años, seis despliegues y cuatro giras de combate, McCorkle busca traer dignidad e integridad al Congreso y restaurar la confianza en el gobierno. Es una clara elección progresista que, si es elegido, planea unir a personas con diversos antecedentes y creencias para construir una sociedad estadounidense en la que nos ayudemos unos a otros para que todos nos beneficiemos juntos.
El titular al que se enfrenta es Ken Buck, un exfiscal y abogado del distrito en el condado de Weld que ha estado en el Congreso desde 2014. Su carrera legal se ha visto empañada por numerosos escándalos éticos, que incluyen comprometer un caso contra donantes republicanos y negarse a procesar una agresión sexual, culpando a la víctima en su lugar. Desde que está en el Congreso, Buck ha seguido la línea de extrema derecha del partido. Está en contra del derecho a elegir, se opone a la legislación razonable de control de armas y ha dicho que ser gay es una elección. Buck también votó a favor del proyecto de ley de reforma fiscal de 2017, que favoreció en gran medida a los ricos y a las corporaciones al tiempo que aumentó la carga fiscal sobre la clase media. Con todo esto en mente, Buck no debe permanecer en el cargo.
Ike McCorkle is challenging the Republican incumbent for Colorado’s 4th Congressional District. The single father of three kids believes the people in the district deserve a representative who is dedicated to them, not the elite. In order to get Big Money out of politics, he supports a publicly funded, transparent system of campaign financing and wants to see the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling overturned to limit the influence of special interest groups that are buying much of our governmental leadership.
McCorkle is also an unabashed environmentalist who intends to fight for a Green New Deal not just to address the existential threat of climate change and rapidly transition energy production but to reinvest in rural America and create thousands of good-paying jobs in his district. Other policies he supports are ones that will expand equity and opportunity for everyone, including Medicare for All, tuition-free public college, reducing college debt by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators, and a universal basic income system.
A retired Marine Corps officer and special operator who served for 18 years, six deployments, and four combat tours, McCorkle seeks to bring dignity and integrity to Congress and restore trust and confidence in government. He is a clear progressive choice who, if elected, plans to bring people with diverse backgrounds and beliefs together to build an American society where we lift each other up so that we all benefit together.
The incumbent he faces is U.S. Sen. Ken Buck, a former prosecutor and district attorney in Weld County who has been in Congress since 2014. His legal career has been marred by numerous ethical scandals, including compromising a case against Republican donors and declining to prosecute a sexual assault, instead blaming the victim. Since he has been in Congress, Buck has toed the party’s extreme right-wing line. He is anti-choice, opposes reasonable gun safety legislation, and has said that being gay is a choice. Buck also voted in favor of the 2017 tax reform bill, which heavily favored the wealthy and corporations while increasing tax burdens on the middle class. With all this in mind, Buck must not remain in office.
Ike McCorkle
Ike McCorkle está desafiando al titular republicano por el 4º distrito congresional de Colorado. El padre soltero de tres hijos cree que la gente del distrito se merece un representante que se dedique a ellos, no a la élite. Para sacar a las grandes cantidades de dinero de la política, apoya un sistema transparente y financiado con fondos públicos de financiamiento de campañas y quiere que se anule el fallo de Citizens United de la Corte Suprema para limitar la influencia de grupos de intereses especiales que están comprando gran parte de nuestro liderazgo gubernamental.
McCorkle también es un ecologista descarado que tiene la intención de luchar por un Green New Deal no solo para abordar la amenaza existencial del cambio climático y hacer una rápida transición de la producción de energía, sino para reinvertir en las zonas rurales de Estados Unidos y crear miles de empleos bien pagados en su distrito. Otras políticas que apoya son las que ampliarán la equidad y las oportunidades para todos, incluido Medicare para Todos, la universidad pública gratuita, la reducción de la deuda universitaria al imponer un impuesto a los especuladores de Wall Street y un sistema de ingresos básicos universales.
Un oficial retirado de la Infantería de la Marina y operador especial que sirvió durante 18 años, seis despliegues y cuatro giras de combate, McCorkle busca traer dignidad e integridad al Congreso y restaurar la confianza en el gobierno. Es una clara elección progresista que, si es elegido, planea unir a personas con diversos antecedentes y creencias para construir una sociedad estadounidense en la que nos ayudemos unos a otros para que todos nos beneficiemos juntos.
El titular al que se enfrenta es Ken Buck, un exfiscal y abogado del distrito en el condado de Weld que ha estado en el Congreso desde 2014. Su carrera legal se ha visto empañada por numerosos escándalos éticos, que incluyen comprometer un caso contra donantes republicanos y negarse a procesar una agresión sexual, culpando a la víctima en su lugar. Desde que está en el Congreso, Buck ha seguido la línea de extrema derecha del partido. Está en contra del derecho a elegir, se opone a la legislación razonable de control de armas y ha dicho que ser gay es una elección. Buck también votó a favor del proyecto de ley de reforma fiscal de 2017, que favoreció en gran medida a los ricos y a las corporaciones al tiempo que aumentó la carga fiscal sobre la clase media. Con todo esto en mente, Buck no debe permanecer en el cargo.
-
-
Ike McCorkle is challenging the Republican incumbent for Colorado’s 4th Congressional District. The single father of three kids believes the people in the district deserve a representative who is dedicated to them, not the elite. In order to get Big Money out of politics, he supports a publicly funded, transparent system of campaign financing and wants to see the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling overturned to limit the influence of special interest groups that are buying much of our governmental leadership.
McCorkle is also an unabashed environmentalist who intends to fight for a Green New Deal not just to address the existential threat of climate change and rapidly transition energy production but to reinvest in rural America and create thousands of good-paying jobs in his district. Other policies he supports are ones that will expand equity and opportunity for everyone, including Medicare for All, tuition-free public college, reducing college debt by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators, and a universal basic income system.
A retired Marine Corps officer and special operator who served for 18 years, six deployments, and four combat tours, McCorkle seeks to bring dignity and integrity to Congress and restore trust and confidence in government. He is a clear progressive choice who, if elected, plans to bring people with diverse backgrounds and beliefs together to build an American society where we lift each other up so that we all benefit together.
The incumbent he faces is U.S. Sen. Ken Buck, a former prosecutor and district attorney in Weld County who has been in Congress since 2014. His legal career has been marred by numerous ethical scandals, including compromising a case against Republican donors and declining to prosecute a sexual assault, instead blaming the victim. Since he has been in Congress, Buck has toed the party’s extreme right-wing line. He is anti-choice, opposes reasonable gun safety legislation, and has said that being gay is a choice. Buck also voted in favor of the 2017 tax reform bill, which heavily favored the wealthy and corporations while increasing tax burdens on the middle class. With all this in mind, Buck must not remain in office.
-
-
Incumbent U.S. Rep. Jason Crow, a lawyer and former Army Ranger who completed three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, is running for reelection in Colorado's 6th Congressional District. In 2018, he defeated longtime Republican incumbent Mike Coffman to become the first Democrat ever to represent this district.
Before serving in Congress, Crow spent years helping veterans like himself who struggled to receive benefits, focusing his work on veteran homelessness and substance abuse issues. Then, during his first term, Crow stepped into the national spotlight as one of the seven impeachment managers who argued for Donald Trump’s removal from office during the Senate trial. Crow made the case that Trump put both Ukraine’s safety and the U.S.’s national security at risk by withholding military aid in exchange for political favors.
Crow’s district is the most diverse in Colorado, with 1 in 5 residents being born outside the United States; Crow has said this is what makes his community such a special place to live. He supports protecting DREAMers and passing comprehensive immigration reform and has called for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to end its contracts with private prison companies.
Crow has also focused on instituting campaign finance reform. The first bill he sponsored, the End Dark Money Act, would prevent mega-donors from being able to hide their political contributions. His other priorities include preventing gun violence, combatting the effects of climate change, ensuring small businesses are able to thrive, and fighting for a bold investment in America’s infrastructure.
Running against him is Steve House, the former chair of the Colorado Republican Party and a one-time gubernatorial candidate. He spent 35 years working in the health care industry, yet the biggest point House has made about problems in the health care system is that “we must face the facts and repeal Obamacare.” House apparently doesn’t realize that recent Republican efforts to repeal and replace what’s officially known as the Affordable Care Act—which has been a lifeline for many Americans struggling with health insurance coverage—have been cited as increasing the cost of health care coverage while also reducing coverage throughout the U.S. This kind of regressive thinking can’t be elected to office.Jason Crow
El representante titular Jason Crow, abogado y exguardabosques del Ejército que completó tres giras en Irak y Afganistán, se postula para la reelección en el 6º distrito congresional de Colorado. En 2018, derrotó al antiguo titular republicano Mike Coffman para convertirse en el primer demócrata en representar a este distrito.
Antes de servir en el Congreso, Crow pasó años ayudando a veteranos como él que luchaban por recibir beneficios, enfocando su trabajo en los problemas de abuso de sustancias e indigencia de los veteranos. Luego, durante su primer mandato, Crow se convirtió en el centro de la atención nacional como uno de los siete gerentes de juicio político que defendieron la destitución de Donald Trump de su cargo durante el juicio del Senado. Crow argumentó que Trump puso en riesgo tanto la seguridad de Ucrania como la seguridad nacional de EE.UU. al retener la ayuda militar a cambio de favores políticos.
El distrito de Crow es el más diverso de Colorado, con 1 de cada 5 residentes nacidos fuera de los Estados Unidos; Crow ha dicho que esto es lo que hace que su comunidad sea un lugar tan especial para vivir. Apoya la protección de los DREAMers y la aprobación de una reforma migratoria integral y ha pedido al Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE) que ponga fin a sus contratos con empresas de prisiones privadas.
Crow también se ha centrado en instituir la reforma del financiamiento de campañas. El primer proyecto de ley que patrocinó, la Ley para Acabar con el Dinero Oscuro, evitaría que los mega donantes pudieran ocultar sus contribuciones políticas. Sus otras prioridades incluyen prevenir la violencia armada, combatir los efectos del cambio climático, garantizar que las pequeñas empresas puedan prosperar y luchar por una inversión audaz en la infraestructura de los EE.UU.
Se postula contra el Steve House, ex presidente del partido republicano de Colorado y excandidato a gobernador. Pasó 35 años trabajando en la industria del cuidado de la salud, sin embargo, el punto más importante que House ha hecho sobre los problemas en el sistema de cuidado de la salud es que “debemos enfrentar los hechos y derogar Obamacare”. House aparentemente no se da cuenta de que los recientes esfuerzos republicanos para derogar y reemplazar lo que se conoce oficialmente como la Ley de Cuidado de Salud Asequible (que ha sido un salvavidas para muchos estadounidenses que luchan con la cobertura de seguro médico) han sido citados como la causa del aumento del costo de la cobertura de salud y al mismo tiempo reducir la cobertura en todo EE.UU. Este tipo de pensamiento regresivo no puede ser elegido para un cargo.
Incumbent U.S. Rep. Jason Crow, a lawyer and former Army Ranger who completed three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, is running for reelection in Colorado's 6th Congressional District. In 2018, he defeated longtime Republican incumbent Mike Coffman to become the first Democrat ever to represent this district.
Before serving in Congress, Crow spent years helping veterans like himself who struggled to receive benefits, focusing his work on veteran homelessness and substance abuse issues. Then, during his first term, Crow stepped into the national spotlight as one of the seven impeachment managers who argued for Donald Trump’s removal from office during the Senate trial. Crow made the case that Trump put both Ukraine’s safety and the U.S.’s national security at risk by withholding military aid in exchange for political favors.
Crow’s district is the most diverse in Colorado, with 1 in 5 residents being born outside the United States; Crow has said this is what makes his community such a special place to live. He supports protecting DREAMers and passing comprehensive immigration reform and has called for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to end its contracts with private prison companies.
Crow has also focused on instituting campaign finance reform. The first bill he sponsored, the End Dark Money Act, would prevent mega-donors from being able to hide their political contributions. His other priorities include preventing gun violence, combatting the effects of climate change, ensuring small businesses are able to thrive, and fighting for a bold investment in America’s infrastructure.
Running against him is Steve House, the former chair of the Colorado Republican Party and a one-time gubernatorial candidate. He spent 35 years working in the health care industry, yet the biggest point House has made about problems in the health care system is that “we must face the facts and repeal Obamacare.” House apparently doesn’t realize that recent Republican efforts to repeal and replace what’s officially known as the Affordable Care Act—which has been a lifeline for many Americans struggling with health insurance coverage—have been cited as increasing the cost of health care coverage while also reducing coverage throughout the U.S. This kind of regressive thinking can’t be elected to office.Jason Crow
El representante titular Jason Crow, abogado y exguardabosques del Ejército que completó tres giras en Irak y Afganistán, se postula para la reelección en el 6º distrito congresional de Colorado. En 2018, derrotó al antiguo titular republicano Mike Coffman para convertirse en el primer demócrata en representar a este distrito.
Antes de servir en el Congreso, Crow pasó años ayudando a veteranos como él que luchaban por recibir beneficios, enfocando su trabajo en los problemas de abuso de sustancias e indigencia de los veteranos. Luego, durante su primer mandato, Crow se convirtió en el centro de la atención nacional como uno de los siete gerentes de juicio político que defendieron la destitución de Donald Trump de su cargo durante el juicio del Senado. Crow argumentó que Trump puso en riesgo tanto la seguridad de Ucrania como la seguridad nacional de EE.UU. al retener la ayuda militar a cambio de favores políticos.
El distrito de Crow es el más diverso de Colorado, con 1 de cada 5 residentes nacidos fuera de los Estados Unidos; Crow ha dicho que esto es lo que hace que su comunidad sea un lugar tan especial para vivir. Apoya la protección de los DREAMers y la aprobación de una reforma migratoria integral y ha pedido al Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE) que ponga fin a sus contratos con empresas de prisiones privadas.
Crow también se ha centrado en instituir la reforma del financiamiento de campañas. El primer proyecto de ley que patrocinó, la Ley para Acabar con el Dinero Oscuro, evitaría que los mega donantes pudieran ocultar sus contribuciones políticas. Sus otras prioridades incluyen prevenir la violencia armada, combatir los efectos del cambio climático, garantizar que las pequeñas empresas puedan prosperar y luchar por una inversión audaz en la infraestructura de los EE.UU.
Se postula contra el Steve House, ex presidente del partido republicano de Colorado y excandidato a gobernador. Pasó 35 años trabajando en la industria del cuidado de la salud, sin embargo, el punto más importante que House ha hecho sobre los problemas en el sistema de cuidado de la salud es que “debemos enfrentar los hechos y derogar Obamacare”. House aparentemente no se da cuenta de que los recientes esfuerzos republicanos para derogar y reemplazar lo que se conoce oficialmente como la Ley de Cuidado de Salud Asequible (que ha sido un salvavidas para muchos estadounidenses que luchan con la cobertura de seguro médico) han sido citados como la causa del aumento del costo de la cobertura de salud y al mismo tiempo reducir la cobertura en todo EE.UU. Este tipo de pensamiento regresivo no puede ser elegido para un cargo.
-
-
Incumbent U.S. Rep. Jason Crow, a lawyer and former Army Ranger who completed three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, is running for reelection in Colorado's 6th Congressional District. In 2018, he defeated longtime Republican incumbent Mike Coffman to become the first Democrat ever to represent this district.
Before serving in Congress, Crow spent years helping veterans like himself who struggled to receive benefits, focusing his work on veteran homelessness and substance abuse issues. Then, during his first term, Crow stepped into the national spotlight as one of the seven impeachment managers who argued for Donald Trump’s removal from office during the Senate trial. Crow made the case that Trump put both Ukraine’s safety and the U.S.’s national security at risk by withholding military aid in exchange for political favors.
Crow’s district is the most diverse in Colorado, with 1 in 5 residents being born outside the United States; Crow has said this is what makes his community such a special place to live. He supports protecting DREAMers and passing comprehensive immigration reform and has called for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to end its contracts with private prison companies.
Crow has also focused on instituting campaign finance reform. The first bill he sponsored, the End Dark Money Act, would prevent mega-donors from being able to hide their political contributions. His other priorities include preventing gun violence, combatting the effects of climate change, ensuring small businesses are able to thrive, and fighting for a bold investment in America’s infrastructure.
Running against him is Steve House, the former chair of the Colorado Republican Party and a one-time gubernatorial candidate. He spent 35 years working in the health care industry, yet the biggest point House has made about problems in the health care system is that “we must face the facts and repeal Obamacare.” House apparently doesn’t realize that recent Republican efforts to repeal and replace what’s officially known as the Affordable Care Act—which has been a lifeline for many Americans struggling with health insurance coverage—have been cited as increasing the cost of health care coverage while also reducing coverage throughout the U.S. This kind of regressive thinking can’t be elected to office.
-
-
Ilana Spiegel is a highly experienced and well-respected grassroots organizer, columnist, and public education advocate. A mother and a former public school teacher, her platform emphasizes accessibility in higher education, opportunity, affordability, and inclusivity. Her history as a staff developer, coach, and consultant demonstrates that she will follow through on her promise to “fight for Colorado students and families.”
Spiegel’s organizing led to the creation of the Standards and Assessment Task Force, where she worked with stakeholders on legislation to improve standardized testing in Colorado. Spiegel also spearheaded groups such as Taxpayers for Public Education and SPEAK for Cherry Creek to oppose a conservative-majority school board in Douglas County that threatened the vitality of public education. Spiegel organized and spoke at a 2017 teach-in to educate the public about and protest an ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) conference where Betsy DeVos was a speaker.
Her fierce advocacy and organizing work proves she will stand for progressive values by fighting rising tuition, encouraging academic freedom, and making higher education more accessible and diverse.
She faces Republican Richard Murray and the Unity Party’s Robert Worthey. Murray is an attorney from Highlands Ranch and frequently refers to his desire to run for regent because of his “double buff” status. While he does say that he’s worried about the cost of college, he seems to have more ideas about how to make CU’s football team better than he does about the cost of higher education. We think voters should not vote for Murray.
Worthey is a music teacher and former Green Party candidate for the 6th Congressional District. He is now running with the independent Unity Party, whose platform mostly reflects a Republican or conservative agenda. He seems to have no published policy positions or public statements reflecting what he would do once he’s in office.
We recommend voting for Spiegel, a candidate whose agenda aligns with our values.Ilana Spiegel
Ilana Spiegel es una organizadora, columnista y defensora de la educación pública muy respetada y con mucha experiencia. Madre y exmaestra de escuela pública, su plataforma enfatiza la accesibilidad en la educación superior, las oportunidades, la asequibilidad y la inclusión.
Ilana Spiegel is a highly experienced and well-respected grassroots organizer, columnist, and public education advocate. A mother and a former public school teacher, her platform emphasizes accessibility in higher education, opportunity, affordability, and inclusivity. Her history as a staff developer, coach, and consultant demonstrates that she will follow through on her promise to “fight for Colorado students and families.”
Spiegel’s organizing led to the creation of the Standards and Assessment Task Force, where she worked with stakeholders on legislation to improve standardized testing in Colorado. Spiegel also spearheaded groups such as Taxpayers for Public Education and SPEAK for Cherry Creek to oppose a conservative-majority school board in Douglas County that threatened the vitality of public education. Spiegel organized and spoke at a 2017 teach-in to educate the public about and protest an ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) conference where Betsy DeVos was a speaker.
Her fierce advocacy and organizing work proves she will stand for progressive values by fighting rising tuition, encouraging academic freedom, and making higher education more accessible and diverse.
She faces Republican Richard Murray and the Unity Party’s Robert Worthey. Murray is an attorney from Highlands Ranch and frequently refers to his desire to run for regent because of his “double buff” status. While he does say that he’s worried about the cost of college, he seems to have more ideas about how to make CU’s football team better than he does about the cost of higher education. We think voters should not vote for Murray.
Worthey is a music teacher and former Green Party candidate for the 6th Congressional District. He is now running with the independent Unity Party, whose platform mostly reflects a Republican or conservative agenda. He seems to have no published policy positions or public statements reflecting what he would do once he’s in office.
We recommend voting for Spiegel, a candidate whose agenda aligns with our values.Ilana Spiegel
Ilana Spiegel es una organizadora, columnista y defensora de la educación pública muy respetada y con mucha experiencia. Madre y exmaestra de escuela pública, su plataforma enfatiza la accesibilidad en la educación superior, las oportunidades, la asequibilidad y la inclusión.
-
-
Ilana Spiegel is a highly experienced and well-respected grassroots organizer, columnist, and public education advocate. A mother and a former public school teacher, her platform emphasizes accessibility in higher education, opportunity, affordability, and inclusivity. Her history as a staff developer, coach, and consultant demonstrates that she will follow through on her promise to “fight for Colorado students and families.”
Spiegel’s organizing led to the creation of the Standards and Assessment Task Force, where she worked with stakeholders on legislation to improve standardized testing in Colorado. Spiegel also spearheaded groups such as Taxpayers for Public Education and SPEAK for Cherry Creek to oppose a conservative-majority school board in Douglas County that threatened the vitality of public education. Spiegel organized and spoke at a 2017 teach-in to educate the public about and protest an ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) conference where Betsy DeVos was a speaker.
Her fierce advocacy and organizing work proves she will stand for progressive values by fighting rising tuition, encouraging academic freedom, and making higher education more accessible and diverse.
She faces Republican Richard Murray and the Unity Party’s Robert Worthey. Murray is an attorney from Highlands Ranch and frequently refers to his desire to run for regent because of his “double buff” status. While he does say that he’s worried about the cost of college, he seems to have more ideas about how to make CU’s football team better than he does about the cost of higher education. We think voters should not vote for Murray.
Worthey is a music teacher and former Green Party candidate for the 6th Congressional District. He is now running with the independent Unity Party, whose platform mostly reflects a Republican or conservative agenda. He seems to have no published policy positions or public statements reflecting what he would do once he’s in office.
We recommend voting for Spiegel, a candidate whose agenda aligns with our values.
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below State Senate races on your ballot.
-
-
Chris Kolker is a former teacher and a current financial planner and small-business owner. He previously ran in 2018 for state representative in District 38 and came very close — under 400 votes — to flipping the seat. Kolker has called Arapahoe County home since 1999 and appears to be the kind of person who knows the struggles of everyday life for working families and how the increasing cost of living is making it worse.
Among Kolker’s top priorities: funding for Colorado schools, instituting more gun-safety laws, improving transportation quality, and taking action on human-caused climate change. He also is a strong proponent of social justice reform, particularly as to the legislature’s recent sweeping changes to law enforcement accountability, and said it’s “long past time for us to … dismantle systemic racism.” His platform and actions already have endorsers like the Human Rights Campaign, Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club, and several unions excited to see him in office, and quite frankly, we are too.
Kolker is the one progressives should give their support to in this race.
Vying for the seat on the Republican side is Suzanne Staiert. Staiert has some impressive experience: She is a former city prosecutor for Aurora, the former city attorney for Littleton, and a former deputy Secretary of State. And on issues like education and political integrity, she seems straightforward, if not practically moderate. Staiert wants to say she’s “practical, not political,” but scratch the surface a little, and you’ll find her partisanship coming through. She’s outspoken against reforming our national electoral system, which is clearly broken. She also is a strong supporter of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), which is the primary cause for a number of our budget shortfalls and one of the reasons Colorado is falling behind on education. She definitely doesn’t hit the singingly progressive notes that Kolker does, and he could do more in the office.
Chris Kolker
Chris Kolker es un antiguo profesor y un actual planificador financiero y propietario de una pequeña empresa. Anteriormente se postuló en el 2018 para representante estatal en el distrito 38 y estuvo muy cerca, a menos de 400 votos, de ganar el cargo. Kolker ha llamado hogar al condado de Arapahoe desde 1999 y parece ser el tipo de persona que conoce las luchas de la vida cotidiana de las familias trabajadoras y cómo el creciente costo de la vida está haciendo la situación más difícil.
Entre las principales prioridades de Kolker: la financiación de las escuelas de Colorado, instituir más leyes de seguridad de armas, mejorar la calidad del transporte y tomar medidas sobre el cambio climático causado por el hombre. También es un firme defensor de la reforma de la justicia social, en particular en lo que respecta a los recientes cambios radicales de la legislatura en cuanto a la responsabilidad de los cuerpos policiales y dijo que “hace tiempo que debemos... desmantelar el racismo sistemático”. Su plataforma y sus acciones ya tienen partidarios como la Campaña de Derechos Humanos, Planned Parenthood, el Club Sierra y varios sindicatos emocionados de verlo en el cargo y francamente, nosotros también lo estamos.
Kolker es a quien los progresistas deben dar su apoyo en esta elección.
Luchando por el cargo por el lado republicano está Suzanne Staiert. Staiert tiene una experiencia impresionante: es una exfiscal de la ciudad de Aurora, exfiscal de la ciudad de Littleton y exsecretaria de estado. Y en temas como la educación y la integridad política, parece directa, si no prácticamente moderada. Staiert quiere decir que es “práctica, no política”, pero cuando escarbas un poco en la superficie, verás que su partidismo se hace notar. Está en contra de la reforma de nuestro sistema electoral nacional, que está claramente roto. También es una fuerte defensora de la Declaración de Derechos de los Contribuyentes (TABOR), que es la causa principal de varios de nuestros déficits presupuestarios y una de las razones por las que Colorado se está quedando atrás en materia de educación. Definitivamente ella no da con las notas progresivas donde Kolker sí y podría hacer más en el cargo.
Chris Kolker is a former teacher and a current financial planner and small-business owner. He previously ran in 2018 for state representative in District 38 and came very close — under 400 votes — to flipping the seat. Kolker has called Arapahoe County home since 1999 and appears to be the kind of person who knows the struggles of everyday life for working families and how the increasing cost of living is making it worse.
Among Kolker’s top priorities: funding for Colorado schools, instituting more gun-safety laws, improving transportation quality, and taking action on human-caused climate change. He also is a strong proponent of social justice reform, particularly as to the legislature’s recent sweeping changes to law enforcement accountability, and said it’s “long past time for us to … dismantle systemic racism.” His platform and actions already have endorsers like the Human Rights Campaign, Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club, and several unions excited to see him in office, and quite frankly, we are too.
Kolker is the one progressives should give their support to in this race.
Vying for the seat on the Republican side is Suzanne Staiert. Staiert has some impressive experience: She is a former city prosecutor for Aurora, the former city attorney for Littleton, and a former deputy Secretary of State. And on issues like education and political integrity, she seems straightforward, if not practically moderate. Staiert wants to say she’s “practical, not political,” but scratch the surface a little, and you’ll find her partisanship coming through. She’s outspoken against reforming our national electoral system, which is clearly broken. She also is a strong supporter of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), which is the primary cause for a number of our budget shortfalls and one of the reasons Colorado is falling behind on education. She definitely doesn’t hit the singingly progressive notes that Kolker does, and he could do more in the office.
Chris Kolker
Chris Kolker es un antiguo profesor y un actual planificador financiero y propietario de una pequeña empresa. Anteriormente se postuló en el 2018 para representante estatal en el distrito 38 y estuvo muy cerca, a menos de 400 votos, de ganar el cargo. Kolker ha llamado hogar al condado de Arapahoe desde 1999 y parece ser el tipo de persona que conoce las luchas de la vida cotidiana de las familias trabajadoras y cómo el creciente costo de la vida está haciendo la situación más difícil.
Entre las principales prioridades de Kolker: la financiación de las escuelas de Colorado, instituir más leyes de seguridad de armas, mejorar la calidad del transporte y tomar medidas sobre el cambio climático causado por el hombre. También es un firme defensor de la reforma de la justicia social, en particular en lo que respecta a los recientes cambios radicales de la legislatura en cuanto a la responsabilidad de los cuerpos policiales y dijo que “hace tiempo que debemos... desmantelar el racismo sistemático”. Su plataforma y sus acciones ya tienen partidarios como la Campaña de Derechos Humanos, Planned Parenthood, el Club Sierra y varios sindicatos emocionados de verlo en el cargo y francamente, nosotros también lo estamos.
Kolker es a quien los progresistas deben dar su apoyo en esta elección.
Luchando por el cargo por el lado republicano está Suzanne Staiert. Staiert tiene una experiencia impresionante: es una exfiscal de la ciudad de Aurora, exfiscal de la ciudad de Littleton y exsecretaria de estado. Y en temas como la educación y la integridad política, parece directa, si no prácticamente moderada. Staiert quiere decir que es “práctica, no política”, pero cuando escarbas un poco en la superficie, verás que su partidismo se hace notar. Está en contra de la reforma de nuestro sistema electoral nacional, que está claramente roto. También es una fuerte defensora de la Declaración de Derechos de los Contribuyentes (TABOR), que es la causa principal de varios de nuestros déficits presupuestarios y una de las razones por las que Colorado se está quedando atrás en materia de educación. Definitivamente ella no da con las notas progresivas donde Kolker sí y podría hacer más en el cargo.
-
-
Chris Kolker is a former teacher and a current financial planner and small-business owner. He previously ran in 2018 for state representative in District 38 and came very close — under 400 votes — to flipping the seat. Kolker has called Arapahoe County home since 1999 and appears to be the kind of person who knows the struggles of everyday life for working families and how the increasing cost of living is making it worse.
Among Kolker’s top priorities: funding for Colorado schools, instituting more gun-safety laws, improving transportation quality, and taking action on human-caused climate change. He also is a strong proponent of social justice reform, particularly as to the legislature’s recent sweeping changes to law enforcement accountability, and said it’s “long past time for us to … dismantle systemic racism.” His platform and actions already have endorsers like the Human Rights Campaign, Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club, and several unions excited to see him in office, and quite frankly, we are too.
Kolker is the one progressives should give their support to in this race.
Vying for the seat on the Republican side is Suzanne Staiert. Staiert has some impressive experience: She is a former city prosecutor for Aurora, the former city attorney for Littleton, and a former deputy Secretary of State. And on issues like education and political integrity, she seems straightforward, if not practically moderate. Staiert wants to say she’s “practical, not political,” but scratch the surface a little, and you’ll find her partisanship coming through. She’s outspoken against reforming our national electoral system, which is clearly broken. She also is a strong supporter of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), which is the primary cause for a number of our budget shortfalls and one of the reasons Colorado is falling behind on education. She definitely doesn’t hit the singingly progressive notes that Kolker does, and he could do more in the office.
State House
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below State House races on your ballot.
-
-
As the only nurse in the Colorado General Assembly, incumbent State Rep. Kyle Mullica has been on the “frontlines of the coronavirus fight” both via his role as a legislator and as an EMT and nurse. In his time as a legislator, Mullica has been a leading voice on public health and protecting working families, introducing bills to curb vaping and youth nicotine use, lower prescription drug costs, and increase the number of nurses in Colorado schools.
Among Mullica’s other priorities are fighting for working families by ensuring livable wages and collective bargaining rights, better access to reproductive care, support for DREAMers, sustainable energy solutions, and more. Mullica vows to continue his progressive work in an immediate way by fighting for a smart and “just” economic return from the coronavirus pandemic and pushing forward health care reforms.
Mullica is the best candidate to continue bringing progressive values to the capitol on behalf of House District 34.
His opponent, Republican Mark Bromley, is an electrician living in Northglenn. His website boasts his support for quite a backwards agenda. He’s against vaccinations, police oversight, reforming the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), red-flag laws, and gun safety in general as well as the repeal of the death penalty in Colorado. On top of all of that, he also spreads a lot of disinformation and pro-Trump propaganda. A vote for Bromley is a vote against progress in Colorado.Kyle Mullica
Como único enfermero en la Asamblea General de Colorado, el representante estatal titular Kyle Mullica ha estado en la “primera línea de la lucha contra el coronavirus” tanto a través de su papel como legislador como EMT.
As the only nurse in the Colorado General Assembly, incumbent State Rep. Kyle Mullica has been on the “frontlines of the coronavirus fight” both via his role as a legislator and as an EMT and nurse. In his time as a legislator, Mullica has been a leading voice on public health and protecting working families, introducing bills to curb vaping and youth nicotine use, lower prescription drug costs, and increase the number of nurses in Colorado schools.
Among Mullica’s other priorities are fighting for working families by ensuring livable wages and collective bargaining rights, better access to reproductive care, support for DREAMers, sustainable energy solutions, and more. Mullica vows to continue his progressive work in an immediate way by fighting for a smart and “just” economic return from the coronavirus pandemic and pushing forward health care reforms.
Mullica is the best candidate to continue bringing progressive values to the capitol on behalf of House District 34.
His opponent, Republican Mark Bromley, is an electrician living in Northglenn. His website boasts his support for quite a backwards agenda. He’s against vaccinations, police oversight, reforming the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), red-flag laws, and gun safety in general as well as the repeal of the death penalty in Colorado. On top of all of that, he also spreads a lot of disinformation and pro-Trump propaganda. A vote for Bromley is a vote against progress in Colorado.Kyle Mullica
Como único enfermero en la Asamblea General de Colorado, el representante estatal titular Kyle Mullica ha estado en la “primera línea de la lucha contra el coronavirus” tanto a través de su papel como legislador como EMT.
-
-
As the only nurse in the Colorado General Assembly, incumbent State Rep. Kyle Mullica has been on the “frontlines of the coronavirus fight” both via his role as a legislator and as an EMT and nurse. In his time as a legislator, Mullica has been a leading voice on public health and protecting working families, introducing bills to curb vaping and youth nicotine use, lower prescription drug costs, and increase the number of nurses in Colorado schools.
Among Mullica’s other priorities are fighting for working families by ensuring livable wages and collective bargaining rights, better access to reproductive care, support for DREAMers, sustainable energy solutions, and more. Mullica vows to continue his progressive work in an immediate way by fighting for a smart and “just” economic return from the coronavirus pandemic and pushing forward health care reforms.
Mullica is the best candidate to continue bringing progressive values to the capitol on behalf of House District 34.
His opponent, Republican Mark Bromley, is an electrician living in Northglenn. His website boasts his support for quite a backwards agenda. He’s against vaccinations, police oversight, reforming the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), red-flag laws, and gun safety in general as well as the repeal of the death penalty in Colorado. On top of all of that, he also spreads a lot of disinformation and pro-Trump propaganda. A vote for Bromley is a vote against progress in Colorado.
-
-
Incumbent State Rep. Shannon Bird is seeking a second term representing District 35. She has longstanding experience in business, financial negotiations, and local government. Before becoming a representative, she served on the Westminster City Council, where she created an internship program and secured funding for infrastructure improvements at schools.
Bird’s legislative work to date has focused on fiscal policy, education financing, and economic development, and she is the vice chair of the House finance committee. She has also been a strong advocate for public education, particularly fair and equitable funding for schools in all neighborhoods. To help working individuals and families, Bird sponsored bills this term easing credential and licensing transferability in fields ranging from electricians to midwives and another on extending workforce development programs. She also supports DREAMers, affordable housing, and pairing law enforcement with behavioral health specialists for response calls — plus she regularly convenes virtual town halls and socially distant meetups with constituents.
She is the best candidate to lead her district forward in fighting for progressive values.Challenging her for the seat is Republican Roger Lehman. As of the start of September, he appeared to have not spoken to the media or even created a website or social media pages explaining his campaign or his personal policy positions. If Lehman isn’t going to put his voice on any issues, then he should not be Statehouse-bound.
Shannon Bird
La representante estatal titular Shannon Bird busca un segundo mandato en representación del distrito 35. Tiene una larga experiencia en negocios, negociaciones financieras y gobierno local.
Incumbent State Rep. Shannon Bird is seeking a second term representing District 35. She has longstanding experience in business, financial negotiations, and local government. Before becoming a representative, she served on the Westminster City Council, where she created an internship program and secured funding for infrastructure improvements at schools.
Bird’s legislative work to date has focused on fiscal policy, education financing, and economic development, and she is the vice chair of the House finance committee. She has also been a strong advocate for public education, particularly fair and equitable funding for schools in all neighborhoods. To help working individuals and families, Bird sponsored bills this term easing credential and licensing transferability in fields ranging from electricians to midwives and another on extending workforce development programs. She also supports DREAMers, affordable housing, and pairing law enforcement with behavioral health specialists for response calls — plus she regularly convenes virtual town halls and socially distant meetups with constituents.
She is the best candidate to lead her district forward in fighting for progressive values.Challenging her for the seat is Republican Roger Lehman. As of the start of September, he appeared to have not spoken to the media or even created a website or social media pages explaining his campaign or his personal policy positions. If Lehman isn’t going to put his voice on any issues, then he should not be Statehouse-bound.
Shannon Bird
La representante estatal titular Shannon Bird busca un segundo mandato en representación del distrito 35. Tiene una larga experiencia en negocios, negociaciones financieras y gobierno local.
-
-
Incumbent State Rep. Shannon Bird is seeking a second term representing District 35. She has longstanding experience in business, financial negotiations, and local government. Before becoming a representative, she served on the Westminster City Council, where she created an internship program and secured funding for infrastructure improvements at schools.
Bird’s legislative work to date has focused on fiscal policy, education financing, and economic development, and she is the vice chair of the House finance committee. She has also been a strong advocate for public education, particularly fair and equitable funding for schools in all neighborhoods. To help working individuals and families, Bird sponsored bills this term easing credential and licensing transferability in fields ranging from electricians to midwives and another on extending workforce development programs. She also supports DREAMers, affordable housing, and pairing law enforcement with behavioral health specialists for response calls — plus she regularly convenes virtual town halls and socially distant meetups with constituents.
She is the best candidate to lead her district forward in fighting for progressive values.Challenging her for the seat is Republican Roger Lehman. As of the start of September, he appeared to have not spoken to the media or even created a website or social media pages explaining his campaign or his personal policy positions. If Lehman isn’t going to put his voice on any issues, then he should not be Statehouse-bound.
-
-
Incumbent State Rep. Tom Sullivan was first elected to District 37 in 2018. After his son was murdered in the Aurora movie theater mass shooting, he became involved in politics by advocating for victims’ rights and testifying during committee hearings for stronger gun safety laws.
Sullivan’s platform emphasizes supporting and strengthening middle-class families by stimulating a healthy economy, promoting good jobs, and fighting for affordable health care, education, and housing. While in office, he has fought for the working families of Colorado and successfully sponsored a monumental red-flag gun regulation bill signed into law last year. The bill gained strong opposition from Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) and Kristi Burton Brown, vice chair of the Colorado Republican Party, who organized a recall effort against Sullivan. Prominent progressive leaders from across the nation including Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren rallied their support for Sullivan’s agenda, the recall failed, and the bill was signed into law.
Sullivan deserves to continue to represent this district with the support of progressive voters.
Challenging him for the seat is Republican Caroline Cornell, who is a career coach and education volunteer in the Centennial area. Her campaign website contains some generic platitudes like supporting the economy, wanting more money for fixing roads, and supporting the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). But don’t look for any specifics from Cornell. She seems to use her social media pages largely for kids’ entertainment and proving she has door-to-door selfie skills instead of informing people about her specific views. Not only that, but she seems more interested in getting kids out of quarantine than protecting families during a pandemic. If these are the highlights for her to talk and post about in public, then progressive voters should be worried about what Cornell isn’t saying.Tom Sullivan
El representante estatal titular Tom Sullivan fue elegido por primera vez para el distrito 37 en 2018.
Incumbent State Rep. Tom Sullivan was first elected to District 37 in 2018. After his son was murdered in the Aurora movie theater mass shooting, he became involved in politics by advocating for victims’ rights and testifying during committee hearings for stronger gun safety laws.
Sullivan’s platform emphasizes supporting and strengthening middle-class families by stimulating a healthy economy, promoting good jobs, and fighting for affordable health care, education, and housing. While in office, he has fought for the working families of Colorado and successfully sponsored a monumental red-flag gun regulation bill signed into law last year. The bill gained strong opposition from Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) and Kristi Burton Brown, vice chair of the Colorado Republican Party, who organized a recall effort against Sullivan. Prominent progressive leaders from across the nation including Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren rallied their support for Sullivan’s agenda, the recall failed, and the bill was signed into law.
Sullivan deserves to continue to represent this district with the support of progressive voters.
Challenging him for the seat is Republican Caroline Cornell, who is a career coach and education volunteer in the Centennial area. Her campaign website contains some generic platitudes like supporting the economy, wanting more money for fixing roads, and supporting the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). But don’t look for any specifics from Cornell. She seems to use her social media pages largely for kids’ entertainment and proving she has door-to-door selfie skills instead of informing people about her specific views. Not only that, but she seems more interested in getting kids out of quarantine than protecting families during a pandemic. If these are the highlights for her to talk and post about in public, then progressive voters should be worried about what Cornell isn’t saying.Tom Sullivan
El representante estatal titular Tom Sullivan fue elegido por primera vez para el distrito 37 en 2018.
-
-
Incumbent State Rep. Tom Sullivan was first elected to District 37 in 2018. After his son was murdered in the Aurora movie theater mass shooting, he became involved in politics by advocating for victims’ rights and testifying during committee hearings for stronger gun safety laws.
Sullivan’s platform emphasizes supporting and strengthening middle-class families by stimulating a healthy economy, promoting good jobs, and fighting for affordable health care, education, and housing. While in office, he has fought for the working families of Colorado and successfully sponsored a monumental red-flag gun regulation bill signed into law last year. The bill gained strong opposition from Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) and Kristi Burton Brown, vice chair of the Colorado Republican Party, who organized a recall effort against Sullivan. Prominent progressive leaders from across the nation including Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren rallied their support for Sullivan’s agenda, the recall failed, and the bill was signed into law.
Sullivan deserves to continue to represent this district with the support of progressive voters.
Challenging him for the seat is Republican Caroline Cornell, who is a career coach and education volunteer in the Centennial area. Her campaign website contains some generic platitudes like supporting the economy, wanting more money for fixing roads, and supporting the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). But don’t look for any specifics from Cornell. She seems to use her social media pages largely for kids’ entertainment and proving she has door-to-door selfie skills instead of informing people about her specific views. Not only that, but she seems more interested in getting kids out of quarantine than protecting families during a pandemic. If these are the highlights for her to talk and post about in public, then progressive voters should be worried about what Cornell isn’t saying.
-
-
David Ortiz’s experience as a military veteran, public affairs professional, community and media liaison, advocate, and lobbyist proves he will fight to make equality of opportunity and economic recovery priorities as a representative for District 38.
After college, Ortiz volunteered in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and worked at the Houston mayor’s Office of International Affairs and Development. Ortiz was selected to train as a helicopter pilot in the U.S. Army, and he survived a near-fatal crash while deployed in Afghanistan in 2012. He was left paralyzed from the waist down and has dedicated his life as a public servant to advocating for veterans, service members, and people with disabilities. He has successfully helped to secure resources for veteran services, served in numerous leadership positions at nonprofits, and worked as a legislative liaison.
Ortiz has demonstrated his commitment to progressive issues through his work on several pieces of legislation on higher education, the criminal justice system, mental health, and housing. He is the clear choice in this race.
He is taking on incumbent State Rep. Richard Champion, an energy businessman and diehard right-wing conservative who toes the party line instead of representing his constituents. Champion was nominated to the seat by a select group of Republican activists after his predecessor joined the Trump administration. He is apparently more angry about stay-at-home orders and mask mandates than about the failed federal response to the coronavirus in the first place. He tends to make up his own facts about reforming health care, resulting in conservative ideas that actually take health care away from people. Champion is the kind of backwards-thinking conservative we don’t want representing us anymore.David Ortiz
La experiencia de David Ortiz como profesional de asuntos públicos, enlace con la comunidad y los medios, defensor y cabildero demuestra que luchará para que la igualdad de oportunidades y la recuperación económica sean prioridades como representante del distrito 38.
David Ortiz’s experience as a military veteran, public affairs professional, community and media liaison, advocate, and lobbyist proves he will fight to make equality of opportunity and economic recovery priorities as a representative for District 38.
After college, Ortiz volunteered in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and worked at the Houston mayor’s Office of International Affairs and Development. Ortiz was selected to train as a helicopter pilot in the U.S. Army, and he survived a near-fatal crash while deployed in Afghanistan in 2012. He was left paralyzed from the waist down and has dedicated his life as a public servant to advocating for veterans, service members, and people with disabilities. He has successfully helped to secure resources for veteran services, served in numerous leadership positions at nonprofits, and worked as a legislative liaison.
Ortiz has demonstrated his commitment to progressive issues through his work on several pieces of legislation on higher education, the criminal justice system, mental health, and housing. He is the clear choice in this race.
He is taking on incumbent State Rep. Richard Champion, an energy businessman and diehard right-wing conservative who toes the party line instead of representing his constituents. Champion was nominated to the seat by a select group of Republican activists after his predecessor joined the Trump administration. He is apparently more angry about stay-at-home orders and mask mandates than about the failed federal response to the coronavirus in the first place. He tends to make up his own facts about reforming health care, resulting in conservative ideas that actually take health care away from people. Champion is the kind of backwards-thinking conservative we don’t want representing us anymore.David Ortiz
La experiencia de David Ortiz como profesional de asuntos públicos, enlace con la comunidad y los medios, defensor y cabildero demuestra que luchará para que la igualdad de oportunidades y la recuperación económica sean prioridades como representante del distrito 38.
-
-
David Ortiz’s experience as a military veteran, public affairs professional, community and media liaison, advocate, and lobbyist proves he will fight to make equality of opportunity and economic recovery priorities as a representative for District 38.
After college, Ortiz volunteered in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and worked at the Houston mayor’s Office of International Affairs and Development. Ortiz was selected to train as a helicopter pilot in the U.S. Army, and he survived a near-fatal crash while deployed in Afghanistan in 2012. He was left paralyzed from the waist down and has dedicated his life as a public servant to advocating for veterans, service members, and people with disabilities. He has successfully helped to secure resources for veteran services, served in numerous leadership positions at nonprofits, and worked as a legislative liaison.
Ortiz has demonstrated his commitment to progressive issues through his work on several pieces of legislation on higher education, the criminal justice system, mental health, and housing. He is the clear choice in this race.
He is taking on incumbent State Rep. Richard Champion, an energy businessman and diehard right-wing conservative who toes the party line instead of representing his constituents. Champion was nominated to the seat by a select group of Republican activists after his predecessor joined the Trump administration. He is apparently more angry about stay-at-home orders and mask mandates than about the failed federal response to the coronavirus in the first place. He tends to make up his own facts about reforming health care, resulting in conservative ideas that actually take health care away from people. Champion is the kind of backwards-thinking conservative we don’t want representing us anymore.
-
-
In a rematch, Seth Cagin is seeking the District 58 seat again. He said he stepped up when it was evident no other challenger was going to in this longtime Republican district.
The former reporter and editor who has also co-authored several books has sat on public and nonprofit boards and co-founded local newspaper The Telluride Watch with his wife. Cagin’s top priorities are addressing climate change and income inequality, emphasized by his “100% focus” on improving the quality of life for working people and on protecting the environment. He is also running to combat what he sees as the failings of the Republican Party to properly address the COVID-19 crisis. A strong advocate for science, Cagin says he will push to protect the environment if elected. His stances on climate change, health care, public school funding, and social justice prove he will lead from a reliably “Democratic, progressive perspective.”
Cagin is a solid choice for progressive voters.
As in 2018, Cagin faces tough opposition with incumbent Republican State Rep. Marc Catlin, who was originally appointed to the seat following a vacancy. Catlin is a water policy expert and has worked to protect water rights and natural resources in the Western Slope. He also helped advance a bipartisan effort to introduce a public health insurance option. However, Catlin is a global climate change denier and has voted twice against cutting greenhouse gases. He also voted against repealing the state death penalty and expanding school lunch programs. So, despite Catlin’s ability to work across the aisle on some health care reform legislation, his concerning positions on many other core progressive issues prevents us from being able to endorse him for reelection.Seth Cagin
En la revancha, Seth Cagin quiere el cargo del distrito 58 de nuevo. Dijo que tomó la iniciativa cuando era evidente que ningún otro aspirante iba a hacerlo en este distrito republicano.
In a rematch, Seth Cagin is seeking the District 58 seat again. He said he stepped up when it was evident no other challenger was going to in this longtime Republican district.
The former reporter and editor who has also co-authored several books has sat on public and nonprofit boards and co-founded local newspaper The Telluride Watch with his wife. Cagin’s top priorities are addressing climate change and income inequality, emphasized by his “100% focus” on improving the quality of life for working people and on protecting the environment. He is also running to combat what he sees as the failings of the Republican Party to properly address the COVID-19 crisis. A strong advocate for science, Cagin says he will push to protect the environment if elected. His stances on climate change, health care, public school funding, and social justice prove he will lead from a reliably “Democratic, progressive perspective.”
Cagin is a solid choice for progressive voters.
As in 2018, Cagin faces tough opposition with incumbent Republican State Rep. Marc Catlin, who was originally appointed to the seat following a vacancy. Catlin is a water policy expert and has worked to protect water rights and natural resources in the Western Slope. He also helped advance a bipartisan effort to introduce a public health insurance option. However, Catlin is a global climate change denier and has voted twice against cutting greenhouse gases. He also voted against repealing the state death penalty and expanding school lunch programs. So, despite Catlin’s ability to work across the aisle on some health care reform legislation, his concerning positions on many other core progressive issues prevents us from being able to endorse him for reelection.Seth Cagin
En la revancha, Seth Cagin quiere el cargo del distrito 58 de nuevo. Dijo que tomó la iniciativa cuando era evidente que ningún otro aspirante iba a hacerlo en este distrito republicano.
-
-
In a rematch, Seth Cagin is seeking the District 58 seat again. He said he stepped up when it was evident no other challenger was going to in this longtime Republican district.
The former reporter and editor who has also co-authored several books has sat on public and nonprofit boards and co-founded local newspaper The Telluride Watch with his wife. Cagin’s top priorities are addressing climate change and income inequality, emphasized by his “100% focus” on improving the quality of life for working people and on protecting the environment. He is also running to combat what he sees as the failings of the Republican Party to properly address the COVID-19 crisis. A strong advocate for science, Cagin says he will push to protect the environment if elected. His stances on climate change, health care, public school funding, and social justice prove he will lead from a reliably “Democratic, progressive perspective.”
Cagin is a solid choice for progressive voters.
As in 2018, Cagin faces tough opposition with incumbent Republican State Rep. Marc Catlin, who was originally appointed to the seat following a vacancy. Catlin is a water policy expert and has worked to protect water rights and natural resources in the Western Slope. He also helped advance a bipartisan effort to introduce a public health insurance option. However, Catlin is a global climate change denier and has voted twice against cutting greenhouse gases. He also voted against repealing the state death penalty and expanding school lunch programs. So, despite Catlin’s ability to work across the aisle on some health care reform legislation, his concerning positions on many other core progressive issues prevents us from being able to endorse him for reelection.
-
-
Incumbent State Rep. Julie McCluskie has represented District 61 since being elected in 2018. McCluskie’s background assisting local schools with mental health and community engagement has informed her important work at the Capitol, where she has helped pass numerous education bills, including a renewal of the READ Act. As a key part of the joint budget committee, she helped prioritize critical services during the Covid-19 pandemic. McCluskie’s stances on health care, education, and opportunities for working families are reflective of a progressive vision for the future of her district, and she is the clear recommended candidate in this race.
Republican Kim McGahey is challenging her for the seat. He is a former real estate broker, citizen’s advocate, and volunteer in Breckenridge. McGahey’s emphasis on fiscal conservancy and constitutional freedoms reflect conservative stances that are likely to obstruct progress in Colorado. Additionally, his virulent opposition to economic shutdowns earlier this year reflects a disregard for public health and safety.Julie McCluskie
La representante estatal titular Julie McCluskie ha representado al distrito 61 desde que fue elegida en el 2018.
Incumbent State Rep. Julie McCluskie has represented District 61 since being elected in 2018. McCluskie’s background assisting local schools with mental health and community engagement has informed her important work at the Capitol, where she has helped pass numerous education bills, including a renewal of the READ Act. As a key part of the joint budget committee, she helped prioritize critical services during the Covid-19 pandemic. McCluskie’s stances on health care, education, and opportunities for working families are reflective of a progressive vision for the future of her district, and she is the clear recommended candidate in this race.
Republican Kim McGahey is challenging her for the seat. He is a former real estate broker, citizen’s advocate, and volunteer in Breckenridge. McGahey’s emphasis on fiscal conservancy and constitutional freedoms reflect conservative stances that are likely to obstruct progress in Colorado. Additionally, his virulent opposition to economic shutdowns earlier this year reflects a disregard for public health and safety.Julie McCluskie
La representante estatal titular Julie McCluskie ha representado al distrito 61 desde que fue elegida en el 2018.
-
-
Incumbent State Rep. Julie McCluskie has represented District 61 since being elected in 2018. McCluskie’s background assisting local schools with mental health and community engagement has informed her important work at the Capitol, where she has helped pass numerous education bills, including a renewal of the READ Act. As a key part of the joint budget committee, she helped prioritize critical services during the Covid-19 pandemic. McCluskie’s stances on health care, education, and opportunities for working families are reflective of a progressive vision for the future of her district, and she is the clear recommended candidate in this race.
Republican Kim McGahey is challenging her for the seat. He is a former real estate broker, citizen’s advocate, and volunteer in Breckenridge. McGahey’s emphasis on fiscal conservancy and constitutional freedoms reflect conservative stances that are likely to obstruct progress in Colorado. Additionally, his virulent opposition to economic shutdowns earlier this year reflects a disregard for public health and safety.
-
-
Amy Padden, the Democratic candidate for District 18, is a seasoned prosecutor with a stunning resume, having worked at all levels of law enforcement. Recently, she has been a deputy district attorney for District 5, and she has been both an assistant and deputy chief U.S. attorney and an assistant attorney general in Colorado. Padden wants to use all of that experience for criminal justice reforms like protecting vulnerable populations and addressing systemic inequities like police use of force and over-incarceration. It’s clear Padden stands for progressive reforms and is the clear choice in this race.
Running on the Republican side is John Kellner. He is a Marine Corps veteran and prosecutor in both Boulder County and District 18 and specializes in cold cases. While Kellner undeniably has lengthy experience, progressive voters should be cautious about the fact that he doesn’t seem at all interested in seriously needed criminal justice reforms. Padden is the preferred candidate in this race.Amy Padden
Distrito 18 — Condados de Arapahoe, Douglas, Elbert y Lincoln
Amy Padden, the Democratic candidate for District 18, is a seasoned prosecutor with a stunning resume, having worked at all levels of law enforcement. Recently, she has been a deputy district attorney for District 5, and she has been both an assistant and deputy chief U.S. attorney and an assistant attorney general in Colorado. Padden wants to use all of that experience for criminal justice reforms like protecting vulnerable populations and addressing systemic inequities like police use of force and over-incarceration. It’s clear Padden stands for progressive reforms and is the clear choice in this race.
Running on the Republican side is John Kellner. He is a Marine Corps veteran and prosecutor in both Boulder County and District 18 and specializes in cold cases. While Kellner undeniably has lengthy experience, progressive voters should be cautious about the fact that he doesn’t seem at all interested in seriously needed criminal justice reforms. Padden is the preferred candidate in this race.Amy Padden
Distrito 18 — Condados de Arapahoe, Douglas, Elbert y Lincoln
-
-
Amy Padden, the Democratic candidate for District 18, is a seasoned prosecutor with a stunning resume, having worked at all levels of law enforcement. Recently, she has been a deputy district attorney for District 5, and she has been both an assistant and deputy chief U.S. attorney and an assistant attorney general in Colorado. Padden wants to use all of that experience for criminal justice reforms like protecting vulnerable populations and addressing systemic inequities like police use of force and over-incarceration. It’s clear Padden stands for progressive reforms and is the clear choice in this race.
Running on the Republican side is John Kellner. He is a Marine Corps veteran and prosecutor in both Boulder County and District 18 and specializes in cold cases. While Kellner undeniably has lengthy experience, progressive voters should be cautious about the fact that he doesn’t seem at all interested in seriously needed criminal justice reforms. Padden is the preferred candidate in this race.
-
-
Vietnam veteran and former National Guardsman Bill Holen has been an Arapahoe County commissioner since 2012. Before his first election to the commission, Holen served in many different governmental and community-oriented roles including as a constituent services representative for U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, with a focus on national security and veterans’ affairs, and a staff member for former U.S. Sen. Gary Hart.
Holen has said he strives to be “a commissioner that listens and speaks for those who don’t have a voice.” During his time in office, he has focused on helping veterans access better health care, improving the job market by partnering with local business leaders, and curbing the opioid epidemic. Holen also is committed to ensuring the county’s finances are managed efficiently and effectively, safeguarding the quality of Arapahoe County’s air and water, and working toward a more viable and efficient transportation system.
Holen is an experienced commissioner and public servant who is dedicated to advocating for others. He is the clear choice in this race.
Challenging him is Jim Parker, an Arapahoe County resident and Republican activist. He ran and lost in the race for State House District 36 in 2012. In all that time, Parker has made few, if any, public statements on his policy positions. We don’t see why you would vote for someone who won’t tell you what they stand for.Bill Holen
El veterano de Vietnam y ex Guardia Nacional Bill Holen ha sido comisionado del condado de Arapahoe desde 2012.
Vietnam veteran and former National Guardsman Bill Holen has been an Arapahoe County commissioner since 2012. Before his first election to the commission, Holen served in many different governmental and community-oriented roles including as a constituent services representative for U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, with a focus on national security and veterans’ affairs, and a staff member for former U.S. Sen. Gary Hart.
Holen has said he strives to be “a commissioner that listens and speaks for those who don’t have a voice.” During his time in office, he has focused on helping veterans access better health care, improving the job market by partnering with local business leaders, and curbing the opioid epidemic. Holen also is committed to ensuring the county’s finances are managed efficiently and effectively, safeguarding the quality of Arapahoe County’s air and water, and working toward a more viable and efficient transportation system.
Holen is an experienced commissioner and public servant who is dedicated to advocating for others. He is the clear choice in this race.
Challenging him is Jim Parker, an Arapahoe County resident and Republican activist. He ran and lost in the race for State House District 36 in 2012. In all that time, Parker has made few, if any, public statements on his policy positions. We don’t see why you would vote for someone who won’t tell you what they stand for.Bill Holen
El veterano de Vietnam y ex Guardia Nacional Bill Holen ha sido comisionado del condado de Arapahoe desde 2012.
-
-
Vietnam veteran and former National Guardsman Bill Holen has been an Arapahoe County commissioner since 2012. Before his first election to the commission, Holen served in many different governmental and community-oriented roles including as a constituent services representative for U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, with a focus on national security and veterans’ affairs, and a staff member for former U.S. Sen. Gary Hart.
Holen has said he strives to be “a commissioner that listens and speaks for those who don’t have a voice.” During his time in office, he has focused on helping veterans access better health care, improving the job market by partnering with local business leaders, and curbing the opioid epidemic. Holen also is committed to ensuring the county’s finances are managed efficiently and effectively, safeguarding the quality of Arapahoe County’s air and water, and working toward a more viable and efficient transportation system.
Holen is an experienced commissioner and public servant who is dedicated to advocating for others. He is the clear choice in this race.
Challenging him is Jim Parker, an Arapahoe County resident and Republican activist. He ran and lost in the race for State House District 36 in 2012. In all that time, Parker has made few, if any, public statements on his policy positions. We don’t see why you would vote for someone who won’t tell you what they stand for.
-
-
Idris Keith is an attorney with extensive experience helping small businesses with consulting, development, securing certifications, bidding for government contracts, and more. As a commissioner, he will draw on this knowledge to create revenue-generating policies to help Arapahoe get through the COVID-19 economic downturn by focusing on assisting small businesses and empowering them to create jobs.
Keith has also previously worked as a probation officer; as an investigator of allegations of discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations; and as an administrative hearing officer to determine eligibility for unemployment compensation. He has dedicated his career to seeking justice for those who have been discriminated against because of a lack of political and economic power.
As commissioner, Keith intends to focus on addressing the growing homeless crisis through policies like expanding employment opportunities and assistance for those suffering from mental illness. Restoring fiscal responsibility and budgetary discipline, strengthening public institutions, and protecting Arapahoe County’s natural resources and public lands are also among his top concerns.
Keith is a champion of working people, small businesses, and job creation. As one Englewood city council member put it, he “understands how to build coalitions, how to build consensus, and how to stick to his principles while he does it.” He is most definitely the progressive voter’s best choice in this race.
He faces incumbent Jeff Baker, a former Army chief warrant officer and crime scene investigator, in pursuit of the seat. Baker is blandly straightforward on what he’s concerned about in Arapahoe County: cutting the budget, protecting mineral rights and land ownership (otherwise known as promoting oil and gas drilling in our neighborhoods), and maintaining roads and bridges. Baker falls short on pandemic response: On the COVID-19 mask mandate, his concern was that the Tri-County Health Department mandated masks “without allowing public comments” (even though scientists and public health experts have said over and over again that masks are proven to stop the spread of the virus). Across Arapahoe County, the pandemic has caused unemployment to spike, and people are looking for strong, unified leadership. Keith, in contrast to Baker’s procedural hangup, told Colorado Community Media that the #1 issue for commissioners next year must be finding a way to bounce back economically from the pandemic with job creation and partnering with the health department to keep everyone healthy.Idris Keith
Idris Keith es un abogado con amplia experiencia en ayudar a las pequeñas empresas con consultoría, desarrollo, obtención de certificaciones, búsqueda de contratos gubernamentales y más.
Idris Keith is an attorney with extensive experience helping small businesses with consulting, development, securing certifications, bidding for government contracts, and more. As a commissioner, he will draw on this knowledge to create revenue-generating policies to help Arapahoe get through the COVID-19 economic downturn by focusing on assisting small businesses and empowering them to create jobs.
Keith has also previously worked as a probation officer; as an investigator of allegations of discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations; and as an administrative hearing officer to determine eligibility for unemployment compensation. He has dedicated his career to seeking justice for those who have been discriminated against because of a lack of political and economic power.
As commissioner, Keith intends to focus on addressing the growing homeless crisis through policies like expanding employment opportunities and assistance for those suffering from mental illness. Restoring fiscal responsibility and budgetary discipline, strengthening public institutions, and protecting Arapahoe County’s natural resources and public lands are also among his top concerns.
Keith is a champion of working people, small businesses, and job creation. As one Englewood city council member put it, he “understands how to build coalitions, how to build consensus, and how to stick to his principles while he does it.” He is most definitely the progressive voter’s best choice in this race.
He faces incumbent Jeff Baker, a former Army chief warrant officer and crime scene investigator, in pursuit of the seat. Baker is blandly straightforward on what he’s concerned about in Arapahoe County: cutting the budget, protecting mineral rights and land ownership (otherwise known as promoting oil and gas drilling in our neighborhoods), and maintaining roads and bridges. Baker falls short on pandemic response: On the COVID-19 mask mandate, his concern was that the Tri-County Health Department mandated masks “without allowing public comments” (even though scientists and public health experts have said over and over again that masks are proven to stop the spread of the virus). Across Arapahoe County, the pandemic has caused unemployment to spike, and people are looking for strong, unified leadership. Keith, in contrast to Baker’s procedural hangup, told Colorado Community Media that the #1 issue for commissioners next year must be finding a way to bounce back economically from the pandemic with job creation and partnering with the health department to keep everyone healthy.Idris Keith
Idris Keith es un abogado con amplia experiencia en ayudar a las pequeñas empresas con consultoría, desarrollo, obtención de certificaciones, búsqueda de contratos gubernamentales y más.
-
-
Idris Keith is an attorney with extensive experience helping small businesses with consulting, development, securing certifications, bidding for government contracts, and more. As a commissioner, he will draw on this knowledge to create revenue-generating policies to help Arapahoe get through the COVID-19 economic downturn by focusing on assisting small businesses and empowering them to create jobs.
Keith has also previously worked as a probation officer; as an investigator of allegations of discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations; and as an administrative hearing officer to determine eligibility for unemployment compensation. He has dedicated his career to seeking justice for those who have been discriminated against because of a lack of political and economic power.
As commissioner, Keith intends to focus on addressing the growing homeless crisis through policies like expanding employment opportunities and assistance for those suffering from mental illness. Restoring fiscal responsibility and budgetary discipline, strengthening public institutions, and protecting Arapahoe County’s natural resources and public lands are also among his top concerns.
Keith is a champion of working people, small businesses, and job creation. As one Englewood city council member put it, he “understands how to build coalitions, how to build consensus, and how to stick to his principles while he does it.” He is most definitely the progressive voter’s best choice in this race.
He faces incumbent Jeff Baker, a former Army chief warrant officer and crime scene investigator, in pursuit of the seat. Baker is blandly straightforward on what he’s concerned about in Arapahoe County: cutting the budget, protecting mineral rights and land ownership (otherwise known as promoting oil and gas drilling in our neighborhoods), and maintaining roads and bridges. Baker falls short on pandemic response: On the COVID-19 mask mandate, his concern was that the Tri-County Health Department mandated masks “without allowing public comments” (even though scientists and public health experts have said over and over again that masks are proven to stop the spread of the virus). Across Arapahoe County, the pandemic has caused unemployment to spike, and people are looking for strong, unified leadership. Keith, in contrast to Baker’s procedural hangup, told Colorado Community Media that the #1 issue for commissioners next year must be finding a way to bounce back economically from the pandemic with job creation and partnering with the health department to keep everyone healthy.
-
-
Carrie Warren-Gully is a lifelong Arapahoe County resident and a business owner. She has served on the Littleton Public Schools Board of Education since 2014 and is currently the board treasurer. She also is the executive director of Books to Life, a company that produces audiobooks for people with sight impairment and other disabilities. In her time of public service, she has shown the ability to work with the community to solve some of our most pressing problems.
Arapahoe County is one of the fastest-growing counties in Colorado, and Warren-Gully recognizes the need to plan the county’s growth responsibly in order to protect our way of life. If elected, she has said she will focus on updating and expanding transportation infrastructure, planning for future zoning, and collaborating with community organizations to make sure seniors, young families, teachers, and other working professionals are able to access affordable housing.
Warren-Gully has vowed to support the health care workers strained by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as countywide action to support drug overdose prevention, addiction cessation programs, and other mental health services. She knows the decisions Arapahoe County makes today will have an impact on our quality of life for generations to come.
Warren-Gully has the experience and passion necessary to work with the community to find solutions to the problems facing Arapahoe County and help our community thrive. She is the candidate to back in this election.
She faces incumbent Republican Kathleen Conti, a longtime Arapahoe County resident and a former state legislator. Her tenure as county commissioner has been quiet, but she was a bastion for conservative ideas and talking points, such as being against Colorado’s IUD program which has resulted in some of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy in the country. We can’t recommend voting for Conti to retain this seat.Carrie Warren-Gully
Carrie Warren-Gully es una residente del condado de Arapahoe de toda la vida y propietaria de un negocio. Ha sido miembro de la Junta de Educación de las Escuelas Públicas de Littleton desde 2014 y actualmente es la tesorera de la junta.
Carrie Warren-Gully is a lifelong Arapahoe County resident and a business owner. She has served on the Littleton Public Schools Board of Education since 2014 and is currently the board treasurer. She also is the executive director of Books to Life, a company that produces audiobooks for people with sight impairment and other disabilities. In her time of public service, she has shown the ability to work with the community to solve some of our most pressing problems.
Arapahoe County is one of the fastest-growing counties in Colorado, and Warren-Gully recognizes the need to plan the county’s growth responsibly in order to protect our way of life. If elected, she has said she will focus on updating and expanding transportation infrastructure, planning for future zoning, and collaborating with community organizations to make sure seniors, young families, teachers, and other working professionals are able to access affordable housing.
Warren-Gully has vowed to support the health care workers strained by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as countywide action to support drug overdose prevention, addiction cessation programs, and other mental health services. She knows the decisions Arapahoe County makes today will have an impact on our quality of life for generations to come.
Warren-Gully has the experience and passion necessary to work with the community to find solutions to the problems facing Arapahoe County and help our community thrive. She is the candidate to back in this election.
She faces incumbent Republican Kathleen Conti, a longtime Arapahoe County resident and a former state legislator. Her tenure as county commissioner has been quiet, but she was a bastion for conservative ideas and talking points, such as being against Colorado’s IUD program which has resulted in some of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy in the country. We can’t recommend voting for Conti to retain this seat.Carrie Warren-Gully
Carrie Warren-Gully es una residente del condado de Arapahoe de toda la vida y propietaria de un negocio. Ha sido miembro de la Junta de Educación de las Escuelas Públicas de Littleton desde 2014 y actualmente es la tesorera de la junta.
-
-
Carrie Warren-Gully is a lifelong Arapahoe County resident and a business owner. She has served on the Littleton Public Schools Board of Education since 2014 and is currently the board treasurer. She also is the executive director of Books to Life, a company that produces audiobooks for people with sight impairment and other disabilities. In her time of public service, she has shown the ability to work with the community to solve some of our most pressing problems.
Arapahoe County is one of the fastest-growing counties in Colorado, and Warren-Gully recognizes the need to plan the county’s growth responsibly in order to protect our way of life. If elected, she has said she will focus on updating and expanding transportation infrastructure, planning for future zoning, and collaborating with community organizations to make sure seniors, young families, teachers, and other working professionals are able to access affordable housing.
Warren-Gully has vowed to support the health care workers strained by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as countywide action to support drug overdose prevention, addiction cessation programs, and other mental health services. She knows the decisions Arapahoe County makes today will have an impact on our quality of life for generations to come.
Warren-Gully has the experience and passion necessary to work with the community to find solutions to the problems facing Arapahoe County and help our community thrive. She is the candidate to back in this election.
She faces incumbent Republican Kathleen Conti, a longtime Arapahoe County resident and a former state legislator. Her tenure as county commissioner has been quiet, but she was a bastion for conservative ideas and talking points, such as being against Colorado’s IUD program which has resulted in some of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy in the country. We can’t recommend voting for Conti to retain this seat.
-
VOTE YES
Vote YES for Amendment B
-
Amendment B, Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates
The Gallagher Amendment Repeal and Property Tax Assessment Rates Measure (Amendment B) would repeal the Gallagher Amendment of 1982, which fixed residential and business property tax rates at 45% residential and 55% business. This measure is intended to relieve downward pressure on local public school funding across the state through the repeal of the current property tax assessment formula. The Gallagher Amendment has skewed the tax assessment of residential property in Colorado, resulting in significant shortfalls for school districts reliant on property tax revenue for their funding. Maintaining the Gallagher Amendment’s ratio of residential to business property tax has forced the state to step in with dwindling general fund revenue, causing budget cuts to critical services and an overall proportional reduction in total education funding over time.
Full text on the ballot: Without increasing property tax rates, to help preserve funding for local districts that provide fire protection, police, ambulance, hospital, kindergarten through twelfth grade education, and other services, and to avoid automatic mill levy increases, shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution to repeal the requirement that the general assembly periodically change the residential assessment rate in order to maintain the statewide proportion of residential property as compared to all other taxable property valued for property tax purposes and repeal the nonresidential property tax assessment rate of twenty-nine percent?Amendment B, Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates
The Gallagher Amendment Repeal and Property Tax Assessment Rates Measure (Amendment B) would repeal the Gallagher Amendment of 1982, which fixed residential and business property tax rates at 45% residential and 55% business. This measure is intended to relieve downward pressure on local public school funding across the state through the repeal of the current property tax assessment formula. The Gallagher Amendment has skewed the tax assessment of residential property in Colorado, resulting in significant shortfalls for school districts reliant on property tax revenue for their funding. Maintaining the Gallagher Amendment’s ratio of residential to business property tax has forced the state to step in with dwindling general fund revenue, causing budget cuts to critical services and an overall proportional reduction in total education funding over time.
Full text on the ballot: Without increasing property tax rates, to help preserve funding for local districts that provide fire protection, police, ambulance, hospital, kindergarten through twelfth grade education, and other services, and to avoid automatic mill levy increases, shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution to repeal the requirement that the general assembly periodically change the residential assessment rate in order to maintain the statewide proportion of residential property as compared to all other taxable property valued for property tax purposes and repeal the nonresidential property tax assessment rate of twenty-nine percent?Amendment B, Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates
The Gallagher Amendment Repeal and Property Tax Assessment Rates Measure (Amendment B) would repeal the Gallagher Amendment of 1982, which fixed residential and business property tax rates at 45% residential and 55% business. This measure is intended to relieve downward pressure on local public school funding across the state through the repeal of the current property tax assessment formula. The Gallagher Amendment has skewed the tax assessment of residential property in Colorado, resulting in significant shortfalls for school districts reliant on property tax revenue for their funding. Maintaining the Gallagher Amendment’s ratio of residential to business property tax has forced the state to step in with dwindling general fund revenue, causing budget cuts to critical services and an overall proportional reduction in total education funding over time.
Full text on the ballot: Without increasing property tax rates, to help preserve funding for local districts that provide fire protection, police, ambulance, hospital, kindergarten through twelfth grade education, and other services, and to avoid automatic mill levy increases, shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution to repeal the requirement that the general assembly periodically change the residential assessment rate in order to maintain the statewide proportion of residential property as compared to all other taxable property valued for property tax purposes and repeal the nonresidential property tax assessment rate of twenty-nine percent?Amendment B, Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates
Enmienda B, Derogar las Tarifas de Evaluación del Impuesto a la Propiedad
La Medida de Derogación de la Enmienda Gallagher y Tasas de Evaluación de Impuestos a la Propiedad (Enmienda B) derogaría la Enmienda Gallagher de 1982, que actualmente establece una proporción de impuestos a la propiedad en la Constitución de Colorado, 45% de propiedad residencial y 55% de propiedad comercial. La Enmienda B permitiría aumentar los fondos para las escuelas locales al derogar esta fórmula constitucional sobre las evaluaciones de impuestos a la propiedad. La Enmienda Gallagher ha distorsionado la evaluación de impuestos de la propiedad residencial en Colorado, lo que ha resultado en un déficit significativo para los distritos escolares que dependen de los ingresos del impuesto a la propiedad para su financiación. El mantenimiento de la proporción de impuestos a la propiedad residenciales y comerciales de la Enmienda Gallagher ha obligado al estado a intervenir con la disminución de los ingresos de los fondos generales, lo que ha provocado recortes presupuestarios a servicios críticos y una reducción proporcional general en el financiamiento total de la educación a lo largo del tiempo.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber una enmienda a la constitución de Colorado con respecto a la realización de actividades de juegos benéficos y, en relación con ello, permitir que los titulares de licencias de rifas-bingo contraten gerentes y operadores de juegos y reducir el período requerido de existencia continua de una organización benéfica antes de obtener una licencia de juego?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE YES
Vote YES for Amendment C
-
Amendment C, Bingo Raffles Allow Paid Help and Repeal Five-Year Minimum
The Charitable Bingo and Raffles Amendment (Amendment C) reduces the time period a charitable organization must exist before receiving a charitable gaming license from five years to three years. It also permits charitable organizations to hire staff to manage gaming activities. Charitable gaming in Colorado includes bingo, lotteries, raffles, and certain other games conducted by charitable organizations for fundraising purposes.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the conduct of charitable gaming activities, and, in connection therewith, allowing bingo-raffle licensees to hire managers and operators of games and reducing the required period of a charitable organization's continuous existence before obtaining a charitable gaming license?Amendment C, Bingo Raffles Allow Paid Help and Repeal Five-Year Minimum
The Charitable Bingo and Raffles Amendment (Amendment C) reduces the time period a charitable organization must exist before receiving a charitable gaming license from five years to three years. It also permits charitable organizations to hire staff to manage gaming activities. Charitable gaming in Colorado includes bingo, lotteries, raffles, and certain other games conducted by charitable organizations for fundraising purposes.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the conduct of charitable gaming activities, and, in connection therewith, allowing bingo-raffle licensees to hire managers and operators of games and reducing the required period of a charitable organization's continuous existence before obtaining a charitable gaming license?Amendment C, Bingo Raffles Allow Paid Help and Repeal Five-Year Minimum
The Charitable Bingo and Raffles Amendment (Amendment C) reduces the time period a charitable organization must exist before receiving a charitable gaming license from five years to three years. It also permits charitable organizations to hire staff to manage gaming activities. Charitable gaming in Colorado includes bingo, lotteries, raffles, and certain other games conducted by charitable organizations for fundraising purposes.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the conduct of charitable gaming activities, and, in connection therewith, allowing bingo-raffle licensees to hire managers and operators of games and reducing the required period of a charitable organization's continuous existence before obtaining a charitable gaming license?Amendment C, Bingo Raffles Allow Paid Help and Repeal Five-Year Minimum
Enmienda C, Las Rifas de Bingo Permiten Ayuda Pagada y Derogan el Mínimo de Cinco Años
La Enmienda Bingo y Rifas Benéficas (Enmienda C) reduce el período de tiempo durante el cual debe existir una organización benéfica antes de recibir una licencia de juego benéfico de cinco a tres años. También permite que las organizaciones benéficas contraten personal para administrar las actividades de juego. Los juegos benéficos en Colorado incluyen bingo, loterías, rifas y algunos otros juegos realizados por organizaciones benéficas con fines de recaudación de fondos.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber una enmienda a la constitución de Colorado con respecto a la realización de actividades de juegos benéficos y, en relación con ello, permitir que los titulares de licencias de rifas-bingo contraten gerentes y operadores de juegos y reducir el período requerido de existencia continua de una organización benéfica antes de obtener una licencia de juego?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE NO
Vote NO for Amendment 76
-
Amendment 76, Citizenship Qualification of Electors
The Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative (Amendment 76) purports to amend Section 1 of Article VII of the Colorado Constitution to state that “only a citizen” of the United States who is 18 years of age or older can vote in federal, state, and local elections in Colorado. Currently, Article VII Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution states that “Every citizen of the United States who has attained the age of eighteen years, has resided in this state for such a time as may be prescribed by law, and has been duly registered as a voter if required by law shall be qualified to vote at all elections.” While the sole change made by the Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative is to replace the word “every” with “only a,” it also would upend current law which allows 17-year-olds who would be 18 by the general election to vote in that cycle’s primary. This seemingly simple change, therefore, has the effect of eliminating an otherwise valid group of young voters from the full election process, to say nothing of the fact that it is a clear attempt to confuse voters into believing that current Colorado law permits noncitizens to vote, which it does not.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution requiring that to be qualified to vote at any election an individual must be a United States citizen?Amendment 76, Citizenship Qualification of Electors
The Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative (Amendment 76) purports to amend Section 1 of Article VII of the Colorado Constitution to state that “only a citizen” of the United States who is 18 years of age or older can vote in federal, state, and local elections in Colorado. Currently, Article VII Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution states that “Every citizen of the United States who has attained the age of eighteen years, has resided in this state for such a time as may be prescribed by law, and has been duly registered as a voter if required by law shall be qualified to vote at all elections.” While the sole change made by the Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative is to replace the word “every” with “only a,” it also would upend current law which allows 17-year-olds who would be 18 by the general election to vote in that cycle’s primary. This seemingly simple change, therefore, has the effect of eliminating an otherwise valid group of young voters from the full election process, to say nothing of the fact that it is a clear attempt to confuse voters into believing that current Colorado law permits noncitizens to vote, which it does not.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution requiring that to be qualified to vote at any election an individual must be a United States citizen?Amendment 76, Citizenship Qualification of Electors
The Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative (Amendment 76) purports to amend Section 1 of Article VII of the Colorado Constitution to state that “only a citizen” of the United States who is 18 years of age or older can vote in federal, state, and local elections in Colorado. Currently, Article VII Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution states that “Every citizen of the United States who has attained the age of eighteen years, has resided in this state for such a time as may be prescribed by law, and has been duly registered as a voter if required by law shall be qualified to vote at all elections.” While the sole change made by the Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative is to replace the word “every” with “only a,” it also would upend current law which allows 17-year-olds who would be 18 by the general election to vote in that cycle’s primary. This seemingly simple change, therefore, has the effect of eliminating an otherwise valid group of young voters from the full election process, to say nothing of the fact that it is a clear attempt to confuse voters into believing that current Colorado law permits noncitizens to vote, which it does not.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution requiring that to be qualified to vote at any election an individual must be a United States citizen?Amendment 76, Citizenship Qualification of Electors
Enmienda 76, Calificación de Ciudadanía de los Electores
La Iniciativa de Requisito de Ciudadanía para Votar (Enmienda 76) no tiene un impacto inmediato en los requisitos de votación en Colorado relacionados con la residencia o el registro y no cambia la ley electoral actual que excluye a los no ciudadanos de votar. Sin embargo, priva de sus derechos a los votantes menores de 18 años, ya que la ley actual permite que los jóvenes de 17 años que tendrían 18 años en las elecciones generales voten en las elecciones primarias de ese ciclo, y con esto, ya no podrán hacerlo. También está escrita claramente para dar a entender a los votantes que los no ciudadanos actualmente pueden votar, lo cual no es cierto, y fue pagada por una pareja adinerada de Florida que vive en Mar-a-Lago.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber una enmienda a la constitución de Colorado que requiera que para estar calificado para votar en cualquier elección, un individuo debe ser ciudadano de los Estados Unidos?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
Progressives are split on Amendment 77, known as the Allow Voters in Central, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Cities to Expand Authorized Games and Increase Maximum Bets Initiative. Please read the arguments from both sides below to help you make your decision on this amendment.
-
VOTE YES
Vote YES for Amendment 77
-
Amendment 77, Local Voter Approval of Gaming Limits in Black Hawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek
The Allow Voters in Central, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Cities to Expand Authorized Games and Increase Maximum Bets Initiative (Amendment 77) would allow voters in these three gambling towns to vote to increase the maximum single bet allowed for any game beyond the current statewide limit of $100. Additionally, Amendment 77 would allow voters to approve games other than those currently allowed by Colorado law; currently allowed games in Colorado casinos include blackjack, craps, poker, roulette, and slot machines. The proposed measure would also change the distribution of gaming tax funds for community colleges to prioritize student retention and credit completion.Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning voter-approved changes to limited gaming, and, in connection therewith, allowing the voters of Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek, for their individual cities, to approve other games in addition to those currently allowed and increase a maximum single bet to any amount; and allowing gaming tax revenue to be used for support services to improve student retention and credential completion by students enrolled in community colleges?
Amendment 77, Local Voter Approval of Gaming Limits in Black Hawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek
The Allow Voters in Central, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Cities to Expand Authorized Games and Increase Maximum Bets Initiative (Amendment 77) would allow voters in these three gambling towns to vote to increase the maximum single bet allowed for any game beyond the current statewide limit of $100. Additionally, Amendment 77 would allow voters to approve games other than those currently allowed by Colorado law; currently allowed games in Colorado casinos include blackjack, craps, poker, roulette, and slot machines. The proposed measure would also change the distribution of gaming tax funds for community colleges to prioritize student retention and credit completion.Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning voter-approved changes to limited gaming, and, in connection therewith, allowing the voters of Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek, for their individual cities, to approve other games in addition to those currently allowed and increase a maximum single bet to any amount; and allowing gaming tax revenue to be used for support services to improve student retention and credential completion by students enrolled in community colleges?
Amendment 77, Local Voter Approval of Gaming Limits in Black Hawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek
The Allow Voters in Central, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Cities to Expand Authorized Games and Increase Maximum Bets Initiative (Amendment 77) would allow voters in these three gambling towns to vote to increase the maximum single bet allowed for any game beyond the current statewide limit of $100. Additionally, Amendment 77 would allow voters to approve games other than those currently allowed by Colorado law; currently allowed games in Colorado casinos include blackjack, craps, poker, roulette, and slot machines. The proposed measure would also change the distribution of gaming tax funds for community colleges to prioritize student retention and credit completion.Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning voter-approved changes to limited gaming, and, in connection therewith, allowing the voters of Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek, for their individual cities, to approve other games in addition to those currently allowed and increase a maximum single bet to any amount; and allowing gaming tax revenue to be used for support services to improve student retention and credential completion by students enrolled in community colleges?
Amendment 77, Local Voter Approval of Gaming Limits in Black Hawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek
Enmienda 77, Aprobación por Parte de los Votantes Locales de los Límites de Juego en Black Hawk, Central City y Cripple Creek
La Iniciativa de Permitir a los Votantes en las Ciudades Central, Black Hawk y Cripple Creek Expandir los Juegos Autorizados y Aumentar las Apuestas Máximas (Enmienda 77) permitiría a los votantes en estas tres ciudades de juego votar para aumentar la apuesta única máxima permitida para cualquier juego más allá del límite actual en todo el estado de $100. Además, la Enmienda 77 también permitiría a los votantes aprobar juegos distintos a los permitidos actualmente por la ley de Colorado; Los juegos actualmente permitidos en los casinos de Colorado incluyen blackjack, dados, póquer, ruleta y máquinas tragamonedas. La medida propuesta también cambiaría la distribución de los fondos del impuesto sobre el juego para que los colegios comunitarios prioricen la retención de estudiantes y la finalización de créditos.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber una enmienda a la constitución de Colorado y un cambio a los Estatutos Revisados de Colorado con respecto a los cambios aprobados por los votantes a los juegos limitados y, en relación con ello, permitir a los votantes de Central City, Black Hawk y Cripple Creek, en sus ciudades individuales, aprobar otros juegos además de los permitidos actualmente y aumentar una apuesta única máxima a cualquier cantidad; y permitir que los ingresos fiscales del juego se utilicen para servicios de apoyo para mejorar la retención de estudiantes y la obtención de créditos por parte de los estudiantes inscritos en colegios comunitarios?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE YES
Vote YES for Proposition EE
-
Proposition EE, Cigarette, Tobacco and Nicotine Products Tax
The Colorado Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health and Education Programs Measure (Proposition EE) would close a tax loophole on vaping products that currently leaves these products untaxed in Colorado, bringing the tax in line with other tobacco products. The measure would also increase cigarette taxes from $0.84 per pack currently to $2.64 per pack by 2027. The revenue from this measure would provide $375 million to public schools over the next three years to offset budget cuts from COVID-19, with $90 million specifically going to rural school districts. The revenue would also provide access to free, universal preschool to all four-year-olds in Colorado. The measure would also provide $110 million in additional money for smoking and vaping education and cessation programs as well as $35 million for affordable housing and eviction programs over the next three years.Full text on the ballot: Shall state taxes be increased by $294,000,000 annually by imposing a tax on nicotine liquids used in e-cigarettes and other vaping products that is equal to the total state tax on tobacco products when fully phased in, incrementally increasing the tobacco products tax by up to 22% of the manufacturer's list price, incrementally increasing the cigarette tax by up to 9 cents per cigarette, expanding the existing cigarette and tobacco taxes to apply to sales to consumers from outside of the state, establishing a minimum tax for moist snuff tobacco products, creating an inventory tax that applies for future cigarette tax increases, and initially using the tax revenue primarily for public school funding to help offset revenue that has been lost as a result of the economic impacts related to COVID-19 and then for programs that reduce the use of tobacco and nicotine products, enhance the voluntary Colorado preschool program and make it widely available for free, and maintain the funding for programs that currently receive revenue from tobacco taxes, with the state keeping and spending all of the new tax revenue as a voter-approved revenue change?
Proposition EE, Cigarette, Tobacco and Nicotine Products Tax
The Colorado Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health and Education Programs Measure (Proposition EE) would close a tax loophole on vaping products that currently leaves these products untaxed in Colorado, bringing the tax in line with other tobacco products. The measure would also increase cigarette taxes from $0.84 per pack currently to $2.64 per pack by 2027. The revenue from this measure would provide $375 million to public schools over the next three years to offset budget cuts from COVID-19, with $90 million specifically going to rural school districts. The revenue would also provide access to free, universal preschool to all four-year-olds in Colorado. The measure would also provide $110 million in additional money for smoking and vaping education and cessation programs as well as $35 million for affordable housing and eviction programs over the next three years.Full text on the ballot: Shall state taxes be increased by $294,000,000 annually by imposing a tax on nicotine liquids used in e-cigarettes and other vaping products that is equal to the total state tax on tobacco products when fully phased in, incrementally increasing the tobacco products tax by up to 22% of the manufacturer's list price, incrementally increasing the cigarette tax by up to 9 cents per cigarette, expanding the existing cigarette and tobacco taxes to apply to sales to consumers from outside of the state, establishing a minimum tax for moist snuff tobacco products, creating an inventory tax that applies for future cigarette tax increases, and initially using the tax revenue primarily for public school funding to help offset revenue that has been lost as a result of the economic impacts related to COVID-19 and then for programs that reduce the use of tobacco and nicotine products, enhance the voluntary Colorado preschool program and make it widely available for free, and maintain the funding for programs that currently receive revenue from tobacco taxes, with the state keeping and spending all of the new tax revenue as a voter-approved revenue change?
Proposition EE, Cigarette, Tobacco and Nicotine Products Tax
The Colorado Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health and Education Programs Measure (Proposition EE) would close a tax loophole on vaping products that currently leaves these products untaxed in Colorado, bringing the tax in line with other tobacco products. The measure would also increase cigarette taxes from $0.84 per pack currently to $2.64 per pack by 2027. The revenue from this measure would provide $375 million to public schools over the next three years to offset budget cuts from COVID-19, with $90 million specifically going to rural school districts. The revenue would also provide access to free, universal preschool to all four-year-olds in Colorado. The measure would also provide $110 million in additional money for smoking and vaping education and cessation programs as well as $35 million for affordable housing and eviction programs over the next three years.Full text on the ballot: Shall state taxes be increased by $294,000,000 annually by imposing a tax on nicotine liquids used in e-cigarettes and other vaping products that is equal to the total state tax on tobacco products when fully phased in, incrementally increasing the tobacco products tax by up to 22% of the manufacturer's list price, incrementally increasing the cigarette tax by up to 9 cents per cigarette, expanding the existing cigarette and tobacco taxes to apply to sales to consumers from outside of the state, establishing a minimum tax for moist snuff tobacco products, creating an inventory tax that applies for future cigarette tax increases, and initially using the tax revenue primarily for public school funding to help offset revenue that has been lost as a result of the economic impacts related to COVID-19 and then for programs that reduce the use of tobacco and nicotine products, enhance the voluntary Colorado preschool program and make it widely available for free, and maintain the funding for programs that currently receive revenue from tobacco taxes, with the state keeping and spending all of the new tax revenue as a voter-approved revenue change?
Proposition EE, Cigarette, Tobacco and Nicotine Products Tax
Proposición EE, Impuesto sobre Cigarrillos, Tabaco y Productos de Nicotina
La Medida de Aumento de Impuestos al Tabaco y Cigarrillos Electrónicos de Colorado para Programas de Salud y Educación (Proposición EE) cerraría una laguna fiscal sobre los productos de vapeo que actualmente deja estos productos sin impuestos en Colorado, alinear el impuesto con otros productos de tabaco. La medida también aumentaría los impuestos sobre los cigarrillos de $0.84 por paquete actualmente a $2.64 por paquete por 2027. Los ingresos de esta medida proporcionarían $375 millones a las escuelas públicas durante los próximos tres años para compensar los recortes presupuestarios de COVID-19, con $90 millones destinados específicamente a los distritos escolares rurales. Los ingresos también proporcionarían acceso a preescolar gratuito y universal a todos los niños de cuatro años en Colorado. La medida también proporcionaría $110 millones en dinero adicional para programas de educación y cesación para fumar y vapear, así como $35 millones para programas de vivienda y desalojo asequibles en los próximos tres años.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Deberían aumentarse los impuestos estatales en $294,000,000 anualmente mediante la imposición de un impuesto sobre los líquidos de nicotina utilizados en los cigarrillos electrónicos y otros productos de vapeo que sea igual al impuesto estatal total sobre los productos de tabaco cuando se implemente por completo, aumentando gradualmente el impuesto a los productos de tabaco en hasta un 22% del precio de lista del fabricante, aumentando gradualmente el impuesto a los cigarrillos en hasta 9 centavos por cigarrillo, ampliando los impuestos existentes a los cigarrillos y al tabaco para que se apliquen a las ventas a consumidores de fuera del estado, estableciendo un impuesto mínimo para los productos de tabaco rapé húmedo, creando un impuesto al inventario que se aplica para futuros aumentos de impuestos a los cigarrillos, y que inicialmente utiliza los ingresos fiscales principalmente para la financiación de escuelas públicas para ayudar a compensar los ingresos que se han perdido como resultado de los impactos económicos relacionados con COVID-19 y luego para programas que reducen el uso de productos de tabaco y nicotina, mejorar el programa de preescolar voluntario de Colorado y hacerlo ampliamente disponible de forma gratuita, y mantener la financiación para programas que actualmente reciben ingresos de los impuestos al tabaco, con el estado conservando y gastando todos los nuevos ingresos fiscales como un cambio de ingresos aprobado por los votantes?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE YES
Vote YES for Proposition 113
-
Proposition 113, National Popular Vote
The Colorado National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Referendum (Proposition 113) would affirm the Colorado General Assembly’s passage of Senate Bill 19-042, which entered Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to ensure Colorado's Electoral College votes are awarded to the winner of the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections. Colorado has been carried by the winner of the nationwide popular vote in every presidential election since 2004, and the compact would end the unequal valuation of American votes in presidential elections. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would not take effect until an Electoral College majority of states joins. As of August 2020, 14 states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation that would trigger the compact in the event 270 Electoral College votes are achieved.
Full text on the ballot: Shall the following Act of the General Assembly be approved: An Act concerning adoption of an agreement among the states to elect the President of the United States by national popular vote, being Senate Bill No. 19-042?Proposition 113, National Popular Vote
The Colorado National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Referendum (Proposition 113) would affirm the Colorado General Assembly’s passage of Senate Bill 19-042, which entered Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to ensure Colorado's Electoral College votes are awarded to the winner of the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections. Colorado has been carried by the winner of the nationwide popular vote in every presidential election since 2004, and the compact would end the unequal valuation of American votes in presidential elections. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would not take effect until an Electoral College majority of states joins. As of August 2020, 14 states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation that would trigger the compact in the event 270 Electoral College votes are achieved.
Full text on the ballot: Shall the following Act of the General Assembly be approved: An Act concerning adoption of an agreement among the states to elect the President of the United States by national popular vote, being Senate Bill No. 19-042?Proposition 113, National Popular Vote
The Colorado National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Referendum (Proposition 113) would affirm the Colorado General Assembly’s passage of Senate Bill 19-042, which entered Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to ensure Colorado's Electoral College votes are awarded to the winner of the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections. Colorado has been carried by the winner of the nationwide popular vote in every presidential election since 2004, and the compact would end the unequal valuation of American votes in presidential elections. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would not take effect until an Electoral College majority of states joins. As of August 2020, 14 states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation that would trigger the compact in the event 270 Electoral College votes are achieved.
Full text on the ballot: Shall the following Act of the General Assembly be approved: An Act concerning adoption of an agreement among the states to elect the President of the United States by national popular vote, being Senate Bill No. 19-042?Proposition 113, National Popular Vote
Proposición 113, Voto Popular Nacional
El Referéndum del Pacto Interestatal del Voto Popular Nacional de Colorado (Proposición 113) afirmaría la aprobación por parte de la Asamblea General de Colorado del Proyecto de Ley del Senado 19-042, que unió a Colorado con el Pacto Interestatal del Voto Popular Nacional para garantizar que los votos del Colegio Electoral de Colorado se otorguen al ganador del voto popular nacional en las elecciones presidenciales. Colorado ha sido ganado por el ganador del voto popular a nivel nacional en todas las elecciones presidenciales desde 2000, y el pacto terminaría con la valoración desigual de los votos estadounidenses en las elecciones presidenciales. El Pacto Nacional Interestatal para el Voto Popular no entraría en vigor hasta que se una la mayoría de los estados del Colegio Electoral. En agosto de 2020, 14 estados y el Distrito de Columbia aprobaron una legislación que activaría el pacto en caso de que se obtengan 270 votos del Colegio Electoral.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería aprobarse la siguiente Ley de la Asamblea General: Una Ley relativa a la adopción de un acuerdo entre los estados para elegir al Presidente de los Estados Unidos por votación popular nacional, siendo el Proyecto de Ley del Senado No. 19-042?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE YES
Vote YES for Proposition 114
-
Proposition 114, Restoration of Gray Wolves
The Colorado Gray Wolf Reintroduction Initiative (Proposition 114) directs the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to reintroduce and manage the population of gray wolves in specific areas of the state by the end of 2023. The commission would be required to develop a plan to reintroduce gray wolves to locations west of the Continental Divide that it will determine, manage reintroduced wolf populations, and compensate property owners who may be affected. Reintroducing gray wolves in Colorado would restore an unbroken connection of protected wolf populations from Canada to Mexico.Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the restoration of gray wolves through their reintroduction on designated lands in Colorado located west of the continental divide, and, in connection therewith, requiring the Colorado parks and wildlife commission, after holding statewide hearings and using scientific data, to implement a plan to restore and manage gray wolves; prohibiting the commission from imposing any land, water, or resource use restrictions on private landowners to further the plan; and requiring the commission to fairly compensate owners for losses of livestock caused by gray wolves?
Proposition 114, Restoration of Gray Wolves
The Colorado Gray Wolf Reintroduction Initiative (Proposition 114) directs the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to reintroduce and manage the population of gray wolves in specific areas of the state by the end of 2023. The commission would be required to develop a plan to reintroduce gray wolves to locations west of the Continental Divide that it will determine, manage reintroduced wolf populations, and compensate property owners who may be affected. Reintroducing gray wolves in Colorado would restore an unbroken connection of protected wolf populations from Canada to Mexico.Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the restoration of gray wolves through their reintroduction on designated lands in Colorado located west of the continental divide, and, in connection therewith, requiring the Colorado parks and wildlife commission, after holding statewide hearings and using scientific data, to implement a plan to restore and manage gray wolves; prohibiting the commission from imposing any land, water, or resource use restrictions on private landowners to further the plan; and requiring the commission to fairly compensate owners for losses of livestock caused by gray wolves?
Proposition 114, Restoration of Gray Wolves
The Colorado Gray Wolf Reintroduction Initiative (Proposition 114) directs the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to reintroduce and manage the population of gray wolves in specific areas of the state by the end of 2023. The commission would be required to develop a plan to reintroduce gray wolves to locations west of the Continental Divide that it will determine, manage reintroduced wolf populations, and compensate property owners who may be affected. Reintroducing gray wolves in Colorado would restore an unbroken connection of protected wolf populations from Canada to Mexico.Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the restoration of gray wolves through their reintroduction on designated lands in Colorado located west of the continental divide, and, in connection therewith, requiring the Colorado parks and wildlife commission, after holding statewide hearings and using scientific data, to implement a plan to restore and manage gray wolves; prohibiting the commission from imposing any land, water, or resource use restrictions on private landowners to further the plan; and requiring the commission to fairly compensate owners for losses of livestock caused by gray wolves?
Proposition 114, Restoration of Gray Wolves
Proposición 114, Restauración de los Lobos Grises
La Iniciativa de Reintroducción del Lobo Gris de Colorado (Proposición 114), ordena a la Comisión de Parques y Vida Salvaje de Colorado que reintroduzca lobos grises en áreas específicas del estado para fines de 2023. La comisión deberá desarrollar un plan para reintroducir lobos grises en lugares al oeste de la División Continental que determinará, administrará las poblaciones de lobos reintroducidas y compensará a los propietarios que puedan verse afectados. La reintroducción de los lobos grises en Colorado restablecería una conexión ininterrumpida de las poblaciones de lobos protegidas desde Canadá hasta México.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber un cambio en los Estatutos Revisados de Colorado con respecto a la restauración de los lobos grises a través de su reintroducción en tierras designadas en Colorado ubicadas al oeste de la división continental y, en relación con ello, exigir que la comisión de parques y vida salvaje de Colorado, después de celebrar audiencias estatales y utilizando datos científicos, implemente un plan para restaurar y gestionar a los lobos grises; prohibir que la comisión imponga restricciones de uso de la tierra, el agua o los recursos a los propietarios privados para promover el plan; y exigir que la comisión compense justamente a los propietarios por las pérdidas de ganado causadas por los lobos grises?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE NO
Vote NO for Proposition 115
-
Proposition 115, Prohibition on Abortions Later in Pregnancy
The Colorado 22-Week Abortion Ban Initiative (Proposition 115) would prohibit abortion procedures after 22 weeks of gestational age. Under the rule, an abortion after 22 weeks would only be permitted in an immediate life-threatening emergency with no exceptions for rape, incest, a lethal fetal diagnosis, or the health or medical needs of the patient. Abortion after 22 weeks only accounts for about 1% of total abortion procedures and in many cases is the result of major gestational complications that are found later in pregnancy. Colorado has emerged as a national safe haven for abortion care in these complex circumstances because of gestational bans in other states. Any physician who performs an abortion after 22 weeks would be found in violation of this initiative and face criminal charges and suspension of their medical license by the Colorado Medical Board.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning prohibiting an abortion when the probable gestational age of the fetus is at least twenty-two weeks, and, in connection therewith, making it a misdemeanor punishable by a fine to perform or attempt to perform a prohibited abortion, except when the abortion is immediately required to save the life of the pregnant woman when her life is physically threatened, but not solely by a psychological or emotional condition; defining terms related to the measure including “probable gestational age” and “abortion,” and excepting from the definition of “abortion” medical procedures relating to miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy; specifying that a woman on whom an abortion is performed may not be charged with a crime in relation to a prohibited abortion; and requiring the Colorado medical board to suspend for at least three years the license of a licensee whom the board finds performed or attempted to perform a prohibited abortion?Proposition 115, Prohibition on Abortions Later in Pregnancy
The Colorado 22-Week Abortion Ban Initiative (Proposition 115) would prohibit abortion procedures after 22 weeks of gestational age. Under the rule, an abortion after 22 weeks would only be permitted in an immediate life-threatening emergency with no exceptions for rape, incest, a lethal fetal diagnosis, or the health or medical needs of the patient. Abortion after 22 weeks only accounts for about 1% of total abortion procedures and in many cases is the result of major gestational complications that are found later in pregnancy. Colorado has emerged as a national safe haven for abortion care in these complex circumstances because of gestational bans in other states. Any physician who performs an abortion after 22 weeks would be found in violation of this initiative and face criminal charges and suspension of their medical license by the Colorado Medical Board.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning prohibiting an abortion when the probable gestational age of the fetus is at least twenty-two weeks, and, in connection therewith, making it a misdemeanor punishable by a fine to perform or attempt to perform a prohibited abortion, except when the abortion is immediately required to save the life of the pregnant woman when her life is physically threatened, but not solely by a psychological or emotional condition; defining terms related to the measure including “probable gestational age” and “abortion,” and excepting from the definition of “abortion” medical procedures relating to miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy; specifying that a woman on whom an abortion is performed may not be charged with a crime in relation to a prohibited abortion; and requiring the Colorado medical board to suspend for at least three years the license of a licensee whom the board finds performed or attempted to perform a prohibited abortion?Proposition 115, Prohibition on Abortions Later in Pregnancy
The Colorado 22-Week Abortion Ban Initiative (Proposition 115) would prohibit abortion procedures after 22 weeks of gestational age. Under the rule, an abortion after 22 weeks would only be permitted in an immediate life-threatening emergency with no exceptions for rape, incest, a lethal fetal diagnosis, or the health or medical needs of the patient. Abortion after 22 weeks only accounts for about 1% of total abortion procedures and in many cases is the result of major gestational complications that are found later in pregnancy. Colorado has emerged as a national safe haven for abortion care in these complex circumstances because of gestational bans in other states. Any physician who performs an abortion after 22 weeks would be found in violation of this initiative and face criminal charges and suspension of their medical license by the Colorado Medical Board.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning prohibiting an abortion when the probable gestational age of the fetus is at least twenty-two weeks, and, in connection therewith, making it a misdemeanor punishable by a fine to perform or attempt to perform a prohibited abortion, except when the abortion is immediately required to save the life of the pregnant woman when her life is physically threatened, but not solely by a psychological or emotional condition; defining terms related to the measure including “probable gestational age” and “abortion,” and excepting from the definition of “abortion” medical procedures relating to miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy; specifying that a woman on whom an abortion is performed may not be charged with a crime in relation to a prohibited abortion; and requiring the Colorado medical board to suspend for at least three years the license of a licensee whom the board finds performed or attempted to perform a prohibited abortion?Proposition 115, Prohibition on Abortions Later in Pregnancy
Proposición 115, Prohibición de los Abortos en Etapas Posteriores del Embarazo
La Iniciativa de Prohibición del Aborto de 22 semanas en Colorado (Propuesta 115) prohibiría los procedimientos de aborto después de las 22 semanas de edad gestacional. Bajo esta regla, un aborto después de las 22 semanas sólo se permitiría en una emergencia inmediata que ponga en peligro la vida, sin excepciones por violación, incesto, un diagnóstico fetal letal, o las necesidades médicas o de salud de la paciente. El aborto después de las 22 semanas sólo representa alrededor del 1% del total de los procedimientos de aborto y en muchos casos es el resultado de complicaciones gestacionales importantes que se encuentran más tarde en el embarazo. Colorado ha surgido como un refugio nacional para la atención del aborto en estas complejas circunstancias debido a las prohibiciones gestacionales en otros estados. Cualquier médico que realice un aborto después de 22 semanas estaría violando esta iniciativa y enfrentaría cargos penales y la suspensión de su licencia médica por la Junta Médica de Colorado.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber un cambio en los Estatutos Revisados de Colorado con respecto a la prohibición de un aborto cuando la edad gestacional probable del feto es de al menos veintidós semanas y, en relación con ello, convertirlo en un delito menor punible con una multa por realizar o intentar realizar un aborto prohibido, excepto cuando el aborto se requiera inmediatamente para salvar la vida de la mujer embarazada cuando su vida está amenazada físicamente, pero no únicamente por una condición psicológica o emocional; definiendo términos relacionados con la medida, incluyendo “edad gestacional probable” y “aborto”, y exceptuando de la definición de “aborto” los procedimientos médicos relacionados con un aborto espontáneo o embarazo ectópico; especificando que una mujer a la que se practica un aborto no puede ser acusada de un delito relacionado con un aborto prohibido; y exigiendo que la junta médica de Colorado suspenda durante al menos tres años la licencia de un licenciatario que, según la junta, realizó o intentó realizar un aborto prohibido?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE NO
Vote NO for Proposition 116
-
Proposition 116, Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative
The Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative (Proposition 116) would reduce the state income tax rate for individuals and corporations, resulting in state budget cuts of over $150 million per year, forever. Large businesses and people with incomes over half a million dollars per year will receive 70% of the benefit from this tax reduction. Meanwhile, the average Colorado family will get a tax cut of only $37 per year. The state is currently facing billions of dollars in budget shortfalls due to economic contraction from the COVID-19 pandemic, and this tax cut would have to be paid for by cuts to education, public safety, health care, and transportation to the tune of over $200 million in just the first year.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes reducing the state income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.55%?Proposition 116, Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative
The Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative (Proposition 116) would reduce the state income tax rate for individuals and corporations, resulting in state budget cuts of over $150 million per year, forever. Large businesses and people with incomes over half a million dollars per year will receive 70% of the benefit from this tax reduction. Meanwhile, the average Colorado family will get a tax cut of only $37 per year. The state is currently facing billions of dollars in budget shortfalls due to economic contraction from the COVID-19 pandemic, and this tax cut would have to be paid for by cuts to education, public safety, health care, and transportation to the tune of over $200 million in just the first year.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes reducing the state income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.55%?Proposition 116, Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative
The Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative (Proposition 116) would reduce the state income tax rate for individuals and corporations, resulting in state budget cuts of over $150 million per year, forever. Large businesses and people with incomes over half a million dollars per year will receive 70% of the benefit from this tax reduction. Meanwhile, the average Colorado family will get a tax cut of only $37 per year. The state is currently facing billions of dollars in budget shortfalls due to economic contraction from the COVID-19 pandemic, and this tax cut would have to be paid for by cuts to education, public safety, health care, and transportation to the tune of over $200 million in just the first year.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes reducing the state income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.55%?Proposition 116, Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative
Proposición 116, Iniciativa para Disminuir la Tasa del Impuesto sobre La Renta de 4.63% a 4.55%
La Iniciativa para Disminuir la Tasa del Impuesto sobre la Renta del 4.63% al 4.55% (Proposición 116) reduciría la tasa del impuesto sobre la renta estatal para individuos y corporaciones, resultando en recortes presupuestarios estatales de $236 millones este año y hasta $2 mil millones en los próximos 10 años. La Proposición 116 beneficia abrumadoramente a los ricos y a las corporaciones mientras se paga con recortes a la educación, la seguridad pública, el cuidado de salud y el transporte.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber un cambio en los Estatutos Revisados de Colorado que reduzcan la tasa del impuesto estatal sobre la renta de 4.63% a 4.55%?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE NO
Vote NO for Proposition 117
-
Proposition 117, Require Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises Exempt from TABOR Initiative
The Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises (Proposition 117) would require a statewide vote on new state enterprises generating over $100 million in revenue within the first five years of operation. Enterprises were authorized by the 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) as independent entities that administer fee-based programs for specific goods and services such as unemployment insurance, road and bridge construction, cleaning up chemical waste and oil spills, the sale of hunting and fishing licenses by the Colorado Department of Parks and Wildlife, higher education institutions, and the Colorado State Fair. This initiative is entirely funded by out-of-state billionaires and corporations who often pay the fees this measure would limit. Proposition 117 is confusing and poorly written and will lead to years of lawsuits, unintended consequences, and future cuts in education, transportation, and health care.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes requiring statewide voter approval at the next even-year election of any newly created or qualified state enterprise that is exempt from the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado constitution, if the projected or actual combined revenue from fees and surcharges of the enterprise, and all other enterprises created within the last five years that serve primarily the same purpose, is greater than $100 million within the first five fiscal years of the creation or qualification of the new enterprise?Proposition 117, Require Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises Exempt from TABOR Initiative
The Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises (Proposition 117) would require a statewide vote on new state enterprises generating over $100 million in revenue within the first five years of operation. Enterprises were authorized by the 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) as independent entities that administer fee-based programs for specific goods and services such as unemployment insurance, road and bridge construction, cleaning up chemical waste and oil spills, the sale of hunting and fishing licenses by the Colorado Department of Parks and Wildlife, higher education institutions, and the Colorado State Fair. This initiative is entirely funded by out-of-state billionaires and corporations who often pay the fees this measure would limit. Proposition 117 is confusing and poorly written and will lead to years of lawsuits, unintended consequences, and future cuts in education, transportation, and health care.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes requiring statewide voter approval at the next even-year election of any newly created or qualified state enterprise that is exempt from the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado constitution, if the projected or actual combined revenue from fees and surcharges of the enterprise, and all other enterprises created within the last five years that serve primarily the same purpose, is greater than $100 million within the first five fiscal years of the creation or qualification of the new enterprise?Proposition 117, Require Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises Exempt from TABOR Initiative
The Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises (Proposition 117) would require a statewide vote on new state enterprises generating over $100 million in revenue within the first five years of operation. Enterprises were authorized by the 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) as independent entities that administer fee-based programs for specific goods and services such as unemployment insurance, road and bridge construction, cleaning up chemical waste and oil spills, the sale of hunting and fishing licenses by the Colorado Department of Parks and Wildlife, higher education institutions, and the Colorado State Fair. This initiative is entirely funded by out-of-state billionaires and corporations who often pay the fees this measure would limit. Proposition 117 is confusing and poorly written and will lead to years of lawsuits, unintended consequences, and future cuts in education, transportation, and health care.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes requiring statewide voter approval at the next even-year election of any newly created or qualified state enterprise that is exempt from the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado constitution, if the projected or actual combined revenue from fees and surcharges of the enterprise, and all other enterprises created within the last five years that serve primarily the same purpose, is greater than $100 million within the first five fiscal years of the creation or qualification of the new enterprise?Proposition 117, Require Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises Exempt from TABOR Initiative
Proposición 117, Requerir la Aprobación de los Votantes de Ciertas Empresas Nuevas Exentas de la Iniciativa TABOR
La Aprobación por Parte de los Votantes de Ciertas Empresas Nuevas (Proposición 117) requeriría una votación en todo el estado sobre nuevas empresas estatales que generen más de $100 millones en ingresos dentro de los primeros cinco años de funcionamiento. La Proposición 117 significa que los contribuyentes tendrán que pagar la factura por infracciones de emisiones, desechos químicos, derrames de petróleo y otras transgresiones en lugar de responsabilizar a las corporaciones e intereses especiales por sus acciones a través de las tarifas que pagan. Pone en peligro programas esenciales como el seguro de desempleo, nuestro departamento de parques y vida salvaje, el programa que salvó a los hospitales rurales; incluso las cuentas de ahorro para la universidad son empresas estatales. Esta iniciativa está financiada en su totalidad por multimillonarios y corporaciones de fuera del estado que a menudo pagan las tarifas que esta medida limitaría. La Proposición 117 es confusa y está mal redactada y dará lugar a años de demandas, consecuencias no deseadas y recortes futuros en educación, transporte y cuidado de salud.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber un cambio a los Estatutos Revisados de Colorado que requieran la aprobación de los votantes en todo el estado en la próxima elección de año par de cualquier empresa estatal recién creada o calificada que esté exenta de la Declaración de Derechos del Contribuyente, Artículo X, Sección 20 de la constitución de Colorado, si los ingresos combinados proyectados o reales de tarifas y recargos de la empresa, y todas las demás empresas creadas en los últimos cinco años que sirven principalmente para el mismo propósito, son mayores de $100 millones dentro de los primeros cinco años fiscales de la creación o calificación de la nueva empresa?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
-
VOTE YES
Vote YES for Proposition 118
-
Proposition 118, Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative
The Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative (Proposition 118) would establish a paid family and medical leave benefit for most Colorado workers. It would provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave, allowing 2.6 million Coloradans to take time to care for themselves, a new child, or a seriously ill family member. Eight states including California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island have successfully passed or implemented similar, solvent paid family leave programs. Employees and employers fund the program together, each contributing 0.45% of an employee’s wages to the fund, with the average Colorado worker contributing $3.83 per week. When workers need to take leave, they are paid up to 90% of their salary during that time. Employers may optionally contribute up to 100% of the cost of coverage; businesses with fewer than 10 employees are exempt from paying the premium, but their employees are still covered. Employers that offer paid leave benefits equivalent to the state plan may opt out and keep their plans.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the creation of a paid family and medical leave program in Colorado, and, in connection therewith, authorizing paid family and medical leave for a covered employee who has a serious health condition, is caring for a new child or for a family member with a serious health condition, or has a need for leave related to a family member’s military deployment or for safe leave; establishing a maximum of 12 weeks of family and medical leave, with an additional 4 weeks for pregnancy or childbirth complications, with a cap on the weekly benefit amount; requiring job protection for and prohibiting retaliation against an employee who takes paid family and medical leave; allowing a local government to opt out of the program; permitting employees of such a local government and self-employed individuals to participate in the program; exempting employers who offer an approved private paid family and medical leave plan; to pay for the program, requiring a premium of 0.9% of each employee’s wages, up to a cap, through December 31, 2024, and as set thereafter, up to 1.2% of each employee’s wages, by the director of the division of family and medical leave insurance; authorizing an employer to deduct up to 50% of the premium amount from an employee’s wages and requiring the employer to pay the remainder of the premium, with an exemption for employers with fewer than 10 employees; creating the division of family and medical leave insurance as an enterprise within the department of labor and employment to administer the program; and establishing an enforcement and appeals process for retaliation and denied claims?Proposition 118, Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative
The Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative (Proposition 118) would establish a paid family and medical leave benefit for most Colorado workers. It would provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave, allowing 2.6 million Coloradans to take time to care for themselves, a new child, or a seriously ill family member. Eight states including California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island have successfully passed or implemented similar, solvent paid family leave programs. Employees and employers fund the program together, each contributing 0.45% of an employee’s wages to the fund, with the average Colorado worker contributing $3.83 per week. When workers need to take leave, they are paid up to 90% of their salary during that time. Employers may optionally contribute up to 100% of the cost of coverage; businesses with fewer than 10 employees are exempt from paying the premium, but their employees are still covered. Employers that offer paid leave benefits equivalent to the state plan may opt out and keep their plans.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the creation of a paid family and medical leave program in Colorado, and, in connection therewith, authorizing paid family and medical leave for a covered employee who has a serious health condition, is caring for a new child or for a family member with a serious health condition, or has a need for leave related to a family member’s military deployment or for safe leave; establishing a maximum of 12 weeks of family and medical leave, with an additional 4 weeks for pregnancy or childbirth complications, with a cap on the weekly benefit amount; requiring job protection for and prohibiting retaliation against an employee who takes paid family and medical leave; allowing a local government to opt out of the program; permitting employees of such a local government and self-employed individuals to participate in the program; exempting employers who offer an approved private paid family and medical leave plan; to pay for the program, requiring a premium of 0.9% of each employee’s wages, up to a cap, through December 31, 2024, and as set thereafter, up to 1.2% of each employee’s wages, by the director of the division of family and medical leave insurance; authorizing an employer to deduct up to 50% of the premium amount from an employee’s wages and requiring the employer to pay the remainder of the premium, with an exemption for employers with fewer than 10 employees; creating the division of family and medical leave insurance as an enterprise within the department of labor and employment to administer the program; and establishing an enforcement and appeals process for retaliation and denied claims?Proposition 118, Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative
The Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative (Proposition 118) would establish a paid family and medical leave benefit for most Colorado workers. It would provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave, allowing 2.6 million Coloradans to take time to care for themselves, a new child, or a seriously ill family member. Eight states including California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island have successfully passed or implemented similar, solvent paid family leave programs. Employees and employers fund the program together, each contributing 0.45% of an employee’s wages to the fund, with the average Colorado worker contributing $3.83 per week. When workers need to take leave, they are paid up to 90% of their salary during that time. Employers may optionally contribute up to 100% of the cost of coverage; businesses with fewer than 10 employees are exempt from paying the premium, but their employees are still covered. Employers that offer paid leave benefits equivalent to the state plan may opt out and keep their plans.
Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the creation of a paid family and medical leave program in Colorado, and, in connection therewith, authorizing paid family and medical leave for a covered employee who has a serious health condition, is caring for a new child or for a family member with a serious health condition, or has a need for leave related to a family member’s military deployment or for safe leave; establishing a maximum of 12 weeks of family and medical leave, with an additional 4 weeks for pregnancy or childbirth complications, with a cap on the weekly benefit amount; requiring job protection for and prohibiting retaliation against an employee who takes paid family and medical leave; allowing a local government to opt out of the program; permitting employees of such a local government and self-employed individuals to participate in the program; exempting employers who offer an approved private paid family and medical leave plan; to pay for the program, requiring a premium of 0.9% of each employee’s wages, up to a cap, through December 31, 2024, and as set thereafter, up to 1.2% of each employee’s wages, by the director of the division of family and medical leave insurance; authorizing an employer to deduct up to 50% of the premium amount from an employee’s wages and requiring the employer to pay the remainder of the premium, with an exemption for employers with fewer than 10 employees; creating the division of family and medical leave insurance as an enterprise within the department of labor and employment to administer the program; and establishing an enforcement and appeals process for retaliation and denied claims?Proposition 118, Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative
Proposición 118, Iniciativa de Licencia Familiar y Médica Pagada de Colorado
La Iniciativa de Licencia Familiar y Médica Pagada de Colorado (Proposición 118) establecería un beneficio de licencia familiar y médica pagada para la mayoría de los trabajadores de Colorado. Proporcionaría hasta 12 semanas de licencia pagada, permitiendo que 2.6 millones de habitantes de Colorado se tomen tiempo para cuidarse a sí mismos, a un nuevo hijo o a un familiar gravemente enfermo. Ocho estados, incluidos California, Nueva Jersey y Rhode Island, han aprobado o implementado exitosamente programas similares de licencia familiar pagados y solventes. Los empleados y los empleadores financian el programa juntos, cada uno aportando 0.45% de los salarios de un empleado al fondo, con el trabajador promedio de Colorado aportando $ 3.83 por semana. Cuando los trabajadores necesitan ausentarse del trabajo, se les paga hasta el 90% de su salario durante ese tiempo. Los empleadores pueden contribuir opcionalmente hasta el 100% del costo de la cobertura; las empresas con menos de 10 empleados están exentas de pagar la prima, pero sus empleados todavía están cubiertos. Los empleadores que ofrecen beneficios de licencia pagada equivalentes al plan estatal pueden optar por no participar y mantener sus planes.
Texto completo en la boleta: ¿Debería haber un cambio a los Estatutos Revisados de Colorado con respecto a la creación de un programa de licencia familiar y médica pagada en Colorado y, en relación con ello, la autorización de licencia familiar y médica pagada para un empleado cubierto que tiene una condición de salud grave, está cuidando a un nuevo hijo o a un miembro de la familia con una condición de salud grave, o necesita una licencia en relación con el despliegue militar de un miembro de la familia o para una licencia segura; estableciendo un máximo de 12 semanas de licencia familiar y médica, con 4 semanas adicionales por complicaciones del embarazo o el parto, con un límite al monto del beneficio semanal; exigiendo protección laboral y prohibiendo las represalias contra un empleado que tome una licencia familiar y médica pagada; permitiendo que un gobierno local opte por no participar en el programa; permitiendo que los empleados de dicho gobierno local y los trabajadores independientes participen en el programa; eximiendo a los empleadores que ofrecen un plan de licencia médica y familiar pagada aprobado; para pagar el programa, requiriendo una prima del 0.9% del salario de cada empleado, hasta un tope, hasta el 31 de diciembre de 2024 y, según se establezca a partir de entonces, hasta el 1.2% del salario de cada empleado, por el director de la división de seguro de licencia familiar y médica; autorizando a un empleador a deducir hasta el 50% del monto de la prima del salario de un empleado y exigiendo que el empleador pague el resto de la prima, con una exención para los empleadores con menos de 10 empleados; creando la división de seguro de licencia familiar y médica como una iniciativa dentro del departamento de trabajo y empleo para administrar el programa; y estableciendo un proceso de aplicación y apelación para represalias y reclamos denegados?
Support / Oppose / Neutral
Customizing the Progressive Voters Guide for your location...
Customizing the Progressive Voters Guide for your location...
Progressives are split on Amendment 77, known as the Allow Voters in Central, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Cities to Expand Authorized Games and Increase Maximum Bets Initiative. Please read the arguments from both sides below to help you make your decision on this amendment.