I’m late getting to this, but it’s still bugging me.

In The Denver Post’s, “Winners and Losers of the 2013 Colorado Assembly” editorial May 9, Rep. Mark Waller got credit for being “instrumental in getting a bill passed to set a standard for driving while stoned. He also managed to find a few Republican votes in favor of the budget.”

And House Speaker Mark Ferrandino was a winner for leading “his chamber through a highly contentious session with many late nights and long fights. He was heavily involved in brokering deals on the budget and other matters.”

Then how does Senate President John Morse not get similar recognition? He performed the not-so-easy task of getting a majority of Senate Dems to vote for SB1325, the DUI-D bill, that Waller was “instrumental in getting passed.”

The Post obviously liked the stoned-driving standard bill. Fair enough. So why not spotlight Morse’s work on the measure?

The Grand Junction Sentinel’s Charles Ashby deserves credit for correcting one of his local lawmakers who claimed a bill mandating a higher renewable energy standard would devastate his constituents when, in fact, it wouldn’t affect them at all.

On Channel 6’s Colorado State of Mind Friday, Ashby told the story of how SB 252, which would increase the renewable energy standard on large Rural Electric Associations, was cited by Rep. Jared Wright (R-Fruita) as evidence of a war on rural Colorado, even though one of Grand Junction’s REAs supported the increased standard, and the other local REA gets power from Xcel Energy, which isn’t affected by the legislation, which awaits Gov. Hick’s signature.

Ashby: “We already have a 20 percent standard for utilities like Excel. In ’08, I think it was, they imposed a 10 percent standard on the REAs. Then [this session] they wanted to up it to 25 percent, and they ended up doing 20 percent. And that became the ‘war on rural Colorado.’ It’s going to raise rates. It was almost funny because one of my local lawmakers, for example, from Grand Junction, got up there, and he said, this is going to put people out of their houses. Businesses are gong to close. And what’s funny, in Grand Junction, for example, the major REA gets its power from Xcel, so therefore not affected by this bill. The other REA in his district actually passed a resolution in support of raising the standards. So it was more politics than it was policy.” [BigMedia emphasis]

Ashby originally called out Wright in an April 26 Sentinel story.

I think some journalists see fact checking as boring, but I agree with Ashby that it’s fun to point out the misinformation, even if, at least theoretically, it’s part of the blocking-and-tackling grind of journalism.

In a Spot Blog post Sunday, The Denver Post cited a story from Colorado Springs TV station KOAA reporting that organizers of the campaign to recall Senate President John Morse hired Kennedy Enterprises to gather signatures to put the recall question on the ballot.

But the Post’s print version of its Morse-recall story, unlike it’s Spot Blog post, did not include a reference to Kennedy Enterprises, and it didn’t delve at all into the mysterious question of who’s funding the Morse recall campaign, even though Post reporter Kurtis Lee quoted one of the anti-Morse campaign’s major donors (without informing readers of her donation).

So The Post missed an opportunity to follow up on the query posed by KOAA-TV’s Jacqui Henrich in her May 6 story, “The bigger question at hand: who hired Kennedy Enterprises despite their questionable background?”

In his piece for the print edition of the newspaper, Kurtis Lee quoted Laura Carno, who was identified as a “Republican political strategist who runs a political action committee in Colorado Springs and is in staunch support of the recall.”

Lee didn’t point out that one of Carno’s organizations, I Am Created Equal (IACE), donated over $14,ooo in in-kind support to the recall effort. Lee should have informed readers about her donation, what it’s being used for, and her views other aspects of the anti-Morse campaign, once considered rag-tag but now infused with real money.

You’d have to hope The Post would get better answers from Carno than I did when I emailed her last week. Carno did confirm that her 501(c)4 organization donated 14k, but she skirted these questions:

Will you tell me what the IACE’s 14K (in-kind) donation to El Paso Freedom Defense Committee was used for or what it was earmarked for?

Do you know who’s paying for the people to collect signatures to recall Sen. Morse, if it’s true that there are people being paid to do this?

Do you think it’s fair to call the Morse recall effort “grassroots” even though the paid petition drive appears to be led by someone named Tracy Taylor, who’s not from Colorado?

Carno sent me a video link as well as this written response:

“We are raising money for our Morse education campaign the way I Am Created Equal always has — we are asking folks who believe in free markets, free enterprise, and limited government to help. To date, every penny we have raised for this comes from Colorado, just as you would expect from a grassroots group like our own. Rest assured, not one penny has come from Mayor Bloomberg. That much I can promise you.”

Last month I reported that Larry Pratt, Director of Gun Owners of America, praised Weld Country Sheriff John Cooke for his opposition to gun safety legislation.

On KFKA’s Scooter McGee show, Pratt said some 400 sheriffs in the U.S. are promising not to enforce gun-safety laws, like Colorado’s new statute expanding background checks.

Pratt also said some sheriffs have vowed to arrest federal agents whom sheriffs believe are violating the U.S. Constitution.

Pratt said on the radio that some “sheriffs are saying, ‘Not only will I not cooperate, but if the Feds are doing something unconstitutional in my county, particularly a gun grab, I’ll put them in jail.'”

It wasn’t clear whether Cooke was among the sheriffs who are ready to arrest the feds, so I called to find out.

“The state gun laws are unenforceable, and I won’t enforce them,” he said. “I’d rather go after drug dealers, burglars, and rapists.”

But Cook said he wouldn’t actually arrest federal agents in Weld County, even if he thinks they’re enforcing unconstitutional laws, like federal gun safety statutes.

“I’m not going to arrest a federal agent,” he said. “No, I’m not going to go that far.”

A bill awaiting the signature of Gov. John Hickenlooper would make it a crime for a drunk driver to hit a pregnant women, causing the death of her fetus.

Perpetrators of this and other reckless acts against pregnant women would face prosecution for terminating a pregnancy, whereas now, due to a loophole in state law, they do not.

You might think this is something all sides of the abortion debate could get behind, but think again.

“Personhood” activists, who’ve twice lost ballot initiatives in Colorado to define life as beginning at conception, opposed the bill, as did GOP legislators, like Sen. Scott Renfroe, who was quoted in the Denver Post as saying the bill should be called “Let’s Go on Killing Babies…” and that abortion amounts to the “Holocaust of our day.”

Why didn’t Personhood USA support the bill, even though it specifically does not “confer the status of ‘person’ on any human embryo, fetus, or unborn child at any state of development prior to live birth.”

“The response is very simple and direct,” Personhood USA’s Gualberto Garcia Jones told me via email. “Personhood could not support Planned Parenthood’s bill because, under it, Brady Surovik at 8 lbs, 2 ounces would not be considered a person.”

Brady Surovik was the name chosen for her baby by Heather Surovik, who was hit by a car when eight-months pregnant, resulting in the end of her pregnancy.

Still, why wouldn’t Garcia Jones support the legislation, giving prosecutors a stronger hand to pursue crimes against pregnant women, even if her fetus would not be considered a victim? Why not fight for legal recognition of zygotes (fertilized eggs) and other early forms of human development in other forums?

“The bill is purporting to ‘create(s) a new article for offenses against pregnant women,’ Garcia Jones responded. “Heather is up and about, she is recovering. It is Brady, her son, that is dead. How can the bill drafters claim to bring justice for the death of Brady, while reinforcing and denying that his life was worth protecting?”

“[The bill] specifically denies personhood recognition to babies like Brady,” added Personhood USA Spokeswoman Jennifer Mason. “That is why Heather says she can’t support it, and neither can we.” (Earlier this year, they threw their support behind a competing bill, defeated by Democrats.)

So Personhood backers will push ahead with their “fetal homicide” ballot initiative, which they call the “Brady Amendment” allowing law enforcement officials to prosecute people who commit crimes against “unborn human beings.”

The phrase “unborn human beings” isn’t defined in the text of the initiative, leaving open the possibility that all stages of human development, from zygote through the end of pregnancy, could be considered by courts as “people” and receive legal protections under Colorado law.

That’s why Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains sees the fetal homicide initiative as another attempt to codify personhood in Colorado, according to Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Monica McCafferty.

On its website last week, ABC News reported that petition drives to remove CO state legislators from office, in retaliation for their support of gun safety legislation, are “being run by political newcomers who claim little or no experience working on elections.”

ABC News’ Chris Good wrote in an online story that “activists are relying on volunteers, and no campaign has raised more than a few thousand dollars.”

Good’s piece appeared three days after Colorado Pols posted a video apparently demonstrating that the Morse recall effort, at least, is not a grassroots effort but a sophisticated political hit campaign involving hired guns from outside Colorado.

It appears ABC didn’t bother to check out the video, which contains an audio recording of a man, who identifies himself as Tracy Taylor, the “owner” of a “national petitioning company.”

In the video, Taylor is apparently training workers to collect signatures to recall State Sen. President John Morse. “What we’re going to do is put it on the ballot and let people decide whether or not they want to get rid of [Morse],” the man identified as “Taylor” says.

The signature gatherers would be paid at least $1.oo per signature, he promises. (About 7,000 signatures are needed by June 3 to place the Morse recall question on the ballot.)

In the video, the man identified as Taylor says:

“This office belongs to Dan Kennedy, who’s a good friend of mine and has been in the petition business with me a lot of years. That’s how I got ahold of Brooke, who got ahold of you, because she knows Dan. So this is kind of our home office anyway, so that’s the good news for you guys. We get lots of work. This job is going to last anywhere from four to five weeks.”

You’d think local reporters would be racing to interview Taylor and Dan Kennedy of Kennedy Enterprises, given the appearance that serious money is behind an effort to oust a leading CO politician.

But neither ABC’s Good, nor a local reporter, has apparently bothered to do so.

So to fill the media gap, I called Kennedy Enterprises Friday afternoon, to verify the video evidence that Kennedy, who’s been accused of organizing shady signature-gathering efforts in the past, indeed hosted the anti-Morse training in his office–and to find out more about the role of Kennedy Enterprises in the Morse recall campaign.

“This is Tracy,” said a voice who picked up the phone when I called the phone number listed on the website for Kennedy Enterprises.

Is this Tracy Taylor, whose voice is featured on a video on the website ColoradoPols, I asked.

“I have no comment,” said “Tracy,” and hung up. (For what it’s worth, his voice sounded identical to the one in the Pols video.

My email to Kennedy was not returned, but perhaps a reporter who knows him will have better luck.

Meanwhile, evidence that serious money, not grassroots grit, is fueling the anti-Morse campaign arrived yesterday when the El Paso Freedom Defense Committee reported receiving a large donation of $14,294, which is enough to get an outside operative like “Tracy Taylor” to come Colorado.

The donation came from “I Am Created Equal.” One entity with this name is run by Laura Carno, who confirmed by email that the donation came from her 501c(4) entity, IACE Action. I’m scheduled to talk to Carno more about this later.

Just after the November election, a chastened Cory Gardner told Fox 31’s Eli Stokols:

Gardner: “Republicans have always talked about having a big tent, but it doesn’t do any good if the tent doesn’t have any chairs in it. Bringing Latinos to the forefront, bringing women in, is absolutely critical.”

So you’d think Gardner, who represents Colorado’s 4th Congressional District, would, over the ensuing six months, at least make room in the GOP tent for the children of undocumented immigrants, who were brought to this country through no fault of their own.

You’d think Gardner would get on board with Colorado’s ASSET law, which allows colleges to offer these so-called “Dreamers” the normal in-state tuition rate.

But on Monday, the same day that Gov. John Hickenlooper signed ASSET into law, Gardner told KNUS’ Steve Kelley, that he still opposes Colorado’s new policy of granting in-state tuition to the Dreamers, because Gardner does not believe the U.S. borders are secure enough, and that’s his first priority.

Kelley: Comments on Colorado, now. The Governor, last Friday, rescinded a bill, repealed a bill on notification of illegals. This all ties together, by the way, the Boston bombings and all of these are connected. Obviously, you deal with these things on a federal level, but as a state, now, we’ve repealed this notification thing. And then, in-state tuition for illegals in Colorado, you must have a comment on that.

Gardner: I think we’re actually doing everything backwards. The solution has to come from the federal government on border security with an immigration policy that actually works to identify those who want to come into this country legally, who want to work here legally. But we can’t start putting in place in-state tuition, whether it’s other things that are being in placed [sic] by the states, without actually addressing the root problem that will only continue more illegal immigration into this country. And so, that’s why we’ve got to have a policy that actually works, and I believe it starts with border security.

Gardner, who’s long opposed ASSET, isn’t the only GOP muckety muck who promised to be nice to Hispanics after the 2012 election collapse. Who can forget former GOP lawmakers Josh Penry’s and Rob Witwer’s clarion call for a more loving Republican Party or a dead one. They wrote of the Dreamers: “These kids grow up in households where parents work hard and attend church on Sunday. These are American values. But yes, some of these kids — through no fault of their own — were not born American citizens.”

If Kelley won’t ask a guy like Gardner about the substance of his promise to open the GOP tent to Hispanics, I’m hoping real journalists won’t forget next time they’re standing in front of Gardner and others like him.

I was glad to see an op-ed in The Denver Post this morning supporting the election-modernization bill winding its way toward Gov. John Hickenlooper’s office.

You recall The Post came out with a shallow editorial last week in favor of most of the bill, but arguing that officials should consider waiting “years” before implementing  election-day registration because it’s so dreadfully complicated for the 21st Century human mind to assemble the necessary technology.

But the Post failed to mention that Colorado’s country clerks are already, in effect, registering people on Election Day with existing technology, which can be used in the 2012 and 2013 elections. And the clerks’ experts say this technology can be upgraded for elections beginning in 2014.

You hate to see a newspaper siding with exclusion, when it comes to elections, based on flimsy evidence, because journalism is supposed to stand for giving everyone a voice. The newspaper should have gone the extra mile to do its homework on the election bill.

So it was a relief to see that The Post gave a Republican, Donetta Davidson (who’s the Director of the CO County Clerks Association), and a Democrat, Joan Fitz-Gerald (former State Senate President), space today to argue for the bill in its entirety. They wrote:

If you’re reading this, you likely voted by mail last November, and you’re in good company: Seventy-two percent of Colorado voters joined you. Mail ballots are a convenient, secure and private way to cast a ballot that is increasingly popular among Colorado voters.

HB 1303 answers the demand of these voters while providing ample options for voters who prefer to vote in person. It eliminates the “inactive-failed-to-vote” status that created confusion for voters. It creates a graduated registration system that scales down the demand on the system as Election Day approaches…

As former county clerks, we both understand the pragmatic, non-political approach to maintaining the public trust in elections. Technology has caught up with the needs of voters and taxpayers. The Voter Access & Modernized Elections Act will mean more people can take advantage of their right to vote, our local governments will save money and we all win.

This publication of this piece again shows the newspaper’s commitment to engaging in a full discussion of issues on its commentary page.

In an editorial yesterday, The Denver Post praised all the provisions of the election-modernization bill that just passed the State House, but the newspaper questioned the timeline on the implementation of election-day voter registration.

The Post Editorial stated that the “Internet technology specialist” in the Secretary of State’s office had an unspecified “problem” with the timeline proposed in the bill, which envisions offering election-day registration starting in the coordinated election this November and primary election in June.

The Post advised that “more time should be allowed for development and testing of same-day registration technology,” and the newspaper threw out the completely unsupported suggestion that “consideration” should be given to “disallowing voter registration very close to or on Election Day in the first years of using the technology.” [BigMedia emphasis]

It’s not clear what problem the Secretary of State’s internet expert has with the legislation’s timeline, or whether even he thinks it should operate for “years” before it would be trustworthy (somehow I doubt it), but, in any case, The Post should have offered more evidence to support its view. As it is, readers are left thinking The Post irresponsibly relied on just one opinion.  One expert, even a reputable one, shouldn’t carry the day, just because he happens to agree with the editorial writer.

And as it turns out, there’s more to the story.

For the next two elections, prior to the gubernatorial in 2014, the clerks will employ the exact same technology that they currently use to process “address changes” through election day as well as  “emergency registrations,” Boulder County Clerk and Recorder Hillary Hall told me.

In effect, clerks across Colorado have already processed thousands of same-day registrations on or before election day, using existing technology. Their system, which has been in use since 2008, was live (with backup systems in place) during the last election with all 64 counties participating, Hall said.

In the longer term, a “more seamless” interface is needed, because of the volume increase that’s expected in the bigger elections, but it’s not required for the next two elections, Hall said, adding that she’s confident, based on experience and technical advice, that the new interface will be ready for the 2014 election, which is about a year-and-a-half away. The congressional election would be a good test for the technology leading up to the 2016 presidential election, Hall said.

“It’s an ideal time to begin, as we’re building to the next presidential,” Hall said.

Larry Pratt, Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, praised Weld County Sheriff John Cooke recently for taking a “very strong stand on what he thinks the limits of the Federal government are.”

Speaking to Greeley talk show host Scooter McGee, Pratt, who’s in Colorado now to support the recall effort of State Rep. Mike McLachlan, said some sheriffs around the country are ready to arrest federal officials if, in the sheriffs’ views, they are violating the U.S. Constitution.

PRATT Well, I’m very encouraged by the number of sheriffs that–it’s at least pushing 400 now, that have said– there’s a spectrum. At a minimum, they’re saying they’re not going to cooperate with any unconstitutional gun grabs that the federal government might participate in. And at the other end of the spectrum, sheriffs are saying, “Not only will I not cooperate, but if the Feds are doing something unconstitutional in my county, particularly a gun grab, I’ll put them in jail.” But they’re also addressing other issues where the Feds act unconstitutionally and threaten to incarcerate citizens of their county, the sheriffs are interposing themselves and saying, “If you try to do that, you don’t have authority, and you’re not going to do that in my county, and if you try it, I will arrest you.” This has happened in confrontations with the Forest Service, BLM, the Food and Drug Administration, and of course, the ATF – the gun police.

In a column in the Cortez Journal Monday, Montezuma Country Sheriff Dennis Spruell echoed Pratt’s comments, writing that if sheriffs “think a state or federal law contradicts the Constitution, they are under no obligation to enforce it.”

It wasn’t clear if Pratt thought Cooke would actually arrest federal officials, or if Spruell would arrest them, if necessary to enforce their views of the U.S. Constitution, so I called Cooke and Spruell to find out. Cooke did not return my call immediately, but Spruell said, “I swore an oath to the Constitution, but there’s no law that says I can arrest someone who violates the Constitution.”

In his radio interview, Pratt went on to point to a specific example of a situation, in addition to stopping alleged gun grabs, when Sheriffs need to exert their power and arrest the feds–when the Department of Education sends in a SWAT team to collect student loans.

PRATT: Well, it can get pretty absurd. There was a case last year, a young woman looked outside and realized that her residence was completely surrounded by the Men in Black. And when all the commotion finally subsided, it turned out that that was the Department of Education SWAT team, and they were coming for her because she was delinquent on her education [loans]. McGEE: Oh, on her student loans! PRATT: Exactly. Now, the fact that in the past creditors were able to garnish your wages, put a lien on if you own your house, repo[ssess] your car–. Those are actually sensible, measured, equivalent responses to the problem. But now, if they have a SWAT team, they figure they got to use it, or else why do we ask the taxpayers to spend all this money on – McGEE: And, when it comes to budgets, remember we spent a hundred and fifteen thousand dollars last year and we increase the budget every year and we have to justify it by spending it, and using it and—oh, my god, Larry. You’re absolutely right, again. PRATT: So, off we go and the Department of Education is now using a SWAT team to collect delinquent student loans. Frankly, that’s where we need sheriffs. The sheriff needs to come in and say [affecting a ‘good ol’ boy, southern accent], “Boy, I don’t think you ought to be doing that.” And make sure that the boys understand that the sheriff is serious as a heart attack, that he is just talking smooth, and that he is not going to let them do that.

The Durango Herald will live stream a speech by Pratt in Durango today at 6:30 p.m.. He’s in Colorado in support of efforts to recall State Rep. Mike McLachlan.