Correction: This post was corrected to state that the CO Constitution gives recall candidates until 15 days before an election to qualify for the ballot.

—–

What led to the latest court ruling in two recall elections in southern Colorado is an apparent conflict between Colorado’s Constitution, which gives recall candidates until 15 days before the election to qualify for the election ballot, and Colorado law, which gives them 10 days after the election date is set.

But it wasn’t Colorado’s new election modernization law (HB13-1303) that set the 10-day deadline.

It was actually a 2012 law, sponsored by Republican Keith King and Democrat Nancy Todd. It set the 10-day window. Here’s the relevant portion of HB12-1293 that’s now on the books:

1-12-117. Nomination of successor. (1) FOR PARTISAN ELECTIONS, a candidate to succeed the officer sought to be recalled shall meet the qualifications of a party candidate or an unaffiliated candidate as provided in part 8 of article 4 of this title and shall be nominated by a political party petition or an unaffiliated petition as provided in part 9 of article 4 of this title. Nomination petitions MAY BE CIRCULATED BEGINNING THE FIRST DATE ON WHICH A PROTEST MAY BE FILED and affidavits of intent to run as a write-in candidate shall be filed no later than fifteen TEN CALENDAR days after the date on which the appropriate governing body convenes and DESIGNATED ELECTION OFFICIAL sets the election date AS PROVIDED IN SECTION1-12-111. 

The Denver Post got it wrong in a Spot blog post yesterday, reporting that the new election law set the 10-day limit, and the Associated Press made the same implication in a story yesterday.

If it weren’t for the 2013 election law, county clerks would have been able to choose not to run an all-mail-in-ballot recall election, because the law mandates all-mail voting. But they still would have had to rely on the 10-day deadline for permanent vote-by-mail voters and for absentee and overseas ballots, including ballots for military personnel. So the statutory conflict with the state constitution would have come up anyway.

In fact the problem would have arose had a recall election occurred anytime since Colorado started using mail ballots in the 1990’s as ColoradoPols has pointed out yesterday, citing former GOP Secretary of State Donetta Davidson.

I can’t blame reporters for being confused, however, when you have the state’s top election official, Scott Gessler, spreading false information about this topic and promoting himself in the process.

On KOA’s Mike Rosen show Aug. 13, Secretary of State Scott Gessler held up himself as  white knight who tried to fix the 10-day-deadline problem in the election modernization bill, even though the new law isn’t the cause of the problem. Listen to Gessler here @4 minutes into the recording.

Rosen: “A judge ruled that a provision of the state Constitution, that apparently only applies to a recall election, says that you only have 15 days prior to the election to turn in enough signatures to get your candidate’s name on the ballot. And the lawsuit brought by the Libertarians says instead they were given only 10 days after the Governor set the election date…It’s a little confusing, since the Constitution conflicts with election-reform legislation passed in the last session. Now it all lands back in Secretary of State Scott Gessler’s lap… I gave a brief summary. Put some more details on it. ”

Gessler: “Well, your summary is pretty accurate. We had tried to harmonize the statute and the Constitution. Ironically, I was very much opposed to the legislation that went through last year but found myself in the position where I had to defend it….”

Rosen: “How about the conflict between what the state Constitution says, that apparently applies only to recall elections, and what was in the new legislation passed this year?”

Gessler: “Well, the judge held that it was a conflict. We had tried to harmonize it, but it is what it is. So our approach is, you know, we’ve got to make this work.

Rosen should have Gessler back on his show to explain that the 2013 election-mondernization law did not lead to the latest court ruling in the recall elections, and media outlets who published misleading articles should clarify.

Laura Carno, whose organization donated over $55,000 to recall Sen. John Morse, has been claiming Morse is an extremist on various conservative talk-radio shows.

Yet on “Politics and Guns” July 23, she said of Morse that, before this year, “you wouldn’t have been able to guess that he was a Democrat.”

So Carno’s problems with Morse are very recent, lending credibility to The Denver Post’s view, as expressed in an editorial titled “John Morse Recall Is an Abuse of the Political Process,” that the recall effort an extreme over-reaction to a policy dispute.

The statement invites questions for Carno about whether she thinks The Post is right that the Morse recall is a “perversion of a process that should be reserved for corruption and incompetence.”

Here’s a partial transcript of the radio interview, as well as the audio:

Carno: @31:52  Yes.  That’s correct.  And that’s one of the common questions that the recall committee got when they launched this,  “Why don’t you just let him finish out his term?”  So, there are a couple answers to that.  One is, he didn’t get everything he wanted in the last legislative session.  And just as a reminder to your listeners, Senator Morse was a very moderate Democrat.  You wouldn’t have been able to guess from his legislative agenda from the previous terms that he’d been in there,  you wouldn’t have been able to guess that he was a Democrat.  He is former law enforcement.  He had some good pro-police bills,   pro-military bills.  He even sponsored in 2007 a reciprocity bill for  Conceal /Carry holders for Colorado – a very pro-gun bill.

Click Here for Audio

The Denver Post’s Lynn Bartels wrote a good blog post yesterday reminding us that “gun kingpin” Dudley Brown, who once opposed trying to recall lawmakers because of their votes on gun bills, is now buying ads in the recall election.

To fill out the story, I offer you Brown’s more expansive thoughts on recalls.

Here’s what he told KFKA talk show host Scooter McGee Feb. 19, at about the 11 minute point in the video.

Brown said lawmakers will be “up for re-election in 2014 anyway,” “it’s enormously expensive” to recall lawmakers, and he “might as well burn the dollars.”

SCOOTER McGEE:  All right.  Then having said that, Dudley, why are we not immediately demanding a recall of our politicians who are violating the Colorado Constitution when it comes to the unalienable right to keep and bear arms, whether it be for a tyrannical dictatorship, against each other, or hunting or sporting purposes?  Why is this madness –

DUDLEY BROWN:  Well, if you’re asking from the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners standpoint, why we aren’t asking for a recall, is because one state representative, who is going to be up for re-election in 2014 anyway, you have to go out and gather petition signatures.  And you have to gather them based on the number of votes that they received in the last election. It is a enormously expensive task.  And with all due respect, you don’t have that kind of money.  Neither does Rocky Mountain Gun Owners!  We don’t have that kind of money!  That would be inasmuch lying to people [inaudible] money for us to go out and make the effort to gather signatures of five or six or seven or eight Democrats in the statehouse.  That’s stupid! I might as well burn the dollars!

Full transcript and video here.

Conservative blogger Ari Armstrong published a post Sunday with the headline: “Will Senator Morse clarify his remarks on gun owners having ‘sickness’ in their ‘souls’?”

This should be corrected because, in March, after Morse’s quote was being twisted by opponents, Morse did “confirm” his statement on the Colorado Senate Democrats’ YouTube page.

There, Morse confirmed the obvious, that, when he quoted Martin Luther King in a speech during the gun debate in the State Legislature, he was referring to violence in society as a “sickness in our souls.” He wasn’t referencing gun owners, he wrote.

Morse: I would like to thank you for taking the time to write me to confirm what I said during the gun debate.  The quote that is being circulated is absolutely inaccurate. The quote was from Robert F. Kennedy in a speech that he made the day after Dr. Martin Luther King was assassinated.  It says, “Violence breeds violence, repression breeds retaliation and only a cleansing of our whole society can remove this sickness from our souls.”  This quote was used in reference to the violence of our current society.  I have attached the link to the actual speech with the transcript below.  You will see that I never reference gun owners. In fact, I am a gun owner myself and deeply believe in protecting this right.  Again, thank you for your time and concern.

I criticized radio hosts John Caldara and Peter Boyles for spreading the misinformation that Morse said gun owners have a sickness in their souls, when in fact, Morse was referring to violence as a sickness in society.

As Armstrong points out, I did not quote Morse’s entire speech. I should have done this, so I’ve provided the entire text of Morse’s speech below.

Armstrong claims that Morse is insinuating that gun owners have a sickness in their souls, even though Morse is a gun owner.

Even if Morse didn’t own a gun, it would be senseless for him to make such a ridiculous accusation, given how many people in America own guns. The accusation against Morse defies both common sense and the words he used in his speech, such as: “This debate on reducing gun violence in this country needed to happen, and it finally is happening.”

Anyway, I think any fair-minded person would read the following text and conclude that Morse was not accusing gun owners of having a sickness in their souls. I’m sure Armstrong and I agree on this: You decide.

Text from President Morse’s speech on Friday, March 8.

Under current law in the United States, gun dealers and manufacturers are immune from liability even when they are negligent.  No other industry enjoys in the country this protection.  This immunity is the direct result of a powerful lobby, that ironically is subsidized by our own government and taxpayers through the military and police.  We have experienced the power of this lobby over the last three months.

In the wake of 6-year-old children being shot in the face, the gun lobby has actually argued we need more guns and managed to convince Coloradans that they will lose their guns if we impose even reasonable restrictions on firearms.  They have argued that the mental health system is broken and needs to be fixed, but have not introduced a single piece of legislation to address mental health either in Colorado or nationally.

Robert F. Kennedy, after MLK’s assassination, said:

“Violence breeds violence, repression breeds retaliation and only a cleansing of our whole society can remove this sickness from our souls.”

Cleansing a sickness from our souls does not come easily.  It is gruesome.  During the last three months we have experienced hatred and vitriol that I haven’t seen since I was on the street as a police officer.  This has included wishing rape, torture and death on legislators and their families.  It’s reached its heights just this week as we’ve been considering these bills in committee and we’ve been preparing to consider them today on the floor. Sickness.

Change has not ever come quickly in the United States and our system is designed to make sure it doesn’t.

We have made strides today, strides that will save lives.

Strides that stop bullets piercing more children’s bodies, strides that stop criminals from getting guns, strides that stop domestic abusers from killing their partners with a gun and strides that will stop massacres of 85 people including our children with a 100 round magazine.

This debate on reducing gun violence in this country needed to happen, and it finally is happening.

I am proud to be a Coloradan and proud to represent these Colorado values.  We proudly stand here today as Coloradoans who want the killing to stop and the cleansing to start.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my motion and move that SB 196 be laid over until May 10th.

Back in March, Ray Stafford, the General Manager of the Pueblo Chieftain, fired off an email to Colorado State Sen. Angela Giron, telling her “not to vote for the current gun control legislation,” and also pointing out that he was the person “responsible for the entire newspaper, including the newsroom.”

Stafford never apologized for implying that he would direct the Chieftain’s news department to retaliate against Giron, if she didn’t fall in line against the gun-safety bills, even though his email could clearly be interpreted by a reasonable person as a threat.

In fact, Stafford angrily denied that there was any implied threat in his email, which was sent from his Chieftain email account. Chieftain assistant publisher Jane Rawlings also issued a denial of any wrongdoing, actual or perceived.

A few months later, on April 13, Stafford continued his personal (and undisclosed) political campaign against Giron by signing the Giron-recall petition. (See signature below.)

Will Stafford retaliate against Giron by directing Chieftain news staff to cover the recall in ways that are unfavorable to Giron? (unfavorable story selection or placement? bad headlines? unfair sourcing? etc.)

Stafford did not immediately return an email message seeking comment, but it’s not an unreasonable question.

After Stafford’s ill-advised email to Giron earlier this year, I’d think he’d be extra careful to be thoroughly transparent about his political activities, to ensure that Chieftain readers weren’t left with the impression that the newspaper was underhandedly opposing Giron in the recall election.

But I can’t find anything in the Chieftain saying Stafford personally favors the recall effort, much less the fact that he signed the recall petition personally.

Experts on journalism ethics criticized Stafford earlier this year for not being transparent about his controversial email to Giron.

Their criticism would obviously extend to Stafford’s latest salvo at Giron, launched when he signed the recall petition.

Even if you believe Stafford’s promise not to meddle in the Chieftain’s news coverage of Giron, you have to wonder why he isn’t more transparent about his partisanship.

The Society of Professional Journalism’s ethics code has this to say about the political involvement of “publishers,” which is comparable to the job Stafford holds at the Chieftain:

Skeptics of journalistic objectivity are quick to point out that some publishers and owners of news media outlets may not follow the rules they lay down for their employees. A few get more deeply involved, and they may contribute to candidates. Is this ethical? It’s at best a double standard, and a questionable practice. But at the very minimum there should be public disclosure — in their own media — when media magnates get politically involved in this way.

Especially given his record of undisclosed partisanship, Stafford should show his readers some basic respect by coming clean and apologizing for his behind-the-scenes attacks on Giron and stating his full opinion in the newspaper.

The Pueblo Chieftain published a good article this morning making sense of an exchange of salvos between Republicans on one side and Democrats and state employees on the other. The Chieftain reported:

[A] July 19 letter, signed by all 17 Senate Republicans, says the state’s latest salary plan — due to be finalized Aug. 1 — wrongly implies that state [Department of Corrections] workers are underpaid and fails to point out they receive 33 percent more money than private prison workers.

The letter notes a recent study showing state prison employees average $51,357 a year while private prison staffers average $34,500. It also says DOC employees have other benefits, such as retirement, overtime and access to government vehicles.

The article, written by Peter Roper, is mostly behind the pay wall on the Chieftain’s website. It goes on to explain that Republican signees of the letter asked that the benefits of DOC workers be added to their average pay in the state salary plan. But Sen. Larry Crowder is quoted as saying that a pay cut for DOC workers based on this information might apply to future hires, not current employees.

The Chieftain reported that this year State Sen. Angela Giron pushed through a bill, which was opposed by most Republicans, granting overtime pay to DOC workers.  Giron was quoted as saying:

“As we’ve tragically seen, these officers put their lives on the line in our prisons,” she said Wednesday. “I don’t know why the Senate Republicans want them working for lower pay.”

CORRECTION: The “metrosexual liberals” quote was originally attributed to Sen. Brophy, when it was in fact stated by the KNUS host Kirsta Kafer.

——————————-

Last week, ColoradoPols posted a publicity photo of Sen. Greg Brophy and his family, all brandishing big guns.

The Pols post caught the attention of Brophy, who commented on KNUS’ Backbone radio over the weekend:

Brophy: And then those goofs – you know, those lefty goofs over at ColoradoPols — pitched a fit oh, sometime this past week, over a family photo that we have from back in 2011, where every member of the [sneezes] – excuse me, out in the country, — every member of the family is holding [whispers] a scary black gun, a scary black gun.  And it’s a beautiful photo, and we had a great time.  We shot hundreds of photos that day, right after Christmas when we had the whole family together for the first time in ages.

And they had to make a big deal out of it, you know.  And, you know, my guys, [inaudible] wanted to clean some of that up, and I said, “No.  You know what?  Firearms are part of the culture of rural Colorado. It’s a part of the culture of my family, and if you follow me on Twitter, which is @SenatorBrophy, or on Facebook – Greg Brophy.  You know, we’re out at the farm right now today.  My brother happened to come down for a family reunion, and guess what we’re doing.

Brophy told the Backbone audience that he was proud of the photo and even promoted it on social media after Pols posted it.

Host Krista Kafer responded: “I looked at that photo, and my first thought was, “It’s kind of like a family ‘Charlie’s Angels’, you know?”  Because you have all the guns at different levels, or different kind of pointing – no gun is pointing at a human being, but they’re all pointing in different directions.  And then I had this vision of these Metro-sexual liberals in Denver looking at that photo and being horrified. And being like, “Oh no!  He’s got guns!” [BigMedia emphasis]

I have to say, Brophy’s family looks nice, even with the firearms, but there’s a big problem here: Kafer is wrong about the guns not “pointing at a human being.”

I guess the fact that I’m an aspiring metrosexual gives me the ability to see that the girl on the left is almost certainly pointing his gun at the leg of the boy next to him.  (H/T to Pols commenter Ross Cunniff, who pointed this out on Pols.)

This is one reason I’m scared of guns and proud of it. Accidents happen, even when pros like Brophy or Dick Cheney are in charge.

Brophy hands out the guns to his family, and he has no clue that one of his kids is pointing a big black gun at the other one–or if not at him, way too close for comfort. Yes, it could happen.

Brophy’s daughter could have shot his son.

Yet, on the radio, Brophy said: “You treat guns like they’re loaded all the time…. the reality is, that those of us who have grown up handling firearms – you know you treat them all like they’re loaded, whether they are or they aren’t.”

Brophy: And we have a lot of fun doing [the photo].  I’ve got[ten] a lot of response.  You know.   I’m just going to punch back, because – you know, I am what I am, and I’m proud of who I am and I’m proud of where I come from.  And so I actually re-shared that photo on Facebook again yesterday and it just exploded!  I mean, people were just sharing it all over the place and commenting about it all over the place.  And, you know, it’s—the hard core Left can want to take away everybody’s guns and think that guns are demonic.

Backbone Radio host Krista Kafer, who interviewed Brophy, owes it to her listeners to get Brophy back on the show and ask him about how his family photo could possibly demonstrate the proper safety rules for guns that Brophy told her he lives by. It’s a serious question.

Incidentally, don’t you think Brophy is a bit of an aspiring Metro-sexual himself? He’s even moved temporarily to Denver. Kafer should ask him if he thinks there’s any chance he’ll be giving up his guns as soon as the Capitol Hill, Metro-sexual culture seeps into him.

Update 7/24: Self-described “GOP Rabble-Rouser” Dave Williams of Colorado Springs tweeted, in response to the question of who recruited Herpin: @BigMediaBlog Bernie was personally asked by EPCGOP Chair Jeff Hays. Hays told a crowd of about 20 precinct leaders that he made that call.

—————-

In her Facebook post, first reported by ColoradoPols yesterday, explaining why she dropped her campaign to run in a recall election against Sen. John Morse, Jaxine Bubis cited pressure from “high-ranking legislators” and “the Party.” She said she was sorry for caving.

Ironically, just a couple days before Bubis’ apology yesterday, her Republican opponent, Bernie Herpin, was on the Jeff Crank show bragging about how the Republican muckety-mucks were essentially begging him to run against Morse, even after Bubis was in the race.

Herpin was happily in California, he said, with his wife and grandkids. He was slowing down, even took the train out to the Golden State.

Then, Herpin responded to a phone call:

Herpin: “…I get a call from a person I know and respect saying, Bernie, we need you. I came back into town, met with the Republican leadership and some folks. This issue was too important for me to say no and sit on the sidelines.”

Herpin on the KVOR Crank Show July 20 2013

Who called Bernie? Crank didn’t ask, but I’m sure a lot of people would like to know.

But the internal party politics here can distract from issues near and dear to the GOP heart, and TABOR is certainly close to the left Republican ventricle, including, you’d think, the left ventricle of GOP stalwart Jeff Crank, who sat down with Bubis “over a glass of iced tea” and pressured her to get out of the Morse race.

So I was surprised that Crank, who told listeners he’s a “long-time friend” of Herpin’s, Crank said nothing when Herpin told him “there are some issues with TABOR that even folks who support TABOR will stand up and say, like the ratchet-down effect, those kinds of things, but TABOR has helped Colorado survive.”

So maybe there’s more that divides Republicans in El Paso County than just gossipy details like the name of the person who phoned Herpin, after he’d “hopped the train” to California, and told him how much the Republican Party needed him back in the Springs.

Herpin on the KVOR Crank Show July 20 2013

Follow Jason Salzman on Twitter @bigmediablog

KNUS’ Steve Kelley put some good questions to GOP Rep. Kathleen Conti Friday:

Steve Kelley: What’s the state of affairs of the Republican Party of Colorado?

Kathleen Conti: Well, the Republican Party is—you know, we have just a strong chasm. You know, there’s those on the far right. And there’s those on the not-so-far right. And it seems to me sometimes that our chasm is a little bit wider than those on the Democratic side….

Kelley: Is the Republican Party [as Peter Boyles says] an ugly baby right now in Colorado?

Conti: I certainly hope not….

Conti raises a good question, and Kelley should get into it with her on a future show. Which party in Colorado has a wider chasm?

Conti is the Republicans’ Minority Caucus Chair in the State House, so she knows what she’s talking about. Her party consists of a sharply divided “far right” and “not-so-far right.”  Those in the center and left-leaning are so scant as to be irrelevant.

Democrats, as Conti points out, are different, aren’t they? They’re mostly in the center with a straggler on the not-so-far-left.

The Dems are centrists on immigration (ASSET, driver’s licenses), abortion (pro-choice), renewable energy (efficiency and moderate mandates), gun safety (common-sense background checks), gay rights (civil unions, marriage), sex ed (yes), voter registration (convenience with secure voting), taxation (when necessary), etc., etc., etc. (Here’s a nice visual representation of some of these.)

The Colorado GOP comes down just as Conti said, on the far-right and not-so-far-right, with a wide and vocal chasm running down the middle.

A hatchet might be a better word for what separates the two right wings of the GOP but, like I said, Conti is in leadership, so she knows her caucus. So let it be “chasm.”

In any event, you can’t make much of a list of  issues where the Democrats are on the far left and not-so-far-left. and Republicans are in the middle.

As someone who wants the Dems to move left, I wish you could. But face it, you can’t. It’s a centrist/right party.

And “hatchet” doesn’t come to mind when you think of most of the Democrats’ disagreements.

Kelley (who’s now on KNUS 710 AM from 1 to 4 p.m.) should ask Conti to tell us her thinking on the “chasm” (and the hatchet) in more detail, including an explanation of where she stands on the chasm scale.

Scott McInnis recently tiptoed into the shark-invested world of Denver journalism, where plagiarists are rooted out and hung up to dry.

In an exclusive interview, McInnis told KOA radio’s Colorado Morning News that our state did the right thing by not purchasing an espensive tanker fleet to fight forest fires. He said Colorado should be concerned about the expense and that various options should be evaluated.

Siding with former-McInnis-enemy The Denver Post as well as Rep. Doug Lamborn on the matter, and butting heads with current gubernatorial candidate Greg Brophy, McInnis had this conversation with KOA co-host Steffan Tubbs @ 3:57 :

TUBBS: You’re clearly still on top of issues that go on here in Colorado… to some people it’s unfathomable that a state with so much vegetation, wooded areas, national forests, –like Colorado, that we don’t have an air fleet based here, in this state. Is that a mistake? And has it been a mistake in the past? And would you say you support – no matter where the money comes from, get the money and put a fleet of aircraft here that can quickly respond to the wildfire?

MCINNIS: No, I don’t think it’s a mistake. I mean, it’s easy to talk about putting an air fleet together, and you know, when you have a big fire and people want to a fire station on every corner. I mean, the reality of it is is that It’s very, very expensive and you’ve got a lot of political questions that need to be asked. For example, if we’ve got a fire going in Colorado Springs and we’ve got a fire going in Glenwood Springs, where do you send the fleet? And how many airplanes do you have? And what if our neighbor right next door, Wyoming – if we’ve got a plane up there in Wyoming, would a governor dare send a plane to Wyoming to assist our neighbors, even though we didn’t have a fire in Colorado, and all of a sudden a fire breaks out in Colorado and our aircraft are somewhere off –. I mean,there’s a lot of implications in this. And it’s not just a budget item, it is a huge budget item. Aircraft – I mean, you have to be working those aircraft all the time, and that’s why so many – the Federal government, that’s why a lot of those aircraft are so dated and so on, is because it’s very expensive to keep that up to speed. So, I know right now at the height of this fire and this horrible disaster we’ve suffered, the temptation is to buy more fire trucks, buy more air fleets, make all kinds of commitments. But we need to let it calm down, give it a few weeks, and then really ask the questions, “Okay, we have the airplanes. Now how do we decide who gets them? And how do we decide how many we get? And how do we decide what we do with the people – you know, those planes, they probably fly – I don’t know, what? — fifteen days a year, maybe thirty days a year. What do we do with the other eleven months of the year? I mean there’s a lot of questions.

Listen to Scott McInnis on KOA CO Morning News 7.3.13

McInnis also said on KOA that the reason for the “intense fires” is “we don’t harvest wood like we used to harvest it.”

He added,”They should have thought about this [fires] when we were so tough on the lumber companies that went up there.”

“Musings on wood,” was the response of @Copeakpolitics when I tweeted McInnis’ remarks last week.