Over at Politics West, Joshua has some astute insights into where Gov. Ritter’s executive order unionizing state employees will lead, including:
The right to strike as an individual is virtually meaningless. The right to strike as a part of a union, in order to gain benefits under collective bargaining, is significantly more powerful. If such a right exists by Colorado Supreme Court decisions, then it cannot be overturned or even limited by note in an executive order. Such a note amounts to little more than a plea for AFSCME not to strike, at least not now, when it would be embarassing. Especially if you can’t confine it to the Friday evening news cycle.
The union would be able to negotiate with the state government as a whole, or with individual agency heads. The incentive here is to pick the agency head deemed most congenial (or potentially most hostage) to their interests, and negotiate a deal to be used as a “model” for deals with other agencies. This is the pattern that the UAW has used in Detroit, with an auto industry that is obviously thriving under the arrangement.
The results of such negotiations would then make their way into the state budget proposals. With the Democrats owing their majority to carefully extorted bundled union money, how likely do you think it is they’ll turn down their friends? And when control of the state legislature reverts to Republican control, very likely the first thing they’ll face is the threat of a strike. That is, assuming that the legislature hasn’t agreed to binding arbitration by then.
Make no mistake, this is a payoff to the union interests which increasingly dictate Democratic politics in this state and across the country. And they’re being paid off with your money.
Progressively More Poor. Progressively Less Free.
Can you see where this is going now?
On Monday, the Colorado Springs Gazette reported a vacancy opening up in State House District 15, making way for a head-to-head matchup between Douglas Bruce and businessman Steve Hasbrouck (the “not Douglas Bruce” candidate). Bruce would throw a lot of red meat to the more libertarian-minded Republicans, and figures generally to stir up trouble. But I’d venture to say that’s not mainly what many are looking for in a state representative.
Nonetheless, I am hearing today that the race for vacancy committee support may be opening up into a four-way affair. Two other candidates have expressed interest in taking the plunge. One of the two is former school board candidate Reginald Perry, who previously had declined calls to run, citing his young family.
As a good acquaintance, I know Reginald to have many outstanding leadership qualities: bold vision, strong principles, and tremendous personal charisma. He is an articulate spokesman for conservative values and well-inclined to bring the principles of freedom to bear on issues of taxation, regulation, education, and more, in statesmanlike fashion.
That being said, a three-way or four-way race may muddy the field. We’ll see if one or more of the candidates can be persuaded to bow out. District 15 Republicans will decide who represents them, but here’s hoping they select a qualified candidate of character, principle, and substance. From my point of view, the committee couldn’t do better than choosing Reginald Perry.
Pertaining to the Republican race to replace Tom Tancredo in the 6th Congressional District, my earlier observations were confirmed: Secretary of State Mike Coffman indeed is in, and State Senator Tom Wiens is out (from a press release mailed out this morning):
Colorado state Sen. Tom Wiens, R-Castle Rock, announced today that he will seek re-election to a second term in the Colorado State Senate and will not be a candidate for the sixth congressional seat being vacated by retiring Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo.
“I believe I can have a more positive impact on the future of Colorado by continuing to serve in the State Senate than by being a member of Congress,” Wiens said. “This has become even more clear to me given the events of the last several days in which we have seen our Democrat governor practicing government by fiat, ignoring the best interests of the people and bypassing the entire legislative process. Governor Ritter is clearly placing the interests of his political benefactors above the interests of the people.”
The primary race for the safe Republican seat now appears to be mainly between Coffman and State Senator Ted Harvey.
Though it coincides with the 2007 election, I’m taking a break from politics to commemorate this special day. Today - November 6, 2007 - would be my grandfather’s 100th birthday, were he still alive. A full century ago today, my Grandpa was welcomed to this earth.
I didn’t know him until he was over 70 years old, but only as time has passed have I come to appreciate him more fully. My Grandpa was a man with a tremendous work ethic and incredible moral character. He was honest to a fault. Faced with many difficulties, he showed remarkable loyalty and fidelity to his family. He saved his money, and used it wisely. Yet he was very generous, always willing to help his family or his neighbors. I never knew what to get him for Christmas. He never seemed to want anything.
My Grandpa was full of vigor beyond his years. At my age now, I couldn’t keep up with him. Well after 80, he would mow the lawn or fix something “for the old neighbor lady.” And he could get away with saying it because he always looked many years younger than his actual age. It’s a family trait, one whose benefits I look forward to reaping more in the future. My father is the same. And no one I’ve ever met has over-estimated my age by my appearance.
Read the rest of this entry »
Mere days after stepping into a major political mess, Gov. Ritter announced an ambitious plan to tackle the problem of global warming. Perhaps he aspires to win the Nobel Prize. More studied individuals than myself can break down the economic costs of his proposals, and I look forward to seeing those analyses.
For now, though, I wanted to focus on one aspect of Ritter’s 33-page “Climate Change Action Plan”:
Climate curricula. The state will work through the Governor’s P-20 Education Council and others to make sustainability curricula become standard fare in K-12 classrooms throughout the state. Today’s students will be living in a warmer climate resulting from the activities of previous generations. They need to understand the science of climate change, what its impacts will be on their lives, and how to critically evaluate the steps needed to reach our 2020 and 2050 emission reduction goals. Students will also need academic and technical skills to be ready for jobs in the New Energy Economy.
Unlikely to be included in the curriculum for all Colorado public school students are the well-accredited scientists featured on this 8-minute YouTube video, as John Stossel says “Give me a break.” Or the information included in “Snowjob”. Can we expect the curriculum to be balanced by the Heartland Institute’s Global Warming education site as a resource - including their 10-question quiz? Maybe the problem is that Ritter himself has yet to take the quiz.
Al Gore hath spoken: The Global Warming Debate is over…despite an abundance of evidence to the contrary. But Ritter has swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. And he thinks every public school student in Colorado should be force-fed it, too. “Local control” is a convenient mantra for the state’s liberal elites to squelch choice and competition or standards for accountability. But foisting statewide sex education standards or fearmongering climate propaganda on our kids is no problem.
Apparently, the agenda of union bag man Gov. “Algore” Ritter won’t be slowed down by either facts or concerns about your freedom. Remember, Colorado, what you get when you put the Democrats in charge.
The union bag man Gov. “Jimmy Hoffa” Ritter’s spokesman Evan Dreyer made a reluctant appearance on the Mike Rosen Show this morning with guest host Jon Caldara. Confronted with the issues surrounding Friday’s Big Labor payback, Dreyer hemmed and hawed around the questions. This is a must listen: follow the link, and listen to Rosen Replay 11/5/07 11-11:45 AM. It begins about a third of the way into the recording.
There may be little doubt about why Ritter released this executive order in a Friday afternoon press release - and got called on it by the Denver Post - but you have to wonder what finally gave the governor’s crew enough courage to come out in the light of day and defend the massive policy change in a confrontational setting. And then be unable to answer very significant, pertinent questions about the executive order.
I hear that Dreyer may make a repeat appearance tomorrow morning to try to clear things up. The people of Colorado are ready to listen.
In light of union bag man Gov. Bill Ritter’s recent political leap into the arms of union bosses, we welcome the new Web site Big Labor Bill - “a Big Labor loving blog that loves Bill Ritter for screwing over the business community and Colorado for a pay back to big labor.” Check it out.
You’ve read about the editors of the Denver Post assailing Gov. Ritter for his cowardly, pro-union executive order? Talk about eating your words:
His successor must have a clear vision for Colorado, advancing the state’s economy while protecting its natural resources.
He must have the will to seek bipartisan solutions with a divided legislature and a restless business community.
He needs firm resolve that won’t wilt under political pressures.
He must see government as a force to advance the health and education of Coloradans. And, in this perilous time, to safeguard our borders from enemies, drug runners and the risks of natural disaster. He must be ready to crack down on illegal immigration while laying out a welcome mat for legitimate newcomers and temporary workers.
Most of all, he needs to lead an economic development effort that is second to none among our neighbors in the West.
He needs to be Bill Ritter, the one person in this race with all those attributes and more.
The Post a bad judge of character? Wising up? Experiencing regrets? Perhaps all these and more. Ouch, what a bitter pill to swallow - this just may be a classic case of endorsement remorse.
What a pleasant surprise to find a strongly-worded editorial on the front page of today’s reliably center-left Denver Post, condemning Gov. Bill Ritter for his cowardly Friday order in benefit of a narrow interest group at the expense of Coloradans who elected him to office last year. I almost could have written it myself. Without further ado, here goes:
When Coloradans elected Bill Ritter as governor, they thought they were getting a modern-day version of Roy Romer, a pro-business Democrat. Instead, they got Jimmy Hoffa.
“Our Jimmy Hoffa governor, Bill Ritter” … It has a nice ring to it.
Ritter campaigned under the guise of a moderate “new Democrat” but now we know he’s simply a toady to labor bosses and the old vestiges of his party — a bag man for unions and special interests.
Hey, Lefties. The Post said it, not me. “Our Jimmy Hoffa governor, Bill Ritter, the union bag man.” Sounding even nicer …
The governor on Friday unveiled his plan to drive up the cost of doing business in Colorado by forcing collective bargaining on thousands of state employees. We’re concerned this may be the beginning of the end of Ritter as governor.
I wouldn’t have used the word concerned - how about hopeful? Read the rest of this entry »
I would be lying to say I didn’t find poll results like this a little disconcerting: “More than half of GOP evangelicals might consider third-party candidate” if the Republicans nominate Giuliani for President. Except when you look at it closely, it doesn’t really say that much. If you threw a party and ordered food based on the number who said they might consider attending, you very well could end up begging guests to take large portions of the leftovers home, or end up putting a lot in the freezer afterwards.
Perhaps a more meaningful headline would have read: “Nearly half of GOP evangelicals won’t even consider bolting the party, regardless of nominee.” That’s debatable, I suppose.
Regardless, short of a real and specific third-party conservative candidate tested in the survey, the results are essentially meaningless. Some may say continuing to tout such fluff in the headlines could be part of a well-coordinated liberal media agenda to stir up discontent and dissension among their political rivals. I might consider accepting that possibility, but usually dismiss the conspiracy claptrap for what it is.
Nevertheless, recent hypothetical Hillary-vs-Rudy polls show a little momentum on the former New York mayor’s side and the race within the margin of error. You never know, influential and powerful friends of presumed Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton might consider creative ways of bringing down probably her most threatening potential Republican rival.
As an evangelical Christian who happens to be a Republican, I can tell you I haven’t talked to anyone in these circles say yet that they would jump ship because of Rudy. Then again, politics doesn’t come up a lot in my real-world conversations during an off-election year. It’s pretty safe to assume that this observation can be extrapolated to the broader population, considering how few people obsess over daily political events or even have given serious thought to which candidate should earn their support.
Most of us political wonk-types therefore might consider the possibility that there isn’t a lot of meaning to any of these polls at this point … But then what would we write about?
