Colorado Democratic Attorney General candidate Stan Garnett has unleashed campaign broadsides at incumbent Republican John Suthers for accepting campaign contributions from members of the payday lending industry while fulfilling his legal duty to help write new industry regulations. Certainly not illegal, but Garnett contended that Suthers should avoid the appearance of impropriety and return the contributions.
But should the same standard apply, of all campaigns, to Stan Garnett? What about accepting campaign contributions from attorneys with pending cases before the state, cases the Attorney General will have to defend. Should Garnett return these contributions?
- J. Eric Elliff; Case: McLane Western v. Colo. Dept. of Revenue
- Kenzo Kawanabe; Case: Lobato, et al., v. State of Colorado, et al.
You may remember Lobato as the case where the Colorado Supreme Court decided it has the power to determine school funding policies, the case where your taxpayer dollars are now funding both sides of the argument. It’s also a case Garnett has said he “will work very hard to settle” (presumably on the backs of taxpayers).
So are the attorneys’ campaign contributions to Garnett a big deal? No more or less than Suthers’ contributions that Garnett has complained about. Fair enough. Election season politics. The Democratic challenger has tried to catch on against a popular Republican Attorney General. At least he tried.