1. Take the hard line in staff bargaining negotiations: Mike Antonucci of the Education Intelligence Agency (EIA) reports on the plight of the Ohio Education Association — whose employees today went on strike against the state teachers union
2. Contract picketing duty to non-union workers at minimum wage: Christine Hall of the Competitive Enterprise Institute highlights a new video of CEI’s Vincent Vernuccio crashing a carpenters’ union protest in Washington, D.C., only to find the picketers marching and chanting in the August humidity were non-union

Hey, you can’t make this stuff up. Great work as usual by EIA and CEI.

But I’m more interested in bringing attention to the down-ticket races, which Magellan features in its top line results, as follows:

• Republican Attorney General John Suthers holds a commanding 47-32 lead over Democratic challenger Stan Garnett
• Democratic State Treasurer Cary Kennedy trails GOP challenger Walker Stapleton by the modest margin of 42-38
• Appointed Democratic Secretary of State Bernie Buescher lags behind Republican rival Scott Gessler, 37-31

As is typical with these lower-profile, down-ticket races, a healthy share of undecideds (especially among unaffiliated voters) remains. But it seems more than reasonable at this point to say it’s a good year to run as a Republican in Colorado–unless your name is Dan Maes.

But a key reason why I wanted to bring attention to the down-ticket races is because the first head-to-head public survey of these races further belies the accuracy of the so-called Big Lie, er, Line on a certain local Lefty blog. It may be time for them to wake from their slumbers and update their results. In the meantime, please enjoy my amateur (and more accurate) attempt at election oddsmaking:

Governor Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper (3-1): Living the charmed life when looming scandals should be weighing him down
(R) Dan Maes (15-1): Fear not, Colorado, your “Bike to Work” Day looks safe… very safe
(AC) T. Tancredo (50-1): Constitution Party just thrilled to be talked about… 20% of the vote and they’ll be in Nirvana, er, heaven

Senate Line

(R) Ken Buck (3-1): Being called “extreme” by the NY Times is a shining badge of honor in Colorado, don’t you know?
(D) Michael Bennet (7-1): Wearing Obama like a pair of cement shoes in the East River, and “nothing to show for it”

Treasurer Line

(R) W. Stapleton (4-1): All he has to do is mention 1,000 times that his opponent wants to “drive a stake in the heart of” your right to vote on tax hikes
(D) Cary Kennedy (6-1): Even with a pretty face, it’s a bad year to be an incumbent Democrat officeholder

Att. Gen. Line

(R) John Suthers (3-1): Has a tougher battle on his hands than originally anticipated, but the Health Care Choice issue works to his advantage
(D) Stan Garnett (8-1): Progress Now tries to stay relevant by helping the Boulder D.A. win statewide

S.O.S. Line

(R) Scott Gessler (4-1): In the best of years to run as a Republican, his smart campaign advertising affords him some positive momentum heading into November
(D) Bernie Buescher (6-1): Can we have the Ritter appointee explain again why it’s just so hard to send military ballots out on time?

CD-2 Line

(D) Jared Polis (2-1): A Democrat who fits his district well in a year that doesn’t bode well for his party
(R) Stephen Bailey (15-1): Yeah, he’s a longshot, but if you’re going to include CD-6…

CD-3 Line

(R) Scott Tipton (4-1): Good news for the state rep from Cortez — this isn’t 2006
(D) John Salazar (5-1): If you ignore teeny-tiny issues like his vote for Obama Care, you might be able to pretend that he’s not a Pelosi-style Democrat

CD-4 Line

(R) Cory Gardner (4-1): If you’re living in complete denial of the wave that’s coming and want to imagine him as the underdog, time to go back and play in the pixie dust
(D) Betsy Markey (9-1): One of the bigger questions remaining is how well she’ll wear the “one-term” label… time to bring out Dana Carvey as Bush 41

CD-7 Line

(D) Ed Perlmutter (4-1): Having drifted steadily Leftward since he took his seat in Congress, he’s beginning to find it’s a bad year to wear the label “Pelosi-mutter”
(R) Ryan Frazier (5-1): Joe Biden can tell you how hard it is to run against a “mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy”

• John Hickenlooper (D): 36 percent
• Dan Maes (R): 24 percent
• Tom Tancredo (AC): 14 percent

Do the math. That means not only has support dropped for all three candidates, but that one in four voters isn’t settled on any of the choices. Add in those who say they are leaning in one direction or another, and it doesn’t get a lot better (in fact, it gets worse if you’re Tom Tancredo):

• John Hickenlooper (D): 40 percent
• Dan Maes (R): 32 percent
• Tom Tancredo (AC): 9 percent

That still leaves one in five voters who are left out in the cold on this one. Frankly, to see such a high level of undecideds in a high-profile race right before Labor Day has to be incredibly rare. Perhaps someone with a longer institutional memory can offer up a comparison.

But in this hyper-information age with the local 24 hour news cycle’s attention to this race, the early barrage of Hickenlooper TV advertising and the minute-by-minute interaction of new media, the low and declining levels of support for all three major candidates sends a strong message of voter dissatisfaction: Maes needs a bold move to sell Republicans on his qualifications and convictions (and money to do it), Tancredo needs to show he is something other than a spoiler (a tall order), and Hickenlooper just needs to hang on.

So yes, Hick the Democrat still is the odds-on favorite in a three-way race, but we might be seeing the dynamics of the gubernatorial showdown reshaping as we head into September and the home stretch.

Some observations on the survey:

• The voter sample was 38 percent Democrat, 35 percent Republican and 27 percent Unaffiliated, a reasonable model given expected high GOP voter intensity. If you weight the voting sample in line with actual active voter registrations (which would assume Democrats and independents are as enthused about voting this year as Republicans), Perlmutter still only leads 40-38. In other words, this race is absolutely a statistical tie.
• The incumbent is in rough shape to be tied with around 40 percent support two months before the election. Unlike the challenger Frazier who has 22-11 favorable-to-unfavorable and 60 percent name recognition, there’s very little room for Perlmutter to go up: 37 favorable, 39 unfavorable and nearly 97 percent name recognition. Expect the Democrat to step up the negative campaign forthwith.
• Among voters in Perlmutter’s home base of Jefferson County, Frazier maintains a 40-38 edge while outpolling the incumbent 43-36 in his own Arapahoe County backyard. Perlmutter narrowly wins the Democratic-leaning Adams County 41-37.
• In addition to the fact that 7th CD voters believe the country is on the wrong track by a 65-35 margin, they also substantially disapprove of Obama’s job performance (57-39) and have a strong negative opinion of Nancy Pelosi (61-28). Among CD-7 unaffiliated voters, 60 percent disapprove of Obama’s performance and 68 percent have a negative opinion of Pelosi.

The Denver Post‘s Curtis Hubbard takes note of the poll and remarks:

At a minimum, it’s worth keeping an eye on the 7th Congressional District race to gauge just how much momentum Republicans have this cycle.

To help understand why Frazier has built momentum in this race, check out the campaign’s YouTube page, and watch some of the clips from the recent Arvada Chamber of Commerce (“Arvada CC”) debate.

In the meantime, I won’t be holding my breath waiting for Colorado Pols to update their Big Lie, er, Line.

A few weeks ago, Bill Ritter-appointed Secretary of State Bernie Buescher brought his own campaign into the news limelight by requesting a waiver from the law requiring ballots be sent out to military personnel no later than 45 days before the general election. By doing so, Buescher opened the door to accusations that he was trying “to shaft military voters.”

Last week Brad Jones from Face The State reported on Buescher’s national television appearance on Fox News where he sought to justify the waivers, noting:

…it’s hard to understand why Buescher is allowing himself to become the national poster boy for military voting snafus when innovative solutions are well within reach.

No surprise then that Buescher’s Republican challenger (and Army veteran) Scott Gessler should jump on the issue and call him out for his actions. In a letter to the Grand Junction Sentinel, Gessler faulted Buescher for not doing his due diligence and for failing to display a “can-do attitude.”

And now, today comes word that the Department of Defense has denied the waiver request from Colorado — along with requests from 3 other states, D.C. and the Virgin Islands.

The nicest thing you can say about Secretary of State Bernie Buescher in this situation is that ensuring our military personnel have equal and fair ballot access isn’t exactly a high priority. Time now works against the Western Slope Democrat. Will he start working on a creative solution, or hope that voters don’t take notice? Because failure to comply with the 45-day time frame will open up the state of Colorado to a lawsuit.

By my reckoning the Secretary of State has about three weeks (until September 18) to get ballots out to our Colorado-resident servicemen and women. Let’s just hope Buescher’s actions end up having the least possible negative impact on our military personnel serving in dangerous war zones and other far reaches. Of all people, their right to help decide the democratic elections process should remain sacred. In the meantime, the appointed Secretary of State may have handed a winning issue to his Republican challenger.

According to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll, Hickenlooper currently leads Republican Dan Maes, 41-33, with 3rd-party candidate Tom Tancredo picking up 16 percent. In a hypothetical head-to-head matchup, Hickenlooper and Maes are tied at 45.

Many of you know I have devoted several postings to analyze this year’s showdown for the Colorado state house and Colorado state senate. Many of these races remain critically important even as they are outshone by higher-profile statewide races (and have become even more important in light of the folly that is the governor’s race in this state) — including the 22 candidates participating at R Block Party tomorrow. The state representatives of today also help form the bench for runs at higher office in the future.

The R Block Party’s second annual picnic includes a live and silent auction, baked goods sale, and of course, plenty of opportunities to write good old-fashioned checks directly to one or more of the candidates. If you can do only one tangible thing for the cause of limited, fiscally responsible government over the next few weeks, make it this event!

This is the day on which the average American has earned enough gross income to pay off his or her share of the spending and regulatory burdens imposed by government at the federal, state, and local levels.

The cost of government at all levels consumes about 64 percent of the average Coloradan’s gross income (compared to the national average of 63.41 percent). There’s a less-than-inspiring thought for the day. If that doesn’t help focus your energies on advancing liberty and limited government for the upcoming fall elections, I’m not sure what will.

This morning featured the first showdown of Colorado 7th Congressional candidates at a chamber of commerce-sponsored debate. It was practically in my backyard, but who has $20 or more to swing for such luxuries?

The only coverage of the debate I’ve found is from the Denver Post‘s Lynn Bartels. With her former fave Lang Sias out of the 7th CD race, guess whom Bartels ended up showering the most attention on? Not rising Republican star Ryan Frazier. Not incumbent Pelosi Democrat Ed Perlmutter. Who then?

If you guessed Libertarian Buck Bailey (without reading the blog post), you win tonight’s star prize: a self-congratulatory pat on the back and a warm heaping helping of self-esteem. Taking nothing else into account, one is left to infer from the Post‘s coverage that the exchange between the two major party candidates was somewhat less than interesting. (I mean, I’m sure Mr. Bailey is a nice guy and everything….)

But the Ryan Frazier campaign had a different take. Full press release from his campaign below the fold:

Instead of taking responsibility for his job-killing votes in the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Golden) used the same tired rhetoric of the Democratic Party by blaming former President George W. Bush for our prolonged economic recession at this morning’s Arvada Chamber of Commerce debate. Perlmutter’s Bush blame-game was met with jeers from the crowd.

“The Pelosi-Perlmutter agenda has done nothing to help get Americans back to work,” Ryan Frazier, Republican nominee for the 7th Congressional District, said. “Ed needs to stop making excuses and take responsibility for the failed policies of this Congress.”

Perlmutter also falsely claimed President Bush left a $1.3 trillion budget deficit when he left office. The budget deficit in 2008, Bush’s last year, was an unacceptable $438 billion. Despite criticizing Bush for his spending habits in 2007, Perlmutter has since voted to more than triple the budget deficit, to $1.4 trillion, in just two years.

“Since Ed took office in January of 2007, Colorado’s unemployment rate has doubled,” Frazier continued. “Americans want new solutions, not more of the same.”

In 2006, Perlmutter said he would NOT mandate businesses to provide healthcare to their employees. Yet, this year, Perlmutter flip-flopped and voted for the most intrusive and expansive healthcare mandate in history.

“Ed went to Washington to change it. Instead, Washington changed Ed.” Frazier concluded. “It’s time for a new way forward.”

It’s no coincidence that during my phoned-in appearance this morning on the local Jim Pfaff Show with guest host Kelly Maher, I explained the desperation behind Congressional Democrats’ escalating strategy to blame President Bush for the nation’s woes. If the theme is left out of any other coverage of today’s debate, maybe we can expect some attention next time around.

Which candidate is looking for and talking about solutions? Which candidate is stuck in the blame game of the past?

Drifting further Leftward during his time inside the Beltway, Ed Perlmutter shows why holding on to his seat will require a bitter fight to the finish this fall. The real untold political story is what impact this first debate will have on a race that has implications for which party will control the lower house of Congress in 2011.

Anyway, Ballotpedia’s Leslie Graves this week announces a study that should attract significant interest and involvement: “Is the tea party movement impacting state legislative elections?” More information is here, including a direct link to a survey that I encourage all Colorado Tea Party and other liberty group leaders to chime in on. I certainly hope that Colorado is setting the example of making a positive difference in state legislative races, and that other states are on board as well.

These races are where local groups can exert the most leverage and see tangible results during the upcoming election. It’s also how the conservative, pro-liberty team builds up a bench for bigger races in the future.

We’re not talking about the popularity of candidates vying in well-publicized elections, which often feature a significant undecided vote. What do you do when 65 percent of likely voters confess they don’t even know three Colorado Supreme Court justices are up for retention? You’ve got to get the message out.

Well, for the 894 voters tested from all around Colorado, learning a little basic information makes a difference:

Made aware of the anti-taxpayer decisions of the incumbent Colorado Supreme Court justices appearing on the November ballot, an overwhelming majority of the state’s likely voters say they will opt against retaining the justices for another 10-year term.

So while nearly two-thirds of likely voters acknowledge they don’t even know they can vote state supreme court justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez and Nancy Rice up-or-down, when they learn a little bit about their anti-taxpayer decisions nearly 8 in 10 say they’ll vote the judges out. Essentially CTBC’s major metric of success. But that’s about 700 voters on board. How do you reach 700,000? Yeah, that’s not the good news part.

Especially not as long as the governor’s race remains in such turmoil for conservatives, it’s a harder sell. With the campaign on a strong current trajectory toward electing Democrat John Hickenlooper, any advantage of clearing the bench is minimized. The clock is ticking. The longer the Maes-Tancredo-Hick showdown persists as it has, the harder it is to get people excited about CTBC.

Yet this survey shows that voters are open to the message. So close. It remains to see exactly what kind of impact the grassroots campaign has on retaining the three liberal state supreme court justices. Because if nothing else, CTBC has done a tremendous service in raising awareness about judicial elections and the need to scrutinize their records. Of course, the strong message of successfully voting one or more of the crew off the bench would be ideal.

A classic case of good news, bad news. CTBC clearly has a winning message, but outside factors conspire to make getting the message out there a daunting, difficult task.

But all the speculation now is around tomorrow’s deadline for Maes to announce who his running mate will be. As Amy Oliver ably speculates, one of the two finalists almost certainly is Tambor Williams of Greeley. While she won’t wow anyone with big name recognition, she would balance Maes’ weaknesses with her experience as a four-term state legislator, head of the Department of Regulatory Agencies and appointed service on the state’s Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission, in addition to her private legal practice. In 2002 Williams signed the Colorado Taxpayers’ Pledge.

We’ll know for sure tomorrow whether Maes-Williams will be Colorado’s Republican ticket for 2010.

For those who are wondering, my views about Dan Maes’ candidacy pretty much line up with what Rossputin wrote this morning (except I am more inclined at this point to vote for Maes than for the Libertarian candidate).

I know I’m biased, but watching this video is 4 minutes well spent if you want to understand how some Colorado unions representing teachers and other school employees put money and power before common decency. Watch non-union Pueblo school employee Becky Robertson tell about the year she missed the September deadline to opt out of paying union fees because of family medical emergencies, and what happened when she asked for the money back:

Thank you, Colorado teachers unions (not to mention the school district negotiators that agree to make these deals). And yes, it’s entirely legal in Colorado. For more information on the school districts where non-union teachers and other employees have to go through pains each year to opt out of expensive union fees, and the deadlines for both union and non-union members to opt out (usually in August and/or September), check out the Independent Teachers website.

“My understanding is, from Doug, that Doug had written the stuff, and he noticed it was on his opponent’s website and was not pleased with that discovery,” said David K. Williams Jr., chairman of the Libertarian Party of Colorado. [emphasis added]

Essentially hearsay.

Unfortunately, the Gazette opted for a sensational he said / he said story rather than perform a little basic investigation. Owen Hill’s campaign did the homework for the reporter showing that Hill’s statements were posted on his blog in January, months before the Libertarian even had declared as a candidate or put up a website.

But not before the Lefty propagandists at Colorado Pols honed in on the story like a pack of wild hyenas pouncing on vulnerable prey. Red meat for the True Believers! I’m sure you would be shocked — shocked! — to learn that the Pols wildly assumed that Owen Hill was in the wrong and seized the opportunity to attack the Republican candidate in one of the key races to determine next year’s control of the state legislature. (Smelling salts available for those with a fresh case of the vapors.)

The Lefty blog’s argument basically boils down to this: That the Republican candidate must have been in the wrong because he was insufficiently indignant about the accusations of a third-party candidate with no money and no presence on the campaign trail. (Well, it wasn’t a case of the vapors, but that sure was one good, soul-cleansing, knee-slapping laugh riot!)

Because the Gazette is a professional journalistic enterprise, I fully expect Colorado Springs’ daily newspaper to follow up with a well-placed story featuring this new evidence and a clear correction. No such expectation for the political hacks over at the Pols. But I always could be pleasantly surprised.

On a side note, Libertarian candidate Doug claimed in the Gazette that he’s been “honing some of the political phrases since 1979″ (and I thought I knew some slow writers!), but that probably doesn’t include his website’s statement on education, which reads in part:

In recent years our freedom to choose what is best for our children has increased through the creation of magnet and charter schools, and resurgence in home schooling.

For the record, there were roughly zero charter schools in existence in 1979.

A Colorado political survey released late this past week has garnered little attention. The survey (PDF) of 1,091 likely voters was conducted by my friend and Right-leaning political consultant Jim Pfaff of Innovative Data Solutions. Among the interesting top-line findings:

1. U.S. Senate: Ken Buck leads appointed incumbent Democrat Michael Bennet, 49-37
2. Governor: In the existing 3-way race, Democrat John Hickenlooper pulls down 38 percent, followed by 30 percent for Republican Dan Maes and 19 percent for third-party Tom Tancredo
3. However… in a hypothetical 2-way matchup, Maes leads Hick 44-42
4. Interestingly, while voters oppose the idea of replacing Maes by a margin of 43-26, with 31 percent undecide (though the numbers aren’t broken down by party affiliation), Hick fares the worst head-to-head against a hypothetical GOP replacement candidate, 45-39
5. On a generic ballot ticket for the Colorado state legislature, Republicans outpoll Democrats 50-32 (!) — a finding that if correct and taken advantage of by hard work and smart campaigning translates to new majorities in the state house and state senate
6. Unsurprisingly, 58 percent declared “jobs and economy” as the “most important issue facing Colorado voters,” followed by “government spending” (16 percent) and “illegal immigration” (15 percent)
7. 39 percent of respondents self-identified as “conservative” and 7 percent as “Tea Party,” with 31 percent “moderate” and 16 percent “liberal”

While I find the results encouraging, it’s also worthwhile to note that I have yet to see the precise voter registration / party affiliation sample to see how reliably it fits with Colorado’s likely voter turnout in November. Judging by the self-identifying responses on ideology and how they compare with Gallup’s reported national picture, as well as top-line discrepancies with Rasmussen on the governor and Senate races, for now I’ll “conservatively” estimate the Innovative Data poll is about 2 to 5 points too optimistic in the GOP direction.

Still, from what I can see, that means:

• Ken Buck is leading Michael Bennet in the high single digits
• If Tom Tancredo dropped out of the race, Dan Maes essentially would be in a dead heat with John Hickenlooper
• Republicans enjoy nearly a 15-point lead on the generic ballot statewide for legislative seats

Translate: A golden opportunity lies out there for Republicans and conservatives. Even given the state of the governor’s race, all is far from lost and no GOP statewide candidate should be counted out. If GOP candidates for state legislature put in the hard work and heed good advice, new majorities should be coming into town. And we may see a few surprises roll in our direction come Election Day.

But I’d also feel better seeing more data from other polling outfits that substantiate some or all of these observations.