Legislative Update 6/1/2010

I can’t believe it is June already! This note is titled “legislative update” but in reality all of the members of the state house have transitioned to campaign mode. So, this is really a legislative and campaign update.

As a candidate for office I spend a lot of time talking to voters on the campaign trail about what the legislature did and where I stand on the issues facing the state of Colorado. As I described in my last update, the legislature was very busy this year working on balancing the budget, teacher evaluation and performance, payday lending reform, and last but not least – rafting.

During my last two campaign events there was a lot of conversation about the teacher evaluation bill (SB191) and the rafting bill (HB1188). Based on the questions I have received, I think it would be helpful to say a few things about each of these bills here in this update. In addition I want to offer a few comments on some constituent concerns that have come to my attention, and, summarize the current status of my re-election efforts.

Constituent Communication Concerns

Between the rafting bill and the teacher bill, the members of the House received thousands of individual emails from people all over the state. While I was able to track most of the ones that came from within the district, I know there are some that I missed.

I am in the process of going back through the emails that came in to my office to try and figure out what happened when my state computer got a virus and I lost over 2000 emails that were on the server. Although I asked my aide (a part time employee working for free half the time during the session) to identify the ones from within the district – my fear is that there are others that I didn’t respond to. I will be working on that this week.

Also, just so folks are aware, if you left a message at the office in Denver on the phone, I have not received it. That number is 303-866-2945. The legislature is not in session, so there is no one to check those messages on my behalf. It is also not an option to check the capitol messages remotely.

If you want to give me a call, please don’t hesitate to call the cell at 970-209-5537. The general assembly adjourned on May 12th so I have been traveling and working out of my home in Gunnison since then. I’m sorry if you left a message there and didn’t get a call back from me.

Campaign Update

I am still waiting for a ruling in the lawsuit that is pending in federal court regarding access to the ballot by unaffiliated candidates. The basis of the complaint is the fact that unaffiliated candidates are treated differently under the law than affiliated candidates.

Tomorrow volunteers from my campaign are submitting petition signatures to the Secretary of State in order to comply with the requirements for petitioning onto the ballot if the court rules in my favor. Many people worked very hard to obtain the signatures and I am VERY GRATEFUL for their hard work and support. Nearly everyone we talked to felt that unaffiliated candidates should not be prohibited from accessing the ballot.

Regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit my campaign is under full swing. I want to thank my network of supporters and volunteers for their willingness to help me serve another term in the Colorado General Assembly.

My candidacy as an independent is not anti-democrat, or anti-republican – it is pro-district.  It is time for our elected officials at the state level to put the people first, not the party. And I know the extent to which the system needs improvement having witnessed the partisanship first hand.

We need to get back to focusing on what the people want vs. election-year political gains for the parties. I if you re-elect me you will get continued commitment to the district. My opponents are not in a position to make the district their first priority. If you want to help me with this important effort, I would be very appreciative of financial donations (to purchase signs, flyers, and media) and/or offers to help.

Legislative Questions

SB191, the teacher and principal evaluation bill, has passed and has been signed by the Governor. After the bill was significantly amended I felt comfortable supporting it. Based on the input I have received at campaign and public events it looks like there is a lot of cautious support for the bill. Because there is so much interest in this landmark legislation, I have decided to coordinate a discussion in the district between the various interested parties.

My thought at this point is to get school board members, teachers, administrators and parents together to discuss the new policy. Please let me know if you would like to participate in this conversation – I think it is needed to try and get everyone’s concerns out on the table and to try and come to a mutual understanding regarding the elements of the bill.

HB1188, the commercial rafting bill. As I talk with people in the district, I find that there is still a lot of confusion regarding what the bill would have done and what it actually said. This bill would have limited floating to rivers that were being commercially run by regulated outfitters. The outfitters were required to have floated a river commercially in the last two years. The bill was needed to address a statewide problem. Since HB1188 died the current law stands, and the conflicts on our rivers between landowners and boaters are bound to continue.

I really thought that this approach would strike a balance between landowners and rafting interests, but it turned out that the opposition from the landowners was very strong. I know that the limited solution I put forward was not acceptable to the opposition, so I am not sure at this point what would work. Maybe the issue will be resolved this fall by the voters, or, maybe the issue just needs to be litigated by both sides. If it is litigated, the opponents to the bill argued that the result would be to open up all of the rivers and streams in the state.

Thanks again for your interest,

Sincerely,

Comments
  • Robert Lewis

    Hi,

    I just made a purchase from an internet retailer, and they sent me an email that says because of a new law they are required to send a list of all my purchases to the Colorado Government. This made me very angry. I suspect I am not alone.

    Robert Lewis
    Glenwood Springs

  • Kathleen Curry

    I appreciate the fact that Mr. Lewis has raised this issue, and frankly I am not surprised with his frustration. I voted against the bill that put this new tax into place, but it passed anyway.

    This issue was before the legislature as part of an overall package to eliminate certain existing tax exemptions in order to balance the state’s budget. When the package was being debated I pointed out that the legislature was doing the balancing process backwards – the state should find ways to significantly cut expenditures before we increase taxes on the public.

    But to be fair – that means cutting education funding, medicaid reimbursement rates, corrections, and higher education- all of these are services that are important to the public as well. So, we can’t have it both ways. In the case of charging a state sales tax on internet purchases – there was a strong argument in support of doing that to even the playing field for the direct retail operations that charge a sales tax for the same item.

    There was also the view that we don’t have the mechanisms in place to implement this new approach. I would have considered supporting it if I felt that the state had exhausted all of it’s options to decrease expenditures and promote efficiency. I don’t believe we have done that yet.

Leave a Comment