Former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper

What’s at stake in Colorado’s 2020 U.S. Senate race, and why should we vote for John Hickenlooper? Just imagine the next two hypothetical paragraphs.

In 2021, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez drafts the most brilliant bill ever, and by some stroke of luck she’s able to call it the “PERFECTION Act.” It funds COVID-19 vaccines and PPE and treatments affordable to all, sets plans to slash greenhouse gas emissions, outlines how to revitalize the economy in ways that benefit lower and middle classes, fosters a national dialog on race and sex dynamics, dials back domestic militarization, provides funding for scientific research and development, severely curtails homelessness and hunger, and includes all kinds of other great stuff. The bill passes the House easily, and President Biden is anxious to sign it into law.

But there’s one big problem. Cory Gardner won the Senate race, contributing to Republicans having a 51-49 voting majority in the Senate. As a result, Mitch McConnell’s still the Senate Majority Leader, and he’s got options – a) completely avoid or seriously delay introducing the bill in the Senate, or b) let it go through committees and to the Senate floor, then laugh like a cartoon villain on sedatives when Gardner casts the completely predictable deciding vote in opposition.

People – the PERFECTION Act is fiction (that’s a double entendre) but the paragraph following describes McConnell’s real-life M.O. on progressive bills and Gardner’s likely voting decisions to a “T “ – and I will bury my lede no deeper. This is my strong endorsement of John Hickenlooper in Colorado’s 2020 U.S. Senate race, and I hope you will deeply consider the reasons why giving the former Guv’nor your vote is of utmost importance.

Governor John HIckenlooper facing the press and addressing the people from the State Capitol in Denver, Colorado.

On a personal level, I’ve met John Hickenlooper, and he’s a decent, hard-working and competent man with a solid lifetime record of accomplishments, which includes earning a master’s in geology, private sector experience, and about 15 years of high-level governing. But I can’t emphasize enough that this race could determine majority control of the Senate, so here are five Twitter-ready bullet points as to why this is vitally important if anyone hopes the next several years might produce successful federal progressive/liberal bills or progressive/liberal appointments:

  • If Dems take the Senate majority, they can pass progressive or liberal bills coming over from the House, which isn’t happening today!
  • If Dems take the Senate majority, they can confirm progressive or liberal nominations for major positions including Supreme Court Justices and Secretaries of key departments.
  • If Dems take the Senate majority, Mitch McConnell is gone, at least as Majority Leader.
  • The majority party in the Senate typically chooses committee chairpersons and enjoys majority memberships on committees.
  • Even if the Senate winds up split at 50-50, the Vice President casts tiebreaker votes. Based on current polling, chances are reasonable that the next VP will be current Sen. Kamala Harris, a California Democrat.

If you want to stop reading here, the points above are strong reasons by themselves to vote Hickenlooper in 2020, even if they’re not specifically about Hick. But I like expounding, and I invite you to read on for some deeper understanding.

Majorities Matter

Sen. Heath and Rep. Singer got a youth sports safety bill signed into law in 2013, but couldn’t get another bill done in 2015. Same Governor John Hickenlooper who would have signed the bill, but the new GOP Senate majority killed – yes, a youth sports safety bill – in committee.

I’ve been there. I worked on staff for the Colorado State Senate in 2013 and 2014, and in the 2014 election the balance shifted from 18-17 Democratic to 18-17 Republican. The difference was night and day, and it was blatantly obvious when the new majority took over in 2015 knowing they had political power to use. Progressive bills that would have been signed into law in 2013 or 2014 were instead often killed in their first 2015 Senate committee, while right-wing bills that no progressive could ever support often passed the full Senate, fortunately normally only to be defeated in the Democratic-controlled House.

So, repeat the phrase “straight party-line voting” with me. It’s been a reality in politics since Julius Caesar was a pup, and it’s literally why progressive federal legislation has little or no chance of passing right now – since today’s Senate will stick knives in these bills’ backs.

Democrats have not had simultaneous control of the Presidency, House, and Senate since 2010, but there’s a reasonable chance Dems could assume control of all three again in 2020. This means progressive bills would finally have a chance at passing committees, passing both chambers of Congress, and being signed into law.

But the Senate results are likely to be close, so yes, I’m saying that this means Coloradans who are interested in progressive legislation need to vote for Hickenlooper. Looking at other Senate races nationwide, it’s possible the Republican Kentucky Senator McConnell could lose in 2020, or Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst, or Maine Sen. Susan Collins, or Montana Sen. Steve Daines, or South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, but these are by no means guaranteed Dem pickups since none of the Dem challengers have consistently posted overwhelming leads in polling.

Hickenlooper, on the other hand, has fairly consistently polled ahead of Gardner, but polls mean nothing without voters turning out en masse. Senate terms are for six years, which means this election could determine at least part of which party holds the majority for not only 2021-22, but also for the two election cycles to follow. Much is at stake!

Yes, Hick’s Got Progressive History

Hick and hundreds of friends at the joyous 2013 ceremony for Colorado’s first successful civil unions bill!

Here, I will ask Hick skeptics to look just a little more comprehensively than the single-phrase, limited-issue judgments of a person who’s served two terms as Mayor of Denver and two terms as Governor of Colorado. He’s had broad and deep experience in issues possibly impactful to a very wide range of people, so please hear me out in this section because I’ve seen some of what I’m about to describe with my own two eyes.

One of Hick’s most important roles should he win the Senate race, especially in his early years, will be to cast votes on bills he didn’t sponsor. Nobody rooted in reality expects him as a centrist or center-leftist to draft anything like my fictional PERFECTION Act, nor should they. But he would potentially help decide the fate of bills sponsored by legislators like Sen. Bernie Sanders or AOC or Colorado’s own Rep. Joe Neguse – and the process of coming to these types of tough decisions is somewhat similar to what he had to do as Governor.

Over the course of Hick’s eight years as Governor, he signed roughly 3,100 bills into law, and only vetoed 23 along with a partial veto in the 2011 budget. This is not exactly the same as the role of a Representative or Senator, since legislators can vote against a bill that might still pass, while a Governor’s veto kills a bill unless the legislature can override. But it does show he’s evaluated large volumes of legislation and made some hard calls, and here are a few pretty progressive bills on which Hick took heat from opponents, but he signed them into law.

  • Undocumented students from Colorado gained the right in 2013 to attend college at in-state tuition rates (SB 13-033)
  • Colorado’s election system, which includes mail ballots for all and same-day voter registration, became law in 2013 (HB 13-1303). In 2020, we’re getting mentions in the press calling our system the “gold standard,” while voters in other states are still wondering if they’ll need to risk their health to vote in long lines or at crowded polling places.
  • Civil unions for same-sex couples became legal in 2013 (SB 13-011), plus Hick went to the lengths of calling a special legislative session in 2012 when then-Speaker of the House Frank McNulty used stall tactics to kill a civil unions bill during the regular session.
  • Undocumented people of legal age gained the right to earn a Colorado driver’s license (SB 13-251)
  • In the wake of the Aurora and Sandy Hook mass shootings, the state passed HBs 13-1224 and 13-1229, which between them created a limit on ammunition magazine capacity and closed background check loopholes for firearm purchases and transfers.

Appointments: It’s How We Build and Steer the Ship of State

If you don’t want four more years of Betsy DeVos, you need a new Senate majority and President!

One of the Constitutional roles of a U.S. Senator is to provide “advice and consent” on treaties and Presidential nominations. Most of us don’t hear much about treaties anymore, so let’s turn to nominations. In many cases, the Senate can confirm or defeat a nomination with a simple majority vote. The list of key positions in which the Senate provides or denies confirmation includes Supreme Court Justices; federal judges; Secretaries and Deputy/Assistant/Under Secretaries of departments such as EPA, Education, or Energy; scores of other director positions, and ambassadorships.

But the above paragraph doesn’t do the magnitude of Senatorial power justice, since Senate confirmation is required for about 1,200 positions. If you’re really interested in understanding the scope of what positions the Senate confirms and you only have a minute, just click this link and scroll to the end.

Without exaggeration, these appointments set the direction and tone for the operation of the entire federal government. If you’re politically aware, this matters. Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, and the next President is likely to nominate a new Justice or two. Progressives and liberals alike disliked the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh, but it was only possible because Republicans controlled the Presidency and the Senate. And Republican control of the Presidency and Senate is also how we got Betsy DeVos at Education, William Barr as Attorney General, Scott Pruitt at EPA, Rick Perry at Energy, and numerous federal judges nominated and confirmed since Trump took office.

Nobody in their right mind should expect Joe Biden to make the same types of nominations as President Donald Trump. But without a Senate majority, Biden’s nominations might not pass, and if Trump should win in 2020, his nominations for the next four years probably won’t be blocked unless Democrats control the Senate. The potential benefits or consequences around high-level appointments are immense, and voters would be doing the right thing if they voted Hickenlooper for this reason alone.

Gardner Smiles for the Cameras, Then Votes Against Your Interests

Well, he cleans up nicely.

Coloradans don’t have to watch this “Cardboard Cory” video to understand that they haven’t seen a lot of Cory Gardner over the past several years. Now – oddly, just in time for the election – we’re getting inundated with big-money ads showing that smilin’ face and selling that “aw shucks” just-an-average-guy-from-the-Plains image. But remember, this is the same guy who voted with a straight face to kick more than 20 million Americans off of health care coverage, which just isn’t all that friendly considering lack of coverage can (how can I put this tastefully?) kill people.

So, here are a few big reasons why anyone from the political center to the far left should take one simple action to get Gardner out of the Senate – vote John Hickenlooper.

No Health Care Hero: Gardner took office as a U.S. Representative by winning in 2010, the year of the Tea Party when Republicans took back the House after passage of the Affordable Care Act. He literally ran part of his campaign on repealing the ACA, and proceeded to vote against it early and often. Here’s a link to a scoresheet showing 17 of Gardner’s votes in the House or Senate that are simply not in the interest of better health care opportunities for those who need them. Readers should note that his first House vote on the ACA was on a 2011 bill not at all ambiguously titled “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act.” Never mind the pesky fact that U.S. full-time job totals increased every year since Obamacare passed, at least until the pandemic hit.

And furthermore, despite Gardner’s undeniable and repetitive voting record on killing the ACA – an existing law that includes coverage protections in case of pre-existing conditions – he had the chutzpah to introduce a bill just around election time about protecting coverage for pre-existing conditions!

Hick, on the other hand, was Governor during the early years of Obamacare, and signed a number of positive healthcare bills into law during his tenure. Colorado State Rep. Chris Kennedy lays the record out nicely in this guest opinion, but in short it includes signing bills establishing the Colorado Health Care Exchange (SB 11-200), expanding Medicaid (SB 13-200, exactly one Republican vote in favor), creating the Colorado Commission on Affordable Health Care (SB 14-187), and helping to blaze the trail on “reinsurance” legislation designed to stabilize regional cost differences for coverage – though it didn’t actually pass until 2019.

No Environmental Angel: Cory’s once again posing for TV ads with windmills in the background, but his lifetime voting score with League of Conservation Voters is a decidedly un-green 11%. For comparison, current Democratic U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet is at 89%. Bennet is probably considered a centrist, like Hick, and it’s about as safe a bet as you can place that Hick’s lifetime score will be more similar to Bennet’s than Gardner’s. And in general, it’s one of the best illustrations I can find against the folly of using the tired old phrase “lesser of two evils.” Anyone who cares to look will find vast differences in voting records between Democrats and Republicans on countless issues, and it’s flat-out not evil to choose the candidate most likely by far to pass bills serving your best interests.

I won’t deny that many folks I know criticize Hick for some of his stances and past actions on oil and gas (thanks, Captain Obvious), but here’s a direct quote from Gardner: “This debate that’s taking place in Colorado right now about whether or not we should ban fracking is an existential threat that we have to kill and we have to stop.” Again, no ambiguity. Gardner voted for oil and gas lobbyist David Bernhardt for Secretary of the Interior, while Bennet voted no. He’s taken the second-largest amount of contributions from oil and gas interests among all Senate candidates for 2020 (Bernie’s at #7 on this list, BTW), and ranked third among all Senate candidates in 2014. Gardner voted for the Offshore Energy and Jobs Act, for those of you in love with offshore drilling. And it was ages ago in Twitter-years so it’s basically forgotten, but he even attended a fundraiser with British Petroleum lobbyists as a House candidate in 2010, shortly after BPs Deepwater Horizon disaster killed workers and fouled the Gulf of Mexico with crude oil.

Even on oil and gas, progressives won’t win by giving Gardner another six years in office – especially if it gives Republicans the Senate majority – and there are hundreds of other issues on which people from center to the left will fare much better with Hickenlooper.

Predictable Right-Wing Appointments: Gardner certainly voted to confirm Trump Supreme Court nominees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh as expected (Bennet voted against both), but he also voted against only one major Trump nominee over the course of Trump’s first two years in office. For the environmentally sensitive, this includes voting for the ethically-challenged EPA critic Scott Pruitt to head – yes – the Environmental Protection Agency.

Reproductive Rights in Peril: The Denver Post ran a widely reviled endorsement editorial for Gardner’s first Senate race in 2014, in part claiming that Gardner was no threat to reproductive rights. The Post was wrong. During his years in Congress, he’s voted to defund Planned Parenthood at least 10 times. He once co-sponsored a federal fetal personhood bill, then told media during his first run for Senate that there “is no federal personhood bill.” In Feb. 2020, he voted for a bill that would have banned abortion after 20 weeks. But regardless of his voting record on bills, here’s an area where confirmations under a Republican Senate majority can really matter, since the farther the Supreme Court moves to the right, the more likely it is that Roe v. Wade could be repealed.

Tax Policy – Let Them Eat Cake: Gardner voted for Trump’s “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017,” which gave significant advantages to the already wealthy and greatly expanded the federal deficit. In fact, Trump told wealthy friends at Mar-A-Lago shortly after the bill became law: “You all just got a lot richer.” This is just not an example of progressive economic policy, and today both yearly deficits and the federal debt are growing, a handful of wealthy individuals or corporations are getting wealthier, and a large percentage of Americans are in real financial trouble. By the way, Bennet voted “no” on the 2017 bill.

Wrong Way on Weapons: Yes, the TV ads are blasting Hick for a couple instances of taking meals or travel expense, but Gardner has taken at least $3,939,199 in campaign contributions from the National Rifle Association. So, if we want to talk ethics, New York’s Attorney General has filed a legal action against the NRA alleging “years of runaway corruption and misspending,” NRA officials have been linked with convicted Russian operative Maria Butina, and more or less 10,000 Americans have been killed in firearms-related homicides every year that Gardner was in federal office.

Hick can Help Us Ditch Mitch

This fine gentleman would love two more years of power – or longer – to delay or kill liberal bills and nominations!

A potential side benefit of your vote for Hickenlooper would be knocking Mitch McConnell out of his post as Senate Majority Leader. This is a big deal. The paragraph below describes briefly a series of events regarding Merrick Garland’s Supreme Court nomination for which I will never forgive McConnell, but progressives and liberals alike must understand that he used power available to him only thanks to having a Republican majority in the Senate.

In 2016, President Obama nominated Garland to replace the late Antonin Scalia as Supreme Court Justice. However, McConnell refused to hold hearing or votes on this nomination – for a period of 293 days. In fact, upon Scalia’s passing in February, McConnell announced that he had no intentions of confirming an Obama appointment at all, and he lived up to that promise. As a result, Trump was able to get Neil Gorsuch appointed to replace Scalia, followed in 2018 by the Kavanaugh appointment. Today the Supreme Court has a conservative majority, when a Garland appointment might have kept the court at least somewhat more centrist even with Trump in office from 2017-2021.

Furthermore, the position of Senate Majority Leader has significant power in the progress or lack of progress in legislation. McConnell has actually described himself as the “Grim Reaper” of a “legislative graveyard” where left-leaning bills coming over from the House sit and rot without being heard or going to a vote. And if you’re among the millions of Americans on the verge of financial disaster due to the pandemic, you might want to take a closer look at having a Grim Reaper as Senate Majority Leader because that’s part of the reason why you’re not getting the relief you need.

In 2020, Colorado voters can vote for John Hickenlooper and, as a possible side benefit, dethrone the Grim Reaper. Mitch McConnell might still remain in the Senate in 2021, but if he’s a minority member he’ll have no power to sentence bills or nominations to the graveyard.

Hick History Tidbits

  • Jamestown and many Colorado communities suffered extreme damage in the 2013 floods, and Gov. Hickenlooper played a key leadership role in rescue and recovery efforts.

    Hick led Colorado in emergency rescue and recovery efforts during and after the severe 2013 floods, which required a multi-jurisdictional effort including FEMA, the National Guard, federal and state aid, local governmental action, and contributions from nonprofits and charity organizations.

  • Hick can take his share of credit for the rebuilding and revitalizing of Denver’s Lower Downtown by opening Wynkoop Brewery, Denver’s first craft brewpub in 1988. Coors Field was obviously of much greater magnitude, but those who have been Front Rangers for a while will remember LoDo as sort of a seedy area that was only worth visiting if you had a specific reason, like when I used to hit El Chapultepec once in a while for my high-quality jazz fix.
  • He was a key player in working to attract the Democratic National Convention to Denver in 2008, when some 75,000 people packed Mile High Stadium (that’s the only name I’ll ever use) to witness Obama accepting the party’s nomination, and the city was abuzz with activity and high-profile visitors for an entire week. The then-Mayor of Denver tackled the logistical challenges in planning the city’s role in such a massive event.
  • He took office as Governor in 2011, near the end of the last bad recession, and tirelessly worked tirelessly to attract and retain businesses and employees. Within several years, Colorado was regularly ranking near the top of U.S. states in various economic categories.

DC Gravy Train vs. Colorado Amendment 41 Rice Cakes

I support the strongest ethics in government possible, but readers should know the current TV ads against Hick are awfully sensationalized – plus, the worst ones are oddly paid for by the National Republican Senatorial Committee. He took office as Governor in 2011, and was always bound to the very strict campaign finance measure Amendment 41, while Gardner as a federal official has not been held to the same standards – and I’m not even saying that’s his fault. But the difference between State of Colorado officials and federal officials in campaign finance is like comparing apples to elephants.

Hick’s two violations you’ll hear allusions to on TV were for not directly paying for certain meals and some of the travel on two trips, and here’s a link to an interesting take saying it wasn’t even clear on one of the trips that these expenses weren’t already covered. He paid a $2,750 fine. But the ads are also trumpeting that he accepted “millions of dollars” while as Governor, and that’s extremely misleading. The money referenced in these ads was used for state programs, not for personal gain or campaigning. In fact, former Governors Bill Owens and Bill Ritter, as well as current Gov. Jared Polis, have all participated in similar public-private partnerships. The state legislature might look to boost transparency requirements around these programs this year – great – but they weren’t illegal then and they’re not now.

Meanwhile, the first time I saw Cory Gardner on TV was when the news played footage of him on a Florida junket crawling with high-dollar donors. I’ve already mentioned his breaking bread with BP polluters. He’s even been hit with several ethics complaints in 2020 though not found guilty, for allegedly improperly using footage from a Senate committee hearing in a campaign ad, and allegedly violating a gift ban by attending a lavish dinner party sponsored by the makers of expensive French champagne at a Palm Beach mansion. Heck, watch the 30-second ad!

And if you watched the ad, you might say to yourself “well, it was slick and produced for partisan gain by Gardner’s opponents.” Bingo! That’s what’s happening with the anti-Hick ads too. So, my challenge is asking people to look beyond relatively minor mistakes and media production value, and instead evaluate ethics on how bigger-picture actions on the massive policy issues facing America will determine our quality of life in the years to come. Think health care, public safety, family finances, environmental issues, education, and appointing the key personnel guiding big-picture policies.

Conclusion

John Hickenlooper would probably tell you himself that he’s not perfect, and of course someone would record him saying that, and it would be all over opposition TV ads for the next two months. But hopefully readers have noticed that I’ve used this piece not to paint the picture of PERFECTION – but to support a candidate who’s much better across the board on multiple progressive or liberal issues than his opponent.

To be clear, I’m emphasizing “across the board.” I’ve disagreed with Hick on specifics or positions, as have friends and bosses and co-workers. Nobody’s likely to get 100% of what they want out of him, but he’s going to beat Gardner on most issues that matter to people from the political center to left of center by, say, 80-20 or better – when you look at the total scorecard. In any game I’ve ever played, that’s a win.