House District 38

House District 38

Not in House District 38? Click here to choose your customized guide.

Election Day is Tuesday, November 3!

The Progressive Voters Guide compiles the information that allows you to make informed decisions about the races on your ballot based on your values. Vote in every race! It’s our right and responsibility. Browse the categories at the left or select “Choose My Guide” to see races specific to you. And please share this guide with your friends and family.

Federal

President

  • Democrat
  • Joe Biden is one of the nation’s most experienced public servants, having served as a U.S. senator from Delaware for 36 years and the U.S. vice president for eight years. Biden is running on a comprehensive progressive platform.

    Biden has championed individual rights throughout his career — from spearheading the Violence Against Women Act to passing laws that expanded the definition of hate crimes to include those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Biden led the fight to pass the Brady Bill, which established the national firearms background check system, and helped secure a 10-year ban on assault weapons from 1994-2004. As vice president, Biden oversaw the implementation of one of the largest economic recovery plans in American history in 2009, saving the American automobile industry and millions of American jobs in all sectors of the economy. During the Obama/Biden administration, the United States made significant progress toward a clean energy economy and provided health coverage to millions of Americans via the passage of the Affordable Care Act — a law Biden has vowed to expand and improve.

    If elected president, Biden has pledged to work to reverse the damage from the last four years of partisan obstruction and executive branch policies solely benefiting the wealthy and well-connected. Biden supports a $15-per-hour minimum wage and 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all workers. He also seeks to address the country's racial wealth disparity, equal opportunity, and jobs gaps by empowering small-business creation and expansion in economically disadvantaged areas. On the climate crisis, Biden proposes net-zero CO2 emissions in the U.S. by 2050 and rejoining the Paris climate accords. On the immediate front, Biden has proposed a national crisis response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden’s experience handling the economic recovery with Obama after the Great Recession of 2009 will inform his actions to help individuals, families, small businesses, and local and state governments that are struggling badly as a result of the botched response to the pandemic. Biden will restore the long-standing precedent that public health decisions are best made by public health professionals.

    Biden has pledged to defend abortion rights, expand and protect union membership, bring together an equitable and diverse group of experts to handle the nation’s institutional racism crisis, and restore dignity to the office of president of the United States.

    Biden is the clear presidential choice for progressive voters.

    In this election, he faces Donald Trump — considered by progressives to be the most corrupt, incompetent, anti-progressive president in recent memory and perhaps in American history. Trump’s biggest achievement as president was forcing through a massive tax cut that overwhelmingly favored the wealthiest Americans, making the nation’s historic income-disparity problem even worse. Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Paris Climate Accords, making the U.S. one of very few countries that are not signatories. Trump’s administration has encouraged repeated unsuccessful attempts by Congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which has provided health coverage to millions of Americans, including a federal court challenge in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic to dismantle the law. Trump has supported racist immigration practices that contravene international law on the treatment of refugees.

    Trump’s decisions have trickled into even the most mundane things, affecting Americans on a daily basis. Trump scrapped a bill requiring airlines to disclose bag fees, blocked consumers from suing banks, ignored the growing crisis over student loans, lifted bans on transferring military equipment to local law enforcement which has exacerbated police-citizen conflicts, particularly in relation to Black Lives Matter protests, and has set off a trade war with China that has done tremendous economic damage to American agricultural producers and manufacturers.

    Controversies involving Trump’s presidency are too numerous to list here but include lying about mail voting to such a degree that social media platforms have been forced to remove his misinformation, racist, sexist, and defamatory statements against his political opponents, dispatching federal police to attack protesters in unmarked vehicles, installing corrupt and incompetent tools of special interest into every level of government, nominating federal judges and Supreme Court justices who seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, banning transgender Americans from military service, helping spread baseless conspiracy theories, defending the actions of overt white supremacists and racist nationalists, downplaying the severity of the coronavirus pandemic to the public despite detailed foreknowledge of the coming disaster, pursuing diplomacy with dictators while scorning traditional American allies, and changing federal guidelines to undermine racial equality. For a more comprehensive list, we encourage you to visit the Wikipedia page for Trump administration controversies.

    Evidence abounds showing that Trump never disassociated himself from his businesses and has used his office for personal enrichment. And let’s not forget he was impeached over revelations he first blocked military aid to Ukraine and then pushed its president to dig up damaging info on his political opponent as a “favor.”

    Trump must not only be defeated, but the margin of victory must be so resounding as to prevent him from calling the results of the election into question as he has already pledged to do.

    Joe Biden is one of the nation’s most experienced public servants, having served as a U.S. senator from Delaware for 36 years and the U.S. vice president for eight years. Biden is running on a comprehensive progressive platform.

    Biden has championed individual rights throughout his career — from spearheading the Violence Against Women Act to passing laws that expanded the definition of hate crimes to include those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. Biden led the fight to pass the Brady Bill, which established the national firearms background check system, and helped secure a 10-year ban on assault weapons from 1994-2004. As vice president, Biden oversaw the implementation of one of the largest economic recovery plans in American history in 2009, saving the American automobile industry and millions of American jobs in all sectors of the economy. During the Obama/Biden administration, the United States made significant progress toward a clean energy economy and provided health coverage to millions of Americans via the passage of the Affordable Care Act — a law Biden has vowed to expand and improve.

U.S. Senator

  • Former Colorado Gov. and incumbent U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper did not take the usual path into public office. After being laid off from his job as a geologist, he opened a successful brewpub. But as a small-business owner, he became involved in his community, and he ran for office. He served two terms each as mayor of Denver and governor of Colorado, using his unique perspective to bring people together to get things done.

    When Hickenlooper was sworn in as governor in 2010, Colorado ranked 40th among the states in job creation. By the time Hickenlooper left office eight years later, Colorado had the #1 economy in the nation. Under Hickenlooper, when he was governor, Colorado’s economy grew without leaving Coloradans behind. Hickenlooper expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 400,000 Coloradans and cut the uninsured rate by nearly two-thirds. He signed three landmark gun safety laws in 2013 that banned high-capacity magazines and required background checks for any firearm transfer. On the environment, Hickenlooper made Colorado the first state to limit methane pollution from oil and gas wells. Working with the General Assembly, Hickenlooper signed legislation to ensure every eligible registered voter in Colorado gets a mail-in ballot, made voter registration more accessible, and pushed for numerous other election reforms that have made Colorado a model for election innovation. He also signed historic legislation granting in-state tuition to DREAMers.

    Hickenlooper has vowed to improve and build on the Affordable Care Act and supports a federally administered public health coverage option. Hickenlooper recognizes the existential threat of climate change and favors a bold, science-based approach. He supports commonsense policies on gun violence, including restoring an assault weapons ban. Hickenlooper was the first governor of Colorado to apologize for the Sand Creek Massacre and has committed to listening to the voices of marginalized communities and rooting out systemic racism where it lurks in our society, from police brutality to immigration laws to racial disparities in economic status to access to quality education.

    Hickenlooper is the progressive voter’s best choice for U.S. senator.

    He faces incumbent U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner in this election. While in the Senate, Gardner has been a reliable Republican vote on the overwhelming majority of issues. He has supported Donald Trump’s position on votes 89% of the time, and Politico notes that Gardner is “reliably conservative on most issues.” In 2014, Gardner promised in a campaign ad to speak out when his party is wrong and called on Donald Trump to pull out of the race for president in October of 2016. Since then, however, Gardner has fully embraced Trump and was one of the first senators to endorse Trump’s reelection.

    From his earliest votes in Congress, Gardner has consistently sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He has voted to repeal the ACA and to replace it with a bill that would dramatically decrease health care coverage and increase the cost of coverage. He was quoted at a private luncheon that failing to repeal the ACA would result in fewer donations to Republicans, suggesting he is not motivated by the common good.

    Gardner has rejected most gun safety legislation throughout his career and is a top recipient of donations from the National Rifle Association. He has voted against expanding background checks to include gun show sales, which has been the law in Colorado since just after the Columbine High School shooting in 1999. He even voted against banning gun sales to people on the terrorist watch list.

    In a historic change of heart, The Denver Post editorial board declared in 2019 they made a mistake in their 2014 endorsement of Gardner, stating he “has been too busy walking a political tight rope to be a leader.”

    This race also has a Libertarian candidate: Raymon Doane. Doane is a Denver native who currently works for the Colorado Department of Revenue as a property tax specialist and business analyst. He previously ran for the state senate in 2016 as a Republican, and in 2018, he first filed to run for state treasurer and then for Congress against Democrat Diana DeGette as a Libertarian.

    Doane’s few public statements should give voters pause. While the country has been dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, Doane was quoted as saying, “The federal government should not have to intervene on behalf of local municipalities and states that make poor decisions during a pandemic.” He also has said he thinks public health mandates should be more like “suggestions.” Additionally, among the four policy positions Doane takes on his website, one statement endorsing an unregulated Second Amendment stands out: “The government should NEVER have a monopoly on force. The U.S. Senate must … refuse to vote for any legislation which limits an American’s right to self-defense.” These kinds of statements don’t represent Colorado progressives.

    Former Colorado Gov. and incumbent U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper did not take the usual path into public office. After being laid off from his job as a geologist, he opened a successful brewpub. But as a small-business owner, he became involved in his community, and he ran for office. He served two terms each as mayor of Denver and governor of Colorado, using his unique perspective to bring people together to get things done.

    When Hickenlooper was sworn in as governor in 2010, Colorado ranked 40th among the states in job creation. By the time Hickenlooper left office eight years later, Colorado had the #1 economy in the nation. Under Hickenlooper, when he was governor, Colorado’s economy grew without leaving Coloradans behind. Hickenlooper expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 400,000 Coloradans and cut the uninsured rate by nearly two-thirds. He signed three landmark gun safety laws in 2013 that banned high-capacity magazines and required background checks for any firearm transfer. On the environment, Hickenlooper made Colorado the first state to limit methane pollution from oil and gas wells. Working with the General Assembly, Hickenlooper signed legislation to ensure every eligible registered voter in Colorado gets a mail-in ballot, made voter registration more accessible, and pushed for numerous other election reforms that have made Colorado a model for election innovation. He also signed historic legislation granting in-state tuition to DREAMers.

Congress

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below congressional districts on your ballot.

1st Congressional District

U.S. Representative

  • Incumbent U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette is seeking reelection for what would be her 13th term representing Colorado’s 1st Congressional District. DeGette, a lawyer, is Colorado’s most senior national legislator, the dean of its nine-member delegation, and the state’s only woman in Congress.

    A lifelong Denverite, she has dedicated her career to protecting the environment, expanding access to health care, and fighting for reproductive justice. Before being elected to Congress, DeGette served two terms in the Colorado House of Representatives, where she authored an important law that protected access to abortion clinics. She continues this work in Congress as co-chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus.

    DeGette has been recognized for her ability to work across party lines to deliver results. Some of her biggest achievements include playing an important role in the passage of the Affordable Care Act, co-authoring an influential law that modernized our medical research fields, and spearheading two key pieces of legislation that made big improvements in protecting the safety of our nation’s food supply. As chair of a key oversight panel, DeGette has led the effort to hold the Trump administration accountable for separating undocumented children from their families.

    DeGette has also been an outspoken advocate for enacting commonsense gun safety measures, safeguarding Colorado’s public lands, and protecting American consumers. If reelected, DeGette will continue being the strong, progressive voice that Denver needs in Washington.

    Her Republican opponent, Shane Bolling, is a management consultant working in energy. He is also a Denver resident and a first-time candidate for office. Bolling has not taken any issue positions except for his unabashed support for Donald Trump. He retweeted a Twitter account called “When Is Trump Gone?” with “Not so fast my friend, 4years plus.” He has also retweeted another account that claimed the recent Black Lives Matter protests are the perfect advertising for Trump, commenting, “It’s why Colorado turns back Red 11.03.20 simple Safety & Security.” Bolling also retweets and comments on coronavirus conspiracy theories. He seems to take no positions on anything else.

    Diana DeGette

    Incumbent U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette is seeking reelection for what would be her 13th term representing Colorado’s 1st Congressional District. DeGette, a lawyer, is Colorado’s most senior national legislator, the dean of its nine-member delegation, and the state’s only woman in Congress.

    A lifelong Denverite, she has dedicated her career to protecting the environment, expanding access to health care, and fighting for reproductive justice. Before being elected to Congress, DeGette served two terms in the Colorado House of Representatives, where she authored an important law that protected access to abortion clinics. She continues this work in Congress as co-chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus.

    DeGette has been recognized for her ability to work across party lines to deliver results. Some of her biggest achievements include playing an important role in the passage of the Affordable Care Act, co-authoring an influential law that modernized our medical research fields, and spearheading two key pieces of legislation that made big improvements in protecting the safety of our nation’s food supply. As chair of a key oversight panel, DeGette has led the effort to hold the Trump administration accountable for separating undocumented children from their families.

    DeGette has also been an outspoken advocate for enacting commonsense gun safety measures, safeguarding Colorado’s public lands, and protecting American consumers. If reelected, DeGette will continue being the strong, progressive voice that Denver needs in Washington.

    Her Republican opponent, Shane Bolling, is a management consultant working in energy. He is also a Denver resident and a first-time candidate for office. Bolling has not taken any issue positions except for his unabashed support for Donald Trump. He retweeted a Twitter account called “When Is Trump Gone?” with “Not so fast my friend, 4years plus.” He has also retweeted another account that claimed the recent Black Lives Matter protests are the perfect advertising for Trump, commenting, “It’s why Colorado turns back Red 11.03.20 simple Safety & Security.” Bolling also retweets and comments on coronavirus conspiracy theories. He seems to take no positions on anything else.

6th Congressional District

U.S. Representative

  • Democrat
  • Incumbent U.S. Rep. Jason Crow, a lawyer and former Army Ranger who completed three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, is running for reelection in Colorado's 6th Congressional District. In 2018, he defeated longtime Republican incumbent Mike Coffman to become the first Democrat ever to represent this district.

    Before serving in Congress, Crow spent years helping veterans like himself who struggled to receive benefits, focusing his work on veteran homelessness and substance abuse issues. Then, during his first term, Crow stepped into the national spotlight as one of the seven impeachment managers who argued for Donald Trump’s removal from office during the Senate trial. Crow made the case that Trump put both Ukraine’s safety and the U.S.’s national security at risk by withholding military aid in exchange for political favors.

    Crow’s district is the most diverse in Colorado, with 1 in 5 residents being born outside the United States; Crow has said this is what makes his community such a special place to live. He supports protecting DREAMers and passing comprehensive immigration reform and has called for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to end its contracts with private prison companies.

    Crow has also focused on instituting campaign finance reform. The first bill he sponsored, the End Dark Money Act, would prevent mega-donors from being able to hide their political contributions. His other priorities include preventing gun violence, combatting the effects of climate change, ensuring small businesses are able to thrive, and fighting for a bold investment in America’s infrastructure.

    Running against him is Steve House, the former chair of the Colorado Republican Party and a one-time gubernatorial candidate. He spent 35 years working in the health care industry, yet the biggest point House has made about problems in the health care system is that “we must face the facts and repeal Obamacare.” House apparently doesn’t realize that recent Republican efforts to repeal and replace what’s officially known as the Affordable Care Act—which has been a lifeline for many Americans struggling with health insurance coverage—have been cited as increasing the cost of health care coverage while also reducing coverage throughout the U.S. This kind of regressive thinking can’t be elected to office.

    Jason Crow

    Incumbent U.S. Rep. Jason Crow, a lawyer and former Army Ranger who completed three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, is running for reelection in Colorado's 6th Congressional District. In 2018, he defeated longtime Republican incumbent Mike Coffman to become the first Democrat ever to represent this district.

    Before serving in Congress, Crow spent years helping veterans like himself who struggled to receive benefits, focusing his work on veteran homelessness and substance abuse issues. Then, during his first term, Crow stepped into the national spotlight as one of the seven impeachment managers who argued for Donald Trump’s removal from office during the Senate trial. Crow made the case that Trump put both Ukraine’s safety and the U.S.’s national security at risk by withholding military aid in exchange for political favors.

    Crow’s district is the most diverse in Colorado, with 1 in 5 residents being born outside the United States; Crow has said this is what makes his community such a special place to live. He supports protecting DREAMers and passing comprehensive immigration reform and has called for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to end its contracts with private prison companies.

    Crow has also focused on instituting campaign finance reform. The first bill he sponsored, the End Dark Money Act, would prevent mega-donors from being able to hide their political contributions. His other priorities include preventing gun violence, combatting the effects of climate change, ensuring small businesses are able to thrive, and fighting for a bold investment in America’s infrastructure.

    Running against him is Steve House, the former chair of the Colorado Republican Party and a one-time gubernatorial candidate. He spent 35 years working in the health care industry, yet the biggest point House has made about problems in the health care system is that “we must face the facts and repeal Obamacare.” House apparently doesn’t realize that recent Republican efforts to repeal and replace what’s officially known as the Affordable Care Act—which has been a lifeline for many Americans struggling with health insurance coverage—have been cited as increasing the cost of health care coverage while also reducing coverage throughout the U.S. This kind of regressive thinking can’t be elected to office.

Board of Education, 1st Congressional District

Depending on where you live, you may have the below races on your ballot.

Board of Education, 1st Congressional District

  • Lisa Escárcega knows how important schools are for kids. Escárcega says her teachers kept her on track when she was a kid in the foster care system. That helped push her go to college on a scholarship and then encouraged her to get her master’s degree in school psychology and even continue on to a doctorate in school psychology. The schools helped her achieve her dreams, she says, and she wants to give back. We strongly recommend voting for Escárcega.

    Running for the seat as a Republican is Sydnnia Wulff, an activist and attorney. Her only known public statement included her saying that a vote for her was a vote “to continue supporting the only qualified candidate, President Donald Trump.” The state board of education is more important than hurling political propaganda, so don’t vote for Wulff.

    Also on the ballot is Alan Hayman, a Libertarian Party officer in Denver. He has no publicly stated education policy positions to speak of, but his Facebook page has posts making light about watching conspiracy theory videos. If he has no policy ideas about the one thing involved in this job, he cannot be supported.

    Lisa Escárcega

    Lisa Escárcega knows how important schools are for kids. Escárcega says her teachers kept her on track when she was a kid in the foster care system.

University of Colorado Board of Regents

CU Regent, 6th Congressional District

  • Ilana Spiegel is a highly experienced and well-respected grassroots organizer, columnist, and public education advocate. A mother and a former public school teacher, her platform emphasizes accessibility in higher education, opportunity, affordability, and inclusivity. Her history as a staff developer, coach, and consultant demonstrates that she will follow through on her promise to “fight for Colorado students and families.”

    Spiegel’s organizing led to the creation of the Standards and Assessment Task Force, where she worked with stakeholders on legislation to improve standardized testing in Colorado. Spiegel also spearheaded groups such as Taxpayers for Public Education and SPEAK for Cherry Creek to oppose a conservative-majority school board in Douglas County that threatened the vitality of public education. Spiegel organized and spoke at a 2017 teach-in to educate the public about and protest an ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) conference where Betsy DeVos was a speaker.

    Her fierce advocacy and organizing work proves she will stand for progressive values by fighting rising tuition, encouraging academic freedom, and making higher education more accessible and diverse.

    She faces Republican Richard Murray and the Unity Party’s Robert Worthey. Murray is an attorney from Highlands Ranch and frequently refers to his desire to run for regent because of his “double buff” status. While he does say that he’s worried about the cost of college, he seems to have more ideas about how to make CU’s football team better than he does about the cost of higher education. We think voters should not vote for Murray.

    Worthey is a music teacher and former Green Party candidate for the 6th Congressional District. He is now running with the independent Unity Party, whose platform mostly reflects a Republican or conservative agenda. He seems to have no published policy positions or public statements reflecting what he would do once he’s in office.
    We recommend voting for Spiegel, a candidate whose agenda aligns with our values.

    Ilana Spiegel

    Ilana Spiegel is a highly experienced and well-respected grassroots organizer, columnist, and public education advocate. A mother and a former public school teacher, her platform emphasizes accessibility in higher education, opportunity, affordability, and inclusivity.

State Senate

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below State Senate races on your ballot.

State Senator, District 26

State Senator

  • Since his appointment to the seat, State Sen. Jeff Bridges has been a legislator that District 26 — and progressives — can be proud of. His ideals are strongly rooted in boosting hard-working families, achieving health care for all, taking responsibility for climate change, and believing that “women’s issues are everyone’s issues.” But Bridges is also keenly aware that you have to reach across the aisle in order to get things done. That’s why he’s so proud of the fact that every bill he’s passed in the legislature has had bipartisan support.

    In his short time in office, Bridges has helped pass legislation to support full-day kindergarten, lower the cost of health care in the state, allow all Colorado employees to earn paid sick leave, and reinvest money in transportation without raising taxes. His accomplishments on working with fellow legislators and in several key committees are numerous, and he’s already looking ahead to what’s next. He plans to seek out things like expanded vocation and continuing education programs and funding and simplifying the tax code so that small businesses can thrive. A fully funded Colorado Water Plan is in his sights as well as increased recognition of reproductive rights.

    Bridges is ambitious but also is getting things done. Progressives should be very comfortable giving him all their support to continue doing good work.

    Taking him on is Bob Roth, a former Aurora city council member who is very active with various nonprofit organizations. His official public policy statements deal largely in generalities on fiscal responsibility, infrastructure, and education reform. But voters should be concerned about his opinions on the coronavirus and law enforcement. He has been very critical about school and business restrictions, saying everything should open back up in favor of easier logistics and economic relief. On police reform, he criticized proposed bans on Aurora police officers using chemical agents, long rifles, and armored vehicles — aimed at curbing police-protester violence — saying the move “handicapped” officers. Moreover, in an August post on his campaign’s social media, he suggests he wouldn’t have supported comprehensive sexuality education in schools, wouldn’t have prohibited conversion therapy, and wouldn’t have passed the red-flag law. This kind of candidate would derail progressive values if in office.

    Also on the ballot is Marc Solomon for the Libertarian Party. He has not made any policy statements widely known.

    Jeff Bridges

    Since his appointment to the seat, State Sen. Jeff Bridges has been a legislator that District 26 — and progressives — can be proud of. His ideals are strongly rooted in boosting hard-working families, achieving health care for all, taking responsibility for climate change, and believing that “women’s issues are everyone’s issues.” But Bridges is also keenly aware that you have to reach across the aisle in order to get things done. That’s why he’s so proud of the fact that every bill he’s passed in the legislature has had bipartisan support.

    In his short time in office, Bridges has helped pass legislation to support full-day kindergarten, lower the cost of health care in the state, allow all Colorado employees to earn paid sick leave, and reinvest money in transportation without raising taxes. His accomplishments on working with fellow legislators and in several key committees are numerous, and he’s already looking ahead to what’s next. He plans to seek out things like expanded vocation and continuing education programs and funding and simplifying the tax code so that small businesses can thrive. A fully funded Colorado Water Plan is in his sights as well as increased recognition of reproductive rights.

    Bridges is ambitious but also is getting things done. Progressives should be very comfortable giving him all their support to continue doing good work.

    Taking him on is Bob Roth, a former Aurora city council member who is very active with various nonprofit organizations. His official public policy statements deal largely in generalities on fiscal responsibility, infrastructure, and education reform. But voters should be concerned about his opinions on the coronavirus and law enforcement. He has been very critical about school and business restrictions, saying everything should open back up in favor of easier logistics and economic relief. On police reform, he criticized proposed bans on Aurora police officers using chemical agents, long rifles, and armored vehicles — aimed at curbing police-protester violence — saying the move “handicapped” officers. Moreover, in an August post on his campaign’s social media, he suggests he wouldn’t have supported comprehensive sexuality education in schools, wouldn’t have prohibited conversion therapy, and wouldn’t have passed the red-flag law. This kind of candidate would derail progressive values if in office.

    Also on the ballot is Marc Solomon for the Libertarian Party. He has not made any policy statements widely known.

State Senator, District 27

State Senator

  • Chris Kolker is a former teacher and a current financial planner and small-business owner. He previously ran in 2018 for state representative in District 38 and came very close — under 400 votes — to flipping the seat. Kolker has called Arapahoe County home since 1999 and appears to be the kind of person who knows the struggles of everyday life for working families and how the increasing cost of living is making it worse. 

    Among Kolker’s top priorities: funding for Colorado schools, instituting more gun-safety laws, improving transportation quality, and taking action on human-caused climate change. He also is a strong proponent of social justice reform, particularly as to the legislature’s recent sweeping changes to law enforcement accountability, and said it’s “long past time for us to … dismantle systemic racism.” His platform and actions already have endorsers like the Human Rights Campaign, Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club, and several unions excited to see him in office, and quite frankly, we are too.

    Kolker is the one progressives should give their support to in this race.

    Vying for the seat on the Republican side is Suzanne Staiert. Staiert has some impressive experience: She is a former city prosecutor for Aurora, the former city attorney for Littleton, and a former deputy Secretary of State. And on issues like education and political integrity, she seems straightforward, if not practically moderate. Staiert wants to say she’s “practical, not political,” but scratch the surface a little, and you’ll find her partisanship coming through. She’s outspoken against reforming our national electoral system, which is clearly broken. She also is a strong supporter of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), which is the primary cause for a number of our budget shortfalls and one of the reasons Colorado is falling behind on education. She definitely doesn’t hit the singingly progressive notes that Kolker does, and he could do more in the office. 

    Chris Kolker

    Chris Kolker is a former teacher and a current financial planner and small-business owner. He previously ran in 2018 for state representative in District 38 and came very close — under 400 votes — to flipping the seat. Kolker has called Arapahoe County home since 1999 and appears to be the kind of person who knows the struggles of everyday life for working families and how the increasing cost of living is making it worse. 

    Among Kolker’s top priorities: funding for Colorado schools, instituting more gun-safety laws, improving transportation quality, and taking action on human-caused climate change. He also is a strong proponent of social justice reform, particularly as to the legislature’s recent sweeping changes to law enforcement accountability, and said it’s “long past time for us to … dismantle systemic racism.” His platform and actions already have endorsers like the Human Rights Campaign, Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club, and several unions excited to see him in office, and quite frankly, we are too.

    Kolker is the one progressives should give their support to in this race.

    Vying for the seat on the Republican side is Suzanne Staiert. Staiert has some impressive experience: She is a former city prosecutor for Aurora, the former city attorney for Littleton, and a former deputy Secretary of State. And on issues like education and political integrity, she seems straightforward, if not practically moderate. Staiert wants to say she’s “practical, not political,” but scratch the surface a little, and you’ll find her partisanship coming through. She’s outspoken against reforming our national electoral system, which is clearly broken. She also is a strong supporter of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), which is the primary cause for a number of our budget shortfalls and one of the reasons Colorado is falling behind on education. She definitely doesn’t hit the singingly progressive notes that Kolker does, and he could do more in the office. 

Representative, District 38

State Representative

  • Democrat
  • David Ortiz’s experience as a military veteran, public affairs professional, community and media liaison, advocate, and lobbyist proves he will fight to make equality of opportunity and economic recovery priorities as a representative for District 38.

    After college, Ortiz volunteered in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and worked at the Houston mayor’s Office of International Affairs and Development. Ortiz was selected to train as a helicopter pilot in the U.S. Army, and he survived a near-fatal crash while deployed in Afghanistan in 2012. He was left paralyzed from the waist down and has dedicated his life as a public servant to advocating for veterans, service members, and people with disabilities. He has successfully helped to secure resources for veteran services, served in numerous leadership positions at nonprofits, and worked as a legislative liaison.

    Ortiz has demonstrated his commitment to progressive issues through his work on several pieces of legislation on higher education, the criminal justice system, mental health, and housing. He is the clear choice in this race.

    He is taking on incumbent State Rep. Richard Champion, an energy businessman and diehard right-wing conservative who toes the party line instead of representing his constituents. Champion was nominated to the seat by a select group of Republican activists after his predecessor joined the Trump administration. He is apparently more angry about stay-at-home orders and mask mandates than about the failed federal response to the coronavirus in the first place. He tends to make up his own facts about reforming health care, resulting in conservative ideas that actually take health care away from people. Champion is the kind of backwards-thinking conservative we don’t want representing us anymore.

    David Ortiz

    David Ortiz’s experience as a military veteran, public affairs professional, community and media liaison, advocate, and lobbyist proves he will fight to make equality of opportunity and economic recovery priorities as a representative for District 38.

District Attorney

District Attorney, 18th Judicial District

  • Amy Padden, the Democratic candidate for District 18, is a seasoned prosecutor with a stunning resume, having worked at all levels of law enforcement. Recently, she has been a deputy district attorney for District 5, and she has been both an assistant and deputy chief U.S. attorney and an assistant attorney general in Colorado. Padden wants to use all of that experience for criminal justice reforms like protecting vulnerable populations and addressing systemic inequities like police use of force and over-incarceration. It’s clear Padden stands for progressive reforms and is the clear choice in this race.

    Running on the Republican side is John Kellner. He is a Marine Corps veteran and prosecutor in both Boulder County and District 18 and specializes in cold cases. While Kellner undeniably has lengthy experience, progressive voters should be cautious about the fact that he doesn’t seem at all interested in seriously needed criminal justice reforms. Padden is the preferred candidate in this race.

    Amy Padden

    Amy Padden, the Democratic candidate for District 18, is a seasoned prosecutor with a stunning resume, having worked at all levels of law enforcement. Recently, she has been a deputy district attorney for District 5, and she has been both an assistant and deputy chief U.S.

Arapahoe County Commission

Arapahoe County Commissioner, District 1

  • Carrie Warren-Gully is a lifelong Arapahoe County resident and a business owner. She has served on the Littleton Public Schools Board of Education since 2014 and is currently the board treasurer. She also is the executive director of Books to Life, a company that produces audiobooks for people with sight impairment and other disabilities. In her time of public service, she has shown the ability to work with the community to solve some of our most pressing problems.

    Arapahoe County is one of the fastest-growing counties in Colorado, and Warren-Gully recognizes the need to plan the county’s growth responsibly in order to protect our way of life. If elected, she has said she will focus on updating and expanding transportation infrastructure, planning for future zoning, and collaborating with community organizations to make sure seniors, young families, teachers, and other working professionals are able to access affordable housing.

    Warren-Gully has vowed to support the health care workers strained by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as countywide action to support drug overdose prevention, addiction cessation programs, and other mental health services. She knows the decisions Arapahoe County makes today will have an impact on our quality of life for generations to come.

    Warren-Gully has the experience and passion necessary to work with the community to find solutions to the problems facing Arapahoe County and help our community thrive. She is the candidate to back in this election.

    She faces incumbent Republican Kathleen Conti, a longtime Arapahoe County resident and a former state legislator. Her tenure as county commissioner has been quiet, but she was a bastion for conservative ideas and talking points, such as being against Colorado’s IUD program which has resulted in some of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy in the country. We can’t recommend voting for Conti to retain this seat.

Arapahoe County Commissioner, District 3

  • Democrat
  • Idris Keith is an attorney with extensive experience helping small businesses with consulting, development, securing certifications, bidding for government contracts, and more. As a commissioner, he will draw on this knowledge to create revenue-generating policies to help Arapahoe get through the COVID-19 economic downturn by focusing on assisting small businesses and empowering them to create jobs.

    Keith has also previously worked as a probation officer; as an investigator of allegations of discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations; and as an administrative hearing officer to determine eligibility for unemployment compensation. He has dedicated his career to seeking justice for those who have been discriminated against because of a lack of political and economic power.

    As commissioner, Keith intends to focus on addressing the growing homeless crisis through policies like expanding employment opportunities and assistance for those suffering from mental illness. Restoring fiscal responsibility and budgetary discipline, strengthening public institutions, and protecting Arapahoe County’s natural resources and public lands are also among his top concerns.

    Keith is a champion of working people, small businesses, and job creation. As one Englewood city council member put it, he “understands how to build coalitions, how to build consensus, and how to stick to his principles while he does it.” He is most definitely the progressive voter’s best choice in this race.

    He faces incumbent Jeff Baker, a former Army chief warrant officer and crime scene investigator, in pursuit of the seat. Baker is blandly straightforward on what he’s concerned about in Arapahoe County: cutting the budget, protecting mineral rights and land ownership (otherwise known as promoting oil and gas drilling in our neighborhoods), and maintaining roads and bridges. Baker falls short on pandemic response: On the COVID-19 mask mandate, his concern was that the Tri-County Health Department mandated masks “without allowing public comments” (even though scientists and public health experts have said over and over again that masks are proven to stop the spread of the virus). Across Arapahoe County, the pandemic has caused unemployment to spike, and people are looking for strong, unified leadership. Keith, in contrast to Baker’s procedural hangup, told Colorado Community Media that the #1 issue for commissioners next year must be finding a way to bounce back economically from the pandemic with job creation and partnering with the health department to keep everyone healthy.

    Idris Keith

    Idris Keith is an attorney with extensive experience helping small businesses with consulting, development, securing certifications, bidding for government contracts, and more.

Arapahoe County Commissioner, District 5

  • Democrat
  • Vietnam veteran and former National Guardsman Bill Holen has been an Arapahoe County commissioner since 2012. Before his first election to the commission, Holen served in many different governmental and community-oriented roles including as a constituent services representative for U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, with a focus on national security and veterans’ affairs, and a staff member for former U.S. Sen. Gary Hart.

    Holen has said he strives to be “a commissioner that listens and speaks for those who don’t have a voice.” During his time in office, he has focused on helping veterans access better health care, improving the job market by partnering with local business leaders, and curbing the opioid epidemic. Holen also is committed to ensuring the county’s finances are managed efficiently and effectively, safeguarding the quality of Arapahoe County’s air and water, and working toward a more viable and efficient transportation system.

    Holen is an experienced commissioner and public servant who is dedicated to advocating for others. He is the clear choice in this race.

    Challenging him is Jim Parker, an Arapahoe County resident and Republican activist. He ran and lost in the race for State House District 36 in 2012. In all that time, Parker has made few, if any, public statements on his policy positions. We don’t see why you would vote for someone who won’t tell you what they stand for.

Statewide Ballot Measures

Amendment #B

  • VOTE YES
    Vote YES for Amendment B
  • Amendment B, Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates

    The Gallagher Amendment Repeal and Property Tax Assessment Rates Measure (Amendment B) would repeal the Gallagher Amendment of 1982, which fixed residential and business property tax rates at 45% residential and 55% business. This measure is intended to relieve downward pressure on local public school funding across the state through the repeal of the current property tax assessment formula. The Gallagher Amendment has skewed the tax assessment of residential property in Colorado, resulting in significant shortfalls for school districts reliant on property tax revenue for their funding. Maintaining the Gallagher Amendment’s ratio of residential to business property tax has forced the state to step in with dwindling general fund revenue, causing budget cuts to critical services and an overall proportional reduction in total education funding over time.

    Full text on the ballot: Without increasing property tax rates, to help preserve funding for local districts that provide fire protection, police, ambulance, hospital, kindergarten through twelfth grade education, and other services, and to avoid automatic mill levy increases, shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution to repeal the requirement that the general assembly periodically change the residential assessment rate in order to maintain the statewide proportion of residential property as compared to all other taxable property valued for property tax purposes and repeal the nonresidential property tax assessment rate of twenty-nine percent?

    Amendment B, Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates

    Amendment B, Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates

    The Gallagher Amendment Repeal and Property Tax Assessment Rates Measure (Amendment B) would repeal the Gallagher Amendment of 1982, which fixed residential and business property tax rates at 45% residential and 55% business. This measure is intended to relieve downward pressure on local public school funding across the state through the repeal of the current property tax assessment formula. The Gallagher Amendment has skewed the tax assessment of residential property in Colorado, resulting in significant shortfalls for school districts reliant on property tax revenue for their funding. Maintaining the Gallagher Amendment’s ratio of residential to business property tax has forced the state to step in with dwindling general fund revenue, causing budget cuts to critical services and an overall proportional reduction in total education funding over time.

    Full text on the ballot: Without increasing property tax rates, to help preserve funding for local districts that provide fire protection, police, ambulance, hospital, kindergarten through twelfth grade education, and other services, and to avoid automatic mill levy increases, shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution to repeal the requirement that the general assembly periodically change the residential assessment rate in order to maintain the statewide proportion of residential property as compared to all other taxable property valued for property tax purposes and repeal the nonresidential property tax assessment rate of twenty-nine percent?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Amendment #C

  • VOTE YES
    Vote YES for Amendment C
  • Amendment C, Bingo Raffles Allow Paid Help and Repeal Five-Year Minimum

    The Charitable Bingo and Raffles Amendment (Amendment C) reduces the time period a charitable organization must exist before receiving a charitable gaming license from five years to three years. It also permits charitable organizations to hire staff to manage gaming activities. Charitable gaming in Colorado includes bingo, lotteries, raffles, and certain other games conducted by charitable organizations for fundraising purposes.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the conduct of charitable gaming activities, and, in connection therewith, allowing bingo-raffle licensees to hire managers and operators of games and reducing the required period of a charitable organization's continuous existence before obtaining a charitable gaming license?

    Amendment C, Bingo Raffles Allow Paid Help and Repeal Five-Year Minimum

    Amendment C, Bingo Raffles Allow Paid Help and Repeal Five-Year Minimum

    The Charitable Bingo and Raffles Amendment (Amendment C) reduces the time period a charitable organization must exist before receiving a charitable gaming license from five years to three years. It also permits charitable organizations to hire staff to manage gaming activities. Charitable gaming in Colorado includes bingo, lotteries, raffles, and certain other games conducted by charitable organizations for fundraising purposes.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the conduct of charitable gaming activities, and, in connection therewith, allowing bingo-raffle licensees to hire managers and operators of games and reducing the required period of a charitable organization's continuous existence before obtaining a charitable gaming license?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Amendment #76

  • VOTE NO
    Vote NO for Amendment 76
  • Amendment 76, Citizenship Qualification of Electors

    The Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative (Amendment 76) purports to amend Section 1 of Article VII of the Colorado Constitution to state that “only a citizen” of the United States who is 18 years of age or older can vote in federal, state, and local elections in Colorado. Currently, Article VII Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution states that “Every citizen of the United States who has attained the age of eighteen years, has resided in this state for such a time as may be prescribed by law, and has been duly registered as a voter if required by law shall be qualified to vote at all elections.” While the sole change made by the Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative is to replace the word “every” with “only a,” it also would upend current law which allows 17-year-olds who would be 18 by the general election to vote in that cycle’s primary. This seemingly simple change, therefore, has the effect of eliminating an otherwise valid group of young voters from the full election process, to say nothing of the fact that it is a clear attempt to confuse voters into believing that current Colorado law permits noncitizens to vote, which it does not.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution requiring that to be qualified to vote at any election an individual must be a United States citizen?

    Amendment 76, Citizenship Qualification of Electors

    Amendment 76, Citizenship Qualification of Electors

    The Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative (Amendment 76) purports to amend Section 1 of Article VII of the Colorado Constitution to state that “only a citizen” of the United States who is 18 years of age or older can vote in federal, state, and local elections in Colorado. Currently, Article VII Section 1 of the Colorado Constitution states that “Every citizen of the United States who has attained the age of eighteen years, has resided in this state for such a time as may be prescribed by law, and has been duly registered as a voter if required by law shall be qualified to vote at all elections.” While the sole change made by the Citizen Requirement for Voting Initiative is to replace the word “every” with “only a,” it also would upend current law which allows 17-year-olds who would be 18 by the general election to vote in that cycle’s primary. This seemingly simple change, therefore, has the effect of eliminating an otherwise valid group of young voters from the full election process, to say nothing of the fact that it is a clear attempt to confuse voters into believing that current Colorado law permits noncitizens to vote, which it does not.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution requiring that to be qualified to vote at any election an individual must be a United States citizen?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Amendment #77

  • VOTE YES
    Vote YES for Amendment 77
  • Amendment 77, Local Voter Approval of Gaming Limits in Black Hawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek

    The Allow Voters in Central, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Cities to Expand Authorized Games and Increase Maximum Bets Initiative (Amendment 77) would allow voters in these three gambling towns to vote to increase the maximum single bet allowed for any game beyond the current statewide limit of $100. Additionally, Amendment 77 would allow voters to approve games other than those currently allowed by Colorado law; currently allowed games in Colorado casinos include blackjack, craps, poker, roulette, and slot machines. The proposed measure would also change the distribution of gaming tax funds for community colleges to prioritize student retention and credit completion.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning voter-approved changes to limited gaming, and, in connection therewith, allowing the voters of Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek, for their individual cities, to approve other games in addition to those currently allowed and increase a maximum single bet to any amount; and allowing gaming tax revenue to be used for support services to improve student retention and credential completion by students enrolled in community colleges?

    Amendment 77, Local Voter Approval of Gaming Limits in Black Hawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek

    Amendment 77, Local Voter Approval of Gaming Limits in Black Hawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek

    The Allow Voters in Central, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek Cities to Expand Authorized Games and Increase Maximum Bets Initiative (Amendment 77) would allow voters in these three gambling towns to vote to increase the maximum single bet allowed for any game beyond the current statewide limit of $100. Additionally, Amendment 77 would allow voters to approve games other than those currently allowed by Colorado law; currently allowed games in Colorado casinos include blackjack, craps, poker, roulette, and slot machines. The proposed measure would also change the distribution of gaming tax funds for community colleges to prioritize student retention and credit completion.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning voter-approved changes to limited gaming, and, in connection therewith, allowing the voters of Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek, for their individual cities, to approve other games in addition to those currently allowed and increase a maximum single bet to any amount; and allowing gaming tax revenue to be used for support services to improve student retention and credential completion by students enrolled in community colleges?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Proposition #EE

  • VOTE YES
    Vote YES for Proposition EE
  • Proposition EE, Cigarette, Tobacco and Nicotine Products Tax

    The Colorado Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health and Education Programs Measure (Proposition EE) would close a tax loophole on vaping products that currently leaves these products untaxed in Colorado, bringing the tax in line with other tobacco products. The measure would also increase cigarette taxes from $0.84 per pack currently to $2.64 per pack by 2027. The revenue from this measure would provide $375 million to public schools over the next three years to offset budget cuts from COVID-19, with $90 million specifically going to rural school districts. The revenue would also provide access to free, universal preschool to all four-year-olds in Colorado. The measure would also provide $110 million in additional money for smoking and vaping education and cessation programs as well as $35 million for affordable housing and eviction programs over the next three years.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall state taxes be increased by $294,000,000 annually by imposing a tax on nicotine liquids used in e-cigarettes and other vaping products that is equal to the total state tax on tobacco products when fully phased in, incrementally increasing the tobacco products tax by up to 22% of the manufacturer's list price, incrementally increasing the cigarette tax by up to 9 cents per cigarette, expanding the existing cigarette and tobacco taxes to apply to sales to consumers from outside of the state, establishing a minimum tax for moist snuff tobacco products, creating an inventory tax that applies for future cigarette tax increases, and initially using the tax revenue primarily for public school funding to help offset revenue that has been lost as a result of the economic impacts related to COVID-19 and then for programs that reduce the use of tobacco and nicotine products, enhance the voluntary Colorado preschool program and make it widely available for free, and maintain the funding for programs that currently receive revenue from tobacco taxes, with the state keeping and spending all of the new tax revenue as a voter-approved revenue change?

    Proposition EE, Cigarette, Tobacco and Nicotine Products Tax

    Proposition EE, Cigarette, Tobacco and Nicotine Products Tax

    The Colorado Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health and Education Programs Measure (Proposition EE) would close a tax loophole on vaping products that currently leaves these products untaxed in Colorado, bringing the tax in line with other tobacco products. The measure would also increase cigarette taxes from $0.84 per pack currently to $2.64 per pack by 2027. The revenue from this measure would provide $375 million to public schools over the next three years to offset budget cuts from COVID-19, with $90 million specifically going to rural school districts. The revenue would also provide access to free, universal preschool to all four-year-olds in Colorado. The measure would also provide $110 million in additional money for smoking and vaping education and cessation programs as well as $35 million for affordable housing and eviction programs over the next three years.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall state taxes be increased by $294,000,000 annually by imposing a tax on nicotine liquids used in e-cigarettes and other vaping products that is equal to the total state tax on tobacco products when fully phased in, incrementally increasing the tobacco products tax by up to 22% of the manufacturer's list price, incrementally increasing the cigarette tax by up to 9 cents per cigarette, expanding the existing cigarette and tobacco taxes to apply to sales to consumers from outside of the state, establishing a minimum tax for moist snuff tobacco products, creating an inventory tax that applies for future cigarette tax increases, and initially using the tax revenue primarily for public school funding to help offset revenue that has been lost as a result of the economic impacts related to COVID-19 and then for programs that reduce the use of tobacco and nicotine products, enhance the voluntary Colorado preschool program and make it widely available for free, and maintain the funding for programs that currently receive revenue from tobacco taxes, with the state keeping and spending all of the new tax revenue as a voter-approved revenue change?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Proposition #113

  • VOTE YES
    Vote YES for Proposition 113
  • Proposition 113, National Popular Vote

    The Colorado National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Referendum (Proposition 113) would affirm the Colorado General Assembly’s passage of Senate Bill 19-042, which entered Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to ensure Colorado's Electoral College votes are awarded to the winner of the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections. Colorado has been carried by the winner of the nationwide popular vote in every presidential election since 2004, and the compact would end the unequal valuation of American votes in presidential elections. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would not take effect until an Electoral College majority of states joins. As of August 2020, 14 states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation that would trigger the compact in the event 270 Electoral College votes are achieved.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall the following Act of the General Assembly be approved: An Act concerning adoption of an agreement among the states to elect the President of the United States by national popular vote, being Senate Bill No. 19-042?

    Proposition 113, National Popular Vote

    Proposition 113, National Popular Vote

    The Colorado National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Referendum (Proposition 113) would affirm the Colorado General Assembly’s passage of Senate Bill 19-042, which entered Colorado into the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to ensure Colorado's Electoral College votes are awarded to the winner of the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections. Colorado has been carried by the winner of the nationwide popular vote in every presidential election since 2004, and the compact would end the unequal valuation of American votes in presidential elections. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would not take effect until an Electoral College majority of states joins. As of August 2020, 14 states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation that would trigger the compact in the event 270 Electoral College votes are achieved.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall the following Act of the General Assembly be approved: An Act concerning adoption of an agreement among the states to elect the President of the United States by national popular vote, being Senate Bill No. 19-042?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Proposition #114

  • VOTE YES
    Vote YES for Proposition 114
  • Proposition 114, Restoration of Gray Wolves

    The Colorado Gray Wolf Reintroduction Initiative (Proposition 114) directs the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to reintroduce and manage the population of gray wolves in specific areas of the state by the end of 2023. The commission would be required to develop a plan to reintroduce gray wolves to locations west of the Continental Divide that it will determine, manage reintroduced wolf populations, and compensate property owners who may be affected. Reintroducing gray wolves in Colorado would restore an unbroken connection of protected wolf populations from Canada to Mexico.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the restoration of gray wolves through their reintroduction on designated lands in Colorado located west of the continental divide, and, in connection therewith, requiring the Colorado parks and wildlife commission, after holding statewide hearings and using scientific data, to implement a plan to restore and manage gray wolves; prohibiting the commission from imposing any land, water, or resource use restrictions on private landowners to further the plan; and requiring the commission to fairly compensate owners for losses of livestock caused by gray wolves?

    Proposition 114, Restoration of Gray Wolves

    Proposition 114, Restoration of Gray Wolves

    The Colorado Gray Wolf Reintroduction Initiative (Proposition 114) directs the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to reintroduce and manage the population of gray wolves in specific areas of the state by the end of 2023. The commission would be required to develop a plan to reintroduce gray wolves to locations west of the Continental Divide that it will determine, manage reintroduced wolf populations, and compensate property owners who may be affected. Reintroducing gray wolves in Colorado would restore an unbroken connection of protected wolf populations from Canada to Mexico.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the restoration of gray wolves through their reintroduction on designated lands in Colorado located west of the continental divide, and, in connection therewith, requiring the Colorado parks and wildlife commission, after holding statewide hearings and using scientific data, to implement a plan to restore and manage gray wolves; prohibiting the commission from imposing any land, water, or resource use restrictions on private landowners to further the plan; and requiring the commission to fairly compensate owners for losses of livestock caused by gray wolves?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Proposition #115

  • VOTE NO
    Vote NO for Proposition 115
  • Proposition 115, Prohibition on Abortions Later in Pregnancy

    The Colorado 22-Week Abortion Ban Initiative (Proposition 115) would prohibit abortion procedures after 22 weeks of gestational age. Under the rule, an abortion after 22 weeks would only be permitted in an immediate life-threatening emergency with no exceptions for rape, incest, a lethal fetal diagnosis, or the health or medical needs of the patient. Abortion after 22 weeks only accounts for about 1% of total abortion procedures and in many cases is the result of major gestational complications that are found later in pregnancy. Colorado has emerged as a national safe haven for abortion care in these complex circumstances because of gestational bans in other states. Any physician who performs an abortion after 22 weeks would be found in violation of this initiative and face criminal charges and suspension of their medical license by the Colorado Medical Board.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning prohibiting an abortion when the probable gestational age of the fetus is at least twenty-two weeks, and, in connection therewith, making it a misdemeanor punishable by a fine to perform or attempt to perform a prohibited abortion, except when the abortion is immediately required to save the life of the pregnant woman when her life is physically threatened, but not solely by a psychological or emotional condition; defining terms related to the measure including “probable gestational age” and “abortion,” and excepting from the definition of “abortion” medical procedures relating to miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy; specifying that a woman on whom an abortion is performed may not be charged with a crime in relation to a prohibited abortion; and requiring the Colorado medical board to suspend for at least three years the license of a licensee whom the board finds performed or attempted to perform a prohibited abortion?

    Proposition 115, Prohibition on Abortions Later in Pregnancy

    Proposition 115, Prohibition on Abortions Later in Pregnancy

    The Colorado 22-Week Abortion Ban Initiative (Proposition 115) would prohibit abortion procedures after 22 weeks of gestational age. Under the rule, an abortion after 22 weeks would only be permitted in an immediate life-threatening emergency with no exceptions for rape, incest, a lethal fetal diagnosis, or the health or medical needs of the patient. Abortion after 22 weeks only accounts for about 1% of total abortion procedures and in many cases is the result of major gestational complications that are found later in pregnancy. Colorado has emerged as a national safe haven for abortion care in these complex circumstances because of gestational bans in other states. Any physician who performs an abortion after 22 weeks would be found in violation of this initiative and face criminal charges and suspension of their medical license by the Colorado Medical Board.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning prohibiting an abortion when the probable gestational age of the fetus is at least twenty-two weeks, and, in connection therewith, making it a misdemeanor punishable by a fine to perform or attempt to perform a prohibited abortion, except when the abortion is immediately required to save the life of the pregnant woman when her life is physically threatened, but not solely by a psychological or emotional condition; defining terms related to the measure including “probable gestational age” and “abortion,” and excepting from the definition of “abortion” medical procedures relating to miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy; specifying that a woman on whom an abortion is performed may not be charged with a crime in relation to a prohibited abortion; and requiring the Colorado medical board to suspend for at least three years the license of a licensee whom the board finds performed or attempted to perform a prohibited abortion?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Proposition #116

  • VOTE NO
    Vote NO for Proposition 116
  • Proposition 116, Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative

    The Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative (Proposition 116) would reduce the state income tax rate for individuals and corporations, resulting in state budget cuts of over $150 million per year, forever. Large businesses and people with incomes over half a million dollars per year will receive 70% of the benefit from this tax reduction. Meanwhile, the average Colorado family will get a tax cut of only $37 per year. The state is currently facing billions of dollars in budget shortfalls due to economic contraction from the COVID-19 pandemic, and this tax cut would have to be paid for by cuts to education, public safety, health care, and transportation to the tune of over $200 million in just the first year.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes reducing the state income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.55%?

    Proposition 116, Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative

    Proposition 116, Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative

    The Decrease Income Tax Rate from 4.63% to 4.55% Initiative (Proposition 116) would reduce the state income tax rate for individuals and corporations, resulting in state budget cuts of over $150 million per year, forever. Large businesses and people with incomes over half a million dollars per year will receive 70% of the benefit from this tax reduction. Meanwhile, the average Colorado family will get a tax cut of only $37 per year. The state is currently facing billions of dollars in budget shortfalls due to economic contraction from the COVID-19 pandemic, and this tax cut would have to be paid for by cuts to education, public safety, health care, and transportation to the tune of over $200 million in just the first year.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes reducing the state income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.55%?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Proposition #117

  • VOTE NO
    Vote NO for Proposition 117
  • Proposition 117, Require Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises Exempt from TABOR Initiative

    The Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises (Proposition 117) would require a statewide vote on new state enterprises generating over $100 million in revenue within the first five years of operation. Enterprises were authorized by the 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) as independent entities that administer fee-based programs for specific goods and services such as unemployment insurance, road and bridge construction, cleaning up chemical waste and oil spills, the sale of hunting and fishing licenses by the Colorado Department of Parks and Wildlife, higher education institutions, and the Colorado State Fair. This initiative is entirely funded by out-of-state billionaires and corporations who often pay the fees this measure would limit. Proposition 117 is confusing and poorly written and will lead to years of lawsuits, unintended consequences, and future cuts in education, transportation, and health care.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes requiring statewide voter approval at the next even-year election of any newly created or qualified state enterprise that is exempt from the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado constitution, if the projected or actual combined revenue from fees and surcharges of the enterprise, and all other enterprises created within the last five years that serve primarily the same purpose, is greater than $100 million within the first five fiscal years of the creation or qualification of the new enterprise?

    Proposition 117, Require Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises Exempt from TABOR Initiative

    Proposition 117, Require Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises Exempt from TABOR Initiative

    The Voter Approval of Certain New Enterprises (Proposition 117) would require a statewide vote on new state enterprises generating over $100 million in revenue within the first five years of operation. Enterprises were authorized by the 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) as independent entities that administer fee-based programs for specific goods and services such as unemployment insurance, road and bridge construction, cleaning up chemical waste and oil spills, the sale of hunting and fishing licenses by the Colorado Department of Parks and Wildlife, higher education institutions, and the Colorado State Fair. This initiative is entirely funded by out-of-state billionaires and corporations who often pay the fees this measure would limit. Proposition 117 is confusing and poorly written and will lead to years of lawsuits, unintended consequences, and future cuts in education, transportation, and health care.

    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes requiring statewide voter approval at the next even-year election of any newly created or qualified state enterprise that is exempt from the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado constitution, if the projected or actual combined revenue from fees and surcharges of the enterprise, and all other enterprises created within the last five years that serve primarily the same purpose, is greater than $100 million within the first five fiscal years of the creation or qualification of the new enterprise?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral

Proposition #118

  • VOTE YES
    Vote YES for Proposition 118
  • Proposition 118, Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative

    The Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative (Proposition 118) would establish a paid family and medical leave benefit for most Colorado workers. It would provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave, allowing 2.6 million Coloradans to take time to care for themselves, a new child, or a seriously ill family member. Eight states including California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island have successfully passed or implemented similar, solvent paid family leave programs. Employees and employers fund the program together, each contributing 0.45% of an employee’s wages to the fund, with the average Colorado worker contributing $3.83 per week. When workers need to take leave, they are paid up to 90% of their salary during that time. Employers may optionally contribute up to 100% of the cost of coverage; businesses with fewer than 10 employees are exempt from paying the premium, but their employees are still covered. Employers that offer paid leave benefits equivalent to the state plan may opt out and keep their plans.


    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the creation of a paid family and medical leave program in Colorado, and, in connection therewith, authorizing paid family and medical leave for a covered employee who has a serious health condition, is caring for a new child or for a family member with a serious health condition, or has a need for leave related to a family member’s military deployment or for safe leave; establishing a maximum of 12 weeks of family and medical leave, with an additional 4 weeks for pregnancy or childbirth complications, with a cap on the weekly benefit amount; requiring job protection for and prohibiting retaliation against an employee who takes paid family and medical leave; allowing a local government to opt out of the program; permitting employees of such a local government and self-employed individuals to participate in the program; exempting employers who offer an approved private paid family and medical leave plan; to pay for the program, requiring a premium of 0.9% of each employee’s wages, up to a cap, through December 31, 2024, and as set thereafter, up to 1.2% of each employee’s wages, by the director of the division of family and medical leave insurance; authorizing an employer to deduct up to 50% of the premium amount from an employee’s wages and requiring the employer to pay the remainder of the premium, with an exemption for employers with fewer than 10 employees; creating the division of family and medical leave insurance as an enterprise within the department of labor and employment to administer the program; and establishing an enforcement and appeals process for retaliation and denied claims?

    Proposition 118, Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative

    Proposition 118, Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative

    The Colorado Paid Family and Medical Leave Initiative (Proposition 118) would establish a paid family and medical leave benefit for most Colorado workers. It would provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave, allowing 2.6 million Coloradans to take time to care for themselves, a new child, or a seriously ill family member. Eight states including California, New Jersey, and Rhode Island have successfully passed or implemented similar, solvent paid family leave programs. Employees and employers fund the program together, each contributing 0.45% of an employee’s wages to the fund, with the average Colorado worker contributing $3.83 per week. When workers need to take leave, they are paid up to 90% of their salary during that time. Employers may optionally contribute up to 100% of the cost of coverage; businesses with fewer than 10 employees are exempt from paying the premium, but their employees are still covered. Employers that offer paid leave benefits equivalent to the state plan may opt out and keep their plans.


    Full text on the ballot: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning the creation of a paid family and medical leave program in Colorado, and, in connection therewith, authorizing paid family and medical leave for a covered employee who has a serious health condition, is caring for a new child or for a family member with a serious health condition, or has a need for leave related to a family member’s military deployment or for safe leave; establishing a maximum of 12 weeks of family and medical leave, with an additional 4 weeks for pregnancy or childbirth complications, with a cap on the weekly benefit amount; requiring job protection for and prohibiting retaliation against an employee who takes paid family and medical leave; allowing a local government to opt out of the program; permitting employees of such a local government and self-employed individuals to participate in the program; exempting employers who offer an approved private paid family and medical leave plan; to pay for the program, requiring a premium of 0.9% of each employee’s wages, up to a cap, through December 31, 2024, and as set thereafter, up to 1.2% of each employee’s wages, by the director of the division of family and medical leave insurance; authorizing an employer to deduct up to 50% of the premium amount from an employee’s wages and requiring the employer to pay the remainder of the premium, with an exemption for employers with fewer than 10 employees; creating the division of family and medical leave insurance as an enterprise within the department of labor and employment to administer the program; and establishing an enforcement and appeals process for retaliation and denied claims?

    Support / Oppose / Neutral