Colorado Recall Elections

Politics & Elections
#1

The people of Colorado have spoken.

During the last session of the Legislature, the Democrats, spearheaded by Senate President John Morse, rammed through some extreme, unconstitutional restrictions on gun ownership. One law banned the sale of magazines holding more than 15 rounds. Another law required background checks for ALL gun sales. (Note: these laws are opposed by 54 out of 64 county sheriffs.)

Senator Morse (to his everlasting shame) tried to shove through even more extreme laws than that–bills that died because they were too extreme for many of his fellow Democrats to stomach.

Well, the chickens have come home to roost. The Democrats now find that they overreached themselves in their power-mad spree of unconstitutional behavior. Morse and a fellow state senator were the targets of the first-ever recalls of state-level officials in Colorado.

Michael Bloomberg contributed $350,000 to fight the recall campaigns. There was a ton of other out-of-state money donated to Democrats.

Angela Giron, the other state senator recalled, represented a heavily Democratic district. Democrats make up about 47% of registered voters, while unaffiliated voters make up 29% and Republicans make up 23%. HOWEVER, she won only 44% of the vote–which means that a significant number of fellow Democrats voted against her.

John Morse’s ignominious career is now cut short. The Democrats still control the state government, but their margin is significantly smaller than it was until today. A single defection in the state Senate is potentially enough to torpedo their bills next year.

Previous to this, there had been only about 34 state-level recall attempts in the entire nation, with about half of them being successful. The fact that both of these succeeded is a shot across the bow for Democrats nationwide.

We here in Colorado have taken a giant step today toward restoring the freedom that we have lost.

#2

It’s a great day for everyone who isn’t predisposed to bow to the government.

Great job in both districts.

#3

They weren’t extreme or unconstitutional. As usual, NRA controlled gun nutter paranoia keeps the guns flowing into the hands of children and mass murderers.

#4

What a bunch of hooey. First, the Republicans tried to recall four Democrats but couldn’t get enough signatures for two of them. They then targeted the two others with massive funding from gun advocates all over the country. The NRA contributed more by themselves than the Bloomberg group did for the other side. They then held two very expensive special elections with nothing else on the ballot and a fired up Republican base turning out and little to turn Democrats out.

It changes nothing in the Colorado State House as Democrats still control both houses and the Governorship. Less than 18,000 votes were cast in one race versus the 28,000 in the general election when Morse was elected. The other race drew 28,000 voters versus the 42,000 in the general. Both Senator’s terms ended next year anyway, and one was term limited from running again.

The whole thing was a huge hissy-fit that accomplished nothing other than costing their districts a whole lot of money. They’ll probably re-elect Democrats next year anyway.

Finally, there is nothing unconstitutional about restricting magazine capacity or requiring background checks on gun purchases.

Gun nuts are celebrating like it’s Christmas and New Years and St. Patrick’s Day rolled into one, but absolutely nothing has changed.

#5

“Gun nuts are celebrating like it’s Christmas and New Years and St. Patrick’s Day rolled into one, but absolutely nothing has changed.”

I remember the Wisconsin recall…the left celebrated their victories in largely democratic areas even though Walker was still standing.

I guess the Yes voters shouldn’t be excited in Colorado since they aren’t for the left, but they are, and I am happy for them.

#6

Liberal feelings keep over medicated psychos in the public instead of institutions.

#7

What are you trying to communicate?

With all due respect, your comment is a bit incoherent.

#8

I think it is clear. Over medicated kids and adults with real issues are not being dealt with anymore. Instead of dealing with the mentally ill, we let them walk amongst us so as not to hurt their feelings. Then we wonder why they went off and the warning signs were not acted upon. Of course from there, sensitive libs think the only solution is to take the guns…for the children, of course.

#9

Ummm…that’s because there were big cutbacks in government spending for mental healthcare so patients were “de-institutionalized”. Are you saying the liberals were responsible for reducing government spending for social services?

#10

I don’t think saying it accomplished nothing is very accurate. What it did do was scare an already scared party on the gun control issue. But a party that got emboldened briefly. It’s never useless to send a message that no matter what the circumstances, supporting gun control measures is a good way to get fired.

#11

Agreed, but fired at the next election cycle, not in a special recall election.
I think this set a bad precedent.

#12

I agree with that now that I think about it. Recalls should be for corruption or gross incomptence(in the case of an executive). Recalls over policy differences aren’t a good idea.

#13

The anti-recall pro-gun controllers tremendously outspent the recallers (by almost 10:1), mostly with out-of-state money, and still lost.

What has changed, hopefully, between this and Obama’s gun control defeat, is that that anti-gun politicians will slink away for another ten years or so.

Nice work, Colorado.

#14

I would say that supporting legislation which an elected representative knows is strongly opposed by the majority of his constituents would count as corruption and gross incompetence. When that legislation blatantly violates the Constitution, then I think it crosses the line into criminal-level malfeasance.

Keep in mind that every elected representative in this nation takes an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. He agrees to this as a condition of taking his job. We have become far too tolerant of our public servants violating this oath, violating the Constitution, and violating our rights. We have allowed them to forget that they are our servants, and to imagine themselves to be our masters.

What has happened in Colorado is a small, but important step, finally, in the right direction. We have two elected representatives who refused to to their jobs,who refused to properly represent their constituents, and who openly violated the Constitution. They deserve more than to simply be removed from office. Hard jail time would be more appropriate. But compared to what has been happening in recent years, this is progress.

#15

Agreed with all of that, except I wish it hadn’t been a recall election but handled in the normal cycle. There was no emergency or state or national crisis.

#16

Anybody care to explain what’s unconstitutional about the law? Some of you seem pretty certain. I do hope the answer isn’t essentially “*any *gun regulations are unconstitutional”.

Are those of you who celebrate this occurrence also now ready to issue everyone in the state a bulletproof vest? If not, why not?

#17

Gee, if only there was some mechanism for nullifying legislation that truly was unconstitutional. If only there was a branch of government entrusted with that task. If only there was some criteria for determining constitutionality other than the inane ramblings of a paranoid terrorist organization.

Obviously the problem is not with the supposed unconstitutionality of legislation, it is that the legislation isn’t what you want. So the poor little titsie babies throw a tantrum and had a recall vote.

It isn’t the legislature’s job to pass what the public wants. And just because a wealthy organization decides that a law threatens its corporate owners doesn’t make it unconstitutional.

#18

What part of “…shall not be infringed.” is it that you do not understand?

#19

I thought so. :frowning:

Just a few dots instead of the purpose statement. Typical of you people.

#20

So in the First, “no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” mean you can shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater, right? Or that any anti-obscenity laws related to magazines must be struck down, right?

Or are things more nuanced than that?