Bill Ritter works in bipartisan fashion, no one seems to care

When Governor Bill Ritter vetoed HB-1072, he wrote that he "vowed to listen to a wide range of views, to unite and to build consensus around a public policy agenda that speaks to the common good."

In today's Post, Denver Post Capitol Bureau Chief Jeri Clausing reports that "[a] bipartisan group of lawmakers turned that around on Ritter last week in a letter asking him to slow down and open broader discussion of his plan to overhaul the state's oil and gas regulatory agency." Not until the article's seventh paragraph does Clausing write, "To be fair, Ritter has reached out to stakeholders on all sides of the education and oil and gas regulation issues."

That's an understatement. Members of the Ritter administration spent more than 30 hours in stakeholder meetings discussing HB-1341. And his administration will "likely grant more than 6,000 new drilling permits, a doubling from just a few years ago."

The media needs conflict. GOP partisans want a fight. And some legislators have their own pet agendas. Hopefully the voters can look past the hype to appreciate Ritter's centrism.

Cross-posted at SquareState.

AFL-CIO threatens to ask Dems to move convention

I have an even better idea. How about we all slap ourselves silly? The AP reports:

Stung by Gov. Bill Ritter's veto of a bill that would make it easier for unions to organize, the AFL-CIO threatened to recommend the Democratic Party move its 2008 convention from Denver.

Meanwhile, Ritter goes about his business. From the Rocky:

Water court judges, for the first time, will be able to consider environmental impacts and water quality along with water quantity as part of the determination on larger permanent transfers in a bill that Gov. Bill Ritter will sign Monday.

UPDATE: Ritter takes a strong stand in the Rocky:

"I don't have any reason to believe it's going to move," Ritter said today of the national convention slated for Denver in August of 2008. What's more, Ritter showed no inclination to bow to the AFL-CIO's threats and revive the fight over House Bill 1072, the Colorado Labor Peace Act.

In defense of a governor who shouldn't need defending

Governor Bill Ritter is arguably the most powerful person in Colorado. His election in November was just short of a landslide. And in the two months since his inaugural, he has helped calm the Amendment 41 debate, directed aid to Colorado's blizzard ravaged southeast counties, recommended full funding for the new science and engineering complex at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, indicated he will approve major renewable energy legislation, saved the state a reported $1.6 million on prescription pharmaceuticals...

I could go on like this for quite awhile.

But a casual observer of Colorado politics might get the impression that Ritter is a governor under siege, taking heavy fire from all sides. Today the Post's Tom McGhee reported that Ritter is attempting to win back labor's trust after his veto of HB-1072. The Rocky's Berny Morson wrote that Ritter is considering vetoing two education bills, one carried by a Republican and one carried by a Democrat. And the Post's Jeri Clausing reported that "in just two months in office, Gov. Bill Ritter has emerged on the opposite side of candidate Bill Ritter on two key issues, raising questions of credibility and the reality of carrying out his sweeping Colorado Promise."

The last statement is especially disingenuous. Nether of the issues Ritter allegedly flip-flopped on - HB-1072 and the allocation of federal mineral lease dollars - was even part of the Colorado Promise, a document the Ritter for Governor campaign released in September of 2006. At the time, I wrote that, "The comprehensive 52-page policy book takes on every issue facing Colorado, from healthcare to the economy to the environment to illegal immigration." On February 11, 2007, I reread the document and realized that'd I'd been wrong. Themes like "energy" or "education" were mentioned far more than issues like, say, union voting procedures.

It's true that some of the voters who cast their ballots for Bill Ritter were voting against his Republican opponent or for pet issues. But I believe most voters chose Ritter because they wanted major, 21st Century reforms for our state's healthcare, transportation, education and clean energy systems.

In other words, voters want the Colorado Promise.

There is no excuse for breaking a campaign pledge. But the two flip-flops alleged in the Post are less serious than Clausing makes them out to be. The first is that Ritter's veto of HB-1072 contradicted earlier statements to labor groups; I discussed that situation on February 9, 2007. The second is that using increases "in federal mineral lease money to shore up the state's failing education fund" would violate Ritter's pledge to "give priority to energy-impacted areas for severance tax and federal mineral lease moneys." Even those alleging this change of heart state that they haven't seen Ritter's plan yet, which makes the whole thing sound like preemptive politicking.

In politics, the perception of smoke can create a very real fire. But there's not even smoke here. Just a lot of hot air.

Cross-posted at SquareState.

Who vetoed HB-1072 and why?

Jon Caldera wants credit for the veto. The complicit media, union strategists and Democratic legislators must take some of the blame. And GOP Machiavelli Dick Wadhams almost certainly played a role in shaping biased media coverage.

But is it silly of me to suggest that the responsibility for Friday's HB-1072 veto rests solely on the shoulders of Governor Bill Ritter?

Colorado is a weak-governor state; the power lies with the legislature. So it's not surprising that Ritter used the way-out-of-porportion circus surrounding HB-1072 as a chance to make a statement using the biggest hammer he had at his disposal.

In this context, the veto feels less like a capitulation to the rightwing noise machine and more like a message to the legislature.

Message received. Yesterday's Denver Post reported that Democratic House Speaker Andrew Romanoff would assemble a "council of business and labor leaders to advise the legislature in light of the bitterness between the two sides over House Bill 1072." Why? Because both sides "have an interest in educating the workforce and reducing the cost of health care." [Ed. - Emphasis added.]

Ritter's veto has reminded everyone exactly what the Colorado Promise goals are: Guaranteed healthcare, reformed education and a New Energy Economy.

Well done, Governor. So long as those goals are, in fact, met.

Bill Ritter's Colorado Promise, for the record

Download the Colorado Promise PDF here:

Mentions of health care: 43
Mentions of energy: 127
Mentions of education: 107
Mentions of environment: 35
Mentions of water: 84
Mentions of economy: 68

Mentions of union: 2
Mentions of labor: 4
Mentions of The Colorado Labor Peace Act: 0

Bill Ritter and the power of the veto

I'd like to say I didn't see it coming. But I did. Today, Governor Bill Ritter vetoed HB-1072, setting off a firestorm of criticism and second-guessing.

Moderate changes the Colorado Labor Peace Act are a fine idea. But in this case, labor groups and the Republican Party both over-reacted, attempting to make political statements early in Ritter's term.

Ritter's response was unexpectedly savvy. First he restated his commitment to bipartisanship:

...I promised the people of Colorado over the last two years, that I would work tirelessly to bridge traditional divides, to bring together groups that often find themselves at odds: Republicans and Democrats, business and labor, developers and environmentalists. I vowed to listen to a wide range of views, to unite and to build consensus around a public policy agenda that speaks to the common good.

Then he chastised those who put him in this unwinnable situation:

From the beginning, this was a bitter, divisive and partisan battle. Opposite sides dug in, refusing to consider reasonable compromises. It demonstrated precisely why so many people have grown so cynical about American politics. The bill's proponents made no effort to open a dialogue with the opponents. At times, the opponents were neither respectful nor civil. It was over-heated politics at its worst.

Ritter made sure to leave the door open for the bill to come up again:

I am persuaded by their argument that changing long-time Colorado law relating to business and labor negotiations in this manner, in the atmosphere with which it was debated, is not now in the best interests of our state. (Ed. - Emphasisis added)

And Ritter finished by reminding all involved that his priorities as governor remain unchanged:

Creating the New Energy Economy, reforming health care, funding education, and building a 21st century transportation system requires that kind of [bipartisan] spirit and commitment.

Ritter's veto leaves him with the ability to re-open negotiations with labor, while building up IOU's from business groups. But it also leaves him with a heavy responsibility. Because those of us who supported him won't forget those elements of the Colorado Promise that Ritter held most dear. The voters are owed substantive proposals for guaranteed healthcare, a 21st Century transportation system, and major steps towards the implementation of a New Energy Economy that greatly reduces pollutants while providing a livlihood for thousands of workers.

The clock is ticking.

Ritter "caught off guard" by HB-1072

Amending the Colorado Labor Peace Act is a good idea. Fast-tracking it to "demonstrate to our workers that life's a whole lot better with Democrats in charge," not so much. From The Denver Post:

Not all labor leaders in Colorado agreed with the effort to push the bill so soon. One person close to the issue said that while everyone agreed it should come forth this session, some disagreed that it should be the first issue to push out of the gate without any warning to the governor.

Ritter said he "talked to (labor) about being inclined to sign a bill that amended" the Labor Peace Act during the campaign. But he says he was caught off guard when it began moving during his first week in office.

Cross-posted at SquareState.

HB-1072 watch

So much bother! But with the mainstream media still spreading rightwing misinformation, who knows what the governor will do.

HB-1072 passes

Passed:

"This doesn't set up a closed shop in Colorado," said the bill's sponsor, Sen. Jennifer Veiga, D-Denver. "You're not required to join the union. All this does is get government out of the middle of private contractual agreements between management and labor."

And the Rocky thinks the filibuster was "more fun than fury."

Senate Republicans try to jam labor bill

Colorado Confidential is live-blogging.

Papers spread conservative misinformation about HB-1072

Colorado Media Matters finds the papers' coverage of the Colorado Labor Peace Act lacking.