Holtzman v Beauprez

Now that I am beginning regular (hopefully) contributions to this new site, I wanted to let you know where I sit so you can filter my comments and observations on the governor's race appropriately.

Today seems like a good a time as any to announce my personal support for the gubernatorial candidacy of Marc Holtzman. About a month ago a couple other RMA bloggers and I sat down with Marc for an informal Q & A session. After that meeting I reported my many positive impressions. I also had positive impressions of Congressman Bob Beauprez during our earlier meeting. Recognizing that honest people of good faith and like principles can disagree in such matters, I wanted to make clear that I do not support Holtzman out of any animosity toward Congressman Beauprez but out of a sincere belief that Holtzman's inspired candidacy will do more to energize and focus the party leading into the important 2006 elections. And Holtzman's leadership qualifications and credentials make him an excellent fit for the Governor's Mansion.

Marc's latest adventures on the Eastern Plains demonstrate that this candidate indeed does have "fire in his belly," as Jerry Kopel recently opined in the Colorado Statesman. The Colorado GOP needs the kind of leadership, dedication, and creative ideas to unleash our state's economic potential and to strengthen our party's organization and commitment to principles. Reasons like this have prompted me to join Holtzman's Team Jeffco and to place his logo on the sidebar of my blog.

Whichever candidate you choose to support, I encourage more Republicans to get involved and attuned to what's going on, to jump on board with the plan to win back the State House and State Senate and keep the Governor's chair. We can't have you sitting on the sidelines. The energy and enthusiasm that is beginning to percolate this far out for Marc Holtzman's candidacy needs to spread through all levels and regions of the party like wildfire.

Cross posted with graphics at Mount Virtus

Posted by Ben at 10:35 AM | Permalink

We know Colorado's Democrats have been straining to find a gubernatorial candidate. With each passing week of press and fundraising for former Denver District Attorney Bill Ritter, it gets a little harder for a primary opponent to nudge into the race. Like a row of performers at the end of a play, most all of the Democrats' big hopes to run have bowed out: Ken Salazar, John Hickenlooper, Mark Udall, Joan Fitz-Gerald. Ritter has posed a problem for his party's base with his open admission of his personal pro-life stance.

Well, you know the prospects for another viable Democrat candidate must be fading into the twilight when you read an opinion piece like this in today's Denver Post. Authored by three prominent liberal Democrat women of strong abortion-rights credentials, the column is a prize example of moral incoherence married to political expediency and ambiguity. They write:

Let's be clear about where Ritter stands on the issue of abortion. Based on his faith and after years of reflection, he is personally opposed to abortion. However, Ritter isn't interested in undermining Roe vs. Wade. It isn't part of his agenda. Nor is he interested in criminalizing women or their doctors over this issue. He will enforce the law just as he did when, as Denver's district attorney, he prosecuted those who violated the "bubble law" and damaged medical clinics and doctors' offices.

We share important common ground with Ritter, including his goals to reduce the number of abortions, unintended pregnancies and unwanted children. We are in complete agreement over the need for: government funding for family planning; ensuring that all women have access to emergency contraception; providing responsible and age-appropriate sex education; and enhancing the state's adoption programs.

One of Ritter's greatest strengths is his willingness to listen and understand all viewpoints. He respects that a great many people hold differing and equally strong opinions on the issue of abortion. It should give all of us great comfort to know that each perspective will always have a seat at his table.

But rather than focus on the differences that divide us, it's time to zero in on what unites us. Ritter's vision is one we share: to create an environment that gives every Coloradan a chance to realize all of the promise that the state has to offer. His priorities include improving health care, education and the economy; protecting our natural resources; fixing our transportation infrastructure; and supporting job creation and keeping good jobs in Colorado.

Ritter offers the best chance for a Democrat to recapture the governor's office. Polls and fundraising results show a broad base of support for Ritter. He's moderate. And even more important to those of us who know him personally, he's an extraordinarily principled person. He's ethical, has high standards and treats people with respect. He has just the right mix of integrity, spirit, courage, compassion and intelligence to become the next governor. [emphases added]

To me, a big point hinges on the meaning of the phrase "government funding for family planning." Since the byline goes out of its way to mention that one of the authors used to work at Planned Parenthood, could we assume this "family planning" service includes providing abortions? If so, what are we to conclude about Ritter's pro-life leanings? That he has no qualms about using taxpayer dollars for a highly controversial - at best - procedure, one that many citizens (allegedly, including himself) who pay taxes have concluded is the taking of innocent life?

If "family planning" is not the typical euphemism here, then which organization would Ritter support with taxpayer dollars? They certainly can't mean Catholic Charities. It seems to me a more "moderate" stance would be a laissez-faire approach to abortion that didn't favor criminalization but withheld public funding.

And may we also presume by its omission from this column that Ritter would favor some restrictions on abortion rights - such as parental notification or a waiting period? If not, then the appellation "pro-life" would not seem appropriate to describe Ritter. Perhaps that's what the column's authors mean when they say he isn't "interested in undermining Roe v Wade."

Can you imagine it being said of one of the prominent civil rights leaders of more than a generation past that he was personally opposed to segregation but wasn't interested in undermining Plessy v Ferguson or Jim Crow laws? Your everyday cynic would conclude that such a person must have been running for office in the Deep South circa 1950.

Is Ritter forging a position based in political expediency? One would be well-supported in making such a case, but the column is too ambiguous to leave us any lasting clues. If the candidate really does favor some abortion restrictions, then signs are coming in that Colorado's liberal Democrat base is starting to think the former DA is their best shot at the governor's mansion, and is willing to concede one of its more cherished tenets for the implementation of its broader agenda.

The state's Democrats have time to decide whether they really like Bill Ritter as a candidate and what he stands for.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

Posted by Ben at 01:19 PM | Permalink

One of the many, I suppose, is the ease with which you can portray yourself as getting things done, of legislative accomplishments. This is particularly useful when you are running against someone who is not holding office currently.

I bring this up because it occurs to me that in the last four weeks I've probably gotten 4 or 5 emails from Rep. Bob Beauprez, touting his votes in Congress or legislation he's sponsored. This does, at the very least, help him stand out from his GOP gubernatorial primary opponent, Marc Holtzman. The various pressers from Beauprez cover things like Mexican extradition rulings, the deficit reduction act, tax cuts, and his own bill "encouraging" extradition of cop-killers.

It's not real high-profile campaigning, but it is, in my opinion, an effective way to tell your base that you're actually in the field getting stuff done. A pretty important point to make, I would say, as you are trying to make in impression early in an election cycle.

(cross-posted at Best Destiny)

Posted by Michael at 12:56 AM | Permalink