Posted on 10/29/2016 8:30:15 AM PDT by snarkpup
Colorado does not elect judges to office in contested elections (they are appointed by the governor from a list of 3 nominees selected by a judicial nominating commission), but they are required to receive voter approval to retain office (on a 4, 6, 8, or 10 year schedule based on the level of the court). The Colorado judges seeking retention in 2016 (appearing on the November 2014 general election ballot with a “Yes” or “No” vote option) are:
1 Supreme Court Justice (Hood)
10 Court of Appeals judges (Ashby, Berger, Bernard, Dunn, Furman, Hawthorne, Jones, Navarro, Roman, Terry)
58 District & 36 County judges (94 total trial court judges)
Unlike the “official” government-sponsored commission “reviews” Clear The Bench Colorado does not insult your intelligence by telling you how to vote – but the following scorecards provide a substantive evaluations of the “work product” of the judges seeking your vote, presented in a scorecard format, to better inform your decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at clearthebenchcolorado.org ...
The issue is that the ratings of judges in the "Blue Book," which is distributed to all voters by the state, tend to be puff pieces; and the public needs alternative and supplemental sources of information.
The purposes of Clear the Bench Colorado are to 1) inform the public about who the hell the judges are who are up for retention on the ballot and 2) "clear the bench" of leftist activist judges. I've worked with them occasionally on projects like trying to get information on local judges, etc.
Colorado Ping ( Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
I voted “NO” on all.
Yeah I’ve used this website before looking over judges. It’s hard to evaluate judges unless you sit it in on them.
I agree.
I voted “Yes” for Hood and the Appellate judges, but did not cast any votes for the others.
How else can you do it?
CA....
“I voted “NO” on all.”
I did as well. I voted no on everything especially on our local school tax. Them there educators just never get enough money and they’re barely making ends meet.
Good on you. I did vote for "raise the bar".
oh... 71 is tricksie. While it looks good initially, it has a little gem in it.
They are going to use it to reverse TABOR.
So, to get an amendment in the Constitution, 55%. To repeal an amendment, simple majority only required.
How it that different than now though?
https://www.i2i.org/announcing-the-political-right-coalition-against-amendment-71/
If we wanted to strengthen TABOR, 55%, if they want to repeal TABOR, 50%.
I just remember hearing in passing, that there was concern about how the amendment was written, and how it can be used to repeal/weaken TABOR.
Yeah, I heard Mike Rosen say that. But as it stands now, a ballot initiative to repeal TABOR would pass if it got 50% +1 votes. So I don't see how this makes it worse, unless I'm missing something.
It sets an unequal requirement. Harder to amend than repeal.
I think I'm alright with that. Right now it's too easy to do both. Californicators bought an amendment to our constitution to regulate (essentially ban) bear hunting for crying out load.
FReegards
I would prefer that both move up... maybe even more than 55%.
I really want to protect TABOR. When everyone is raising my property taxes, my health insurance, this tax, that tax, this cost, that cost... I have something there that makes my state government grow within limits.
Me too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.