When The New York Times posed that question in Estes Park a few days ago, the answers they got indicated that just maybe the body politic has warmed to the game.

In the passage below, two women — one Republican and one Democrat — talk about how this past election cycle reignited their passions for politics.

Both said this election, whether out of defeat or victory, was a renewed call to action and engagement — an alarm signal to push harder than ever in support of steadfast convictions. Many other voters, in a post-election swing through this deeply divided, fought-over county, expressed a similar thought: election over, game on.

“It’s a call to participation,” said Ms. Adams, 49, a yoga instructor. “I’m planning to just show up and see what I can do. Now more than ever, we have to just keep showing up. Obama needs us on his team.”

Ms. Craddock, 58, a small-business owner, said her energy was over-brimming, too, pointing full speed ahead toward reversing everything that Mr. Obama and Democrats have done in the last two years.

“I think this is going to end up probably being the best thing in American history that’s ever happened,” she said. “We have awakened.”

The Times, which produced a long series on Larimer County voters prior to the election, says the county mirrored the state in voting this year.

What will it mean for the nation to have a divided Congress? What will it mean to have people so deeply divided over issues such as health care and federal spending? Well, it may not be all bad, this small slice of America seems to say:

Many voters here, interviewed on a recent gray and frigid day threatening snow at 7,500 feet in the mountains, said they thought that gridlock in Washington and a stalemate over partisan politics were possible outcomes with a divided government and a passionately aroused, divided population at home.

But while some said that gridlock and a failure by the Republicans to compromise with Democrats in solving problems would lead to a backlash in two years, others said the opposite — that failure to push vehemently enough on Republican promises like repealing the health care overhaul would be enough to replenish voter anger and lead to a second wave of change.

“What’s crucial is that they listen,” said Annyce Stone, a college professor and Republican who was working on her laptop at a downtown coffee shop. “If they don’t listen, I think they’ll be voted out.”

Others said that divided government might not be so bad. Amy Hamrick, 34, a Democrat and the owner of Kind Coffee, a roaster and coffee house on Estes Park’s main street, said history made her optimistic about the next two years.

“In the Clinton and Reagan eras, when the power balanced out a little bit, they actually ended up figuring more stuff out,” she said.

Scott McInnis at Estes Park tea-party rally Tuesday. Photo by Joseph Boven/Colorado Independent

McInnis said Hickenlooper supports sanctuary cities, health-care reform and “going against the energy companies.”

The Colorado Independent reported that contrary to some reports, during a recent debate at the Petroleum Club Hickenlooper said that it should be up to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to look at drilling rules and regulations and create exemptions for areas of the state where they are too extreme.

“I don’t think that we need to go and change a regulation. [We] simply would allow the oil and gas commission to handle exemptions. They have that power,” Hickenlooper said at that event.

Hickenlooper further answered challenges by both McInnis and Maes that Denver was a sanctuary city, offering evidence that the city was in compliance with state law.

Maes said his immigration plan includes e-verify, SB-90 (a Colorado statute that forces municipalities to inform Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials of illegal aliens taken into custody), and enforce status verification.

“A year ago a fine young woman did her job. A woman came in with her anchor babies and she applied for food stamps,” Maes said with admiration of the public officials. “That young lady stood up and said, ‘Your ID is not legal’ and denied her those benefits. That is the way it is supposed to work.”

Maes said that he knows of a Colorado legislator who has already created an Arizona-like immigration bill that he said he would sign if elected.

McInnis said he was proud that Maes had switched to opposing amnesty, but said he (McInnis) was the only candidate endorsed by Tom Tancredo.

Opening his speech by reminding the crowd that he had won the most delegate votes at the Colorado Republican Assembly, Maes quickly transitioned into a deluge of promises to cut taxes on businesses, cut subsidies to the environmental energy industry in the state and further cut the size of government in an effort to create a surplus for the state and generate more jobs.

Maes attacked recent McInnis comments demonstrating a dichotomy between Denver and the rural parts of the state. “We shouldn’t be talking about Western Slope versus Front Range versus Denver,” Maes said. “We should be talking about how Colorado as a state can be one of the finest states in the country, and that is how I want to do business.

Downsizing state government, bringing in strong energy and small business sectors, were the main features of Maes’s plan. He went on to say if Coloradans want to drill on the Roan Plateau, then “we can drill on the Roan Plateau, and Washington can come talk to me about it.”

Maes did not comment during the rally on a recent decision finding he transferred funds from his campaign coffers into his own bank account in the form of reimbursements for gas mileage.

Ken Buck at Estes Park tea party event Tuesday. Photo by Joseph Boven/Colorado Independent

“Today [Sen. Michael Bennet's] campaign manager says that I am an extremist. I’m an extremist? I’m sorry I am not in Washington D.C. with $100 trillion of unfunded liability or a $13 trillion national debt. The folks in D.C. are the extremists if they think that is normal,” Buck said.

Buck appeared to be responding to a statement by Bennet campaign manager Craig Hughes, who told the Denver Post, “Rest assured, http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2010/07/05/hot-off-the-presses-michael-bennet-yard-signs/ it will soon be easier to see a Bennet yard sign than it will be to find any sign of moderation from extreme candidates Ken Buck and Jane Norton.”

The Colorado Democratic Party has recently unleashed a campaign noting, among other things, both Buck and Norton’s call to eliminate the Department of Education, their backing of Arizona’s illegal immigration law, statements indicating a general dislike of social security , and support of the Personhood Amendment, which would give full legal protections to zygotes.

In addition, Democratic Party officials have raised concerns over Buck’s adherence to Tim DeMint as a mentor and fundraiser. And Democrats further launched an attack on a recent advertisement by Norton, who was also criticized by Republican Ali Hasan, for a campaign commercial in which she appears to challenge President Barack Obama for saying, “We are not at war with Islam.” The commercial uses the sound of jet engines to take the viewer back to the 9/11 attacks.

“We have to keep America free, safe and sovereign,” Norton said, not commenting on extremist accusations. “I assert you don’t keep us safe by reading terrorists their Miranda rights, you don’t keep us safe by shutting down Gitmo, and you certainly don’t keep us safe by calling the War on Terror the overseas contingency operation. Call it what it is.”

Buck proclaimed that if elected he would introduce constitutional amendments to force a balanced federal budget and create term limits for legislators. “It is time Republicans started acting like Republicans when they go to Washington,” he said.

“Nancy Pelosi thought it would be OK for [Congress] to buy a fleet of Gulf Stream jets so that they didn’t have to fly commercial with the rest of us. There is only one kind answer to that kind of arrogance folks. That is a constitutional term limit,” Buck said.

According to the Wall Street Journal , the jets referred to by Buck reportedly are used primarily by the executive branch, though senators and military officials use them for flights. Eight planes were purchased in total, with four being requested by the Defense Department to replace an aging fleet. Legislative staff said the cost savings would amount to one extra plane.

Norton commented that jobs and government cuts would be a major feature of her agenda, and added Colorado had suffered huge job losses because of oil and gas regulations.

Oil and gas companies in the state have said regulations have been only part of the reason for their drilling slowdown in Colorado. A larger component has been the decrease in oil and gas prices globally and the opening up of more accessible markets elsewhere in the country.

“We have to repeal Obama-care, cut discretionary spending by 20 percent, balance the budget without raising taxes, no earmarks, no to bailouts, no to cap and trade. We need to drill in ANWR and we need to drill on the Roan Plateau,” Norton said.

Despite a relative state of calm between the two candidates, Buck said the Republican Party is flawed and needs to be changed through grass-roots groups. He asked tea partiers to stand by him in fighting lobbyist interests that he says are taking part in the race. The statement appeared to be a backhanded slap at Norton, whose campaign has been well served by lobbyist dollars and who Buck’s campaign has called a “Washington insider.”

Some watersheds in Rocky Mountain National Park are seeing increased levels of nitrogen deposits, a sign that climate change is causing centuries-old ice pack to melt away. (Creative Commons photo by The_Brit2 via Flickr)

ESTES PARK — At a public hearing held Monday by the U.S. Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources subcommittee on National Parks in this gateway town to Rock Mountain National Park, panelists offered details on the profound changes the park and the state will experience in coming years as a result of global warming.

Although the “open hearing” has been overshadowed in part by reports of the joint support for expanded nuclear power voiced by U.S. Sens. Mark Udall of Colorado and John McCain of Arizona, panelists here painted a dramatic picture of the future of colorful Colorado that might not be so bright.

National Park Services Associate Director for Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Dr. Herbert C. Frost said that Rocky Mountain National Park as well as much of the West, is already experiencing the effects of global warming, which has made Colorado a much drier place, saying that one of the park’s watersheds has seen increases in nitrogen deposits, an indication that centuries-old ice pack is melting off.

Frost pointed to deforestation caused by bark beetles previously killed by cold temperatures, the increased frequency and duration of forest fires, changes in the kind of trees growing in the park, as well as the thinning of the high-country’s rabbit-like pika.

“There is documented evidence that our climate is changing, and changes in climate are already affecting land and water resources in the Rocky Mountain West,” said Dr. David Schimel, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. “Observations clearly show warmer temperatures and reduced precipitation, which are affecting our natural resources in the region. Colorado is two to three degrees Fahrenheit warmer than a century ago.”

Schimel added that even as the duration of “snow-covered months” decreases, the shrinking snow pack is causing drought instead of longer growing seasons. He said that these events are consistent with climate models that indicate the pattern of warmer, drier weather will continue.

“The impacts of climate change on natural resources tend to be at a maximum when the effect of warming is hot and dry. Within the U.S., both Arizona and Colorado are in the zone that is experiencing both warmer temperatures and less precipitation … That means that the effect on vegetation, in stream organisms– fish, insects, plants — are going to be very dramatically effected.”

He said that Alpine environments will continue to be “pushed off the tops of the mountains” and that grasslands could become a “dust bowl.”

Stephen Saunders, president of the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization, further explained why the effect of lower precipitation levels intensifies as time passes.

“If we have a 10-percent reduction in precipitation we will have a 20-percent reduction in the stream flow … Because we are dryer we are also going to be hotter. The human body cools from sweat evaporating. The planet cools in a similar way.” The water that is left on the surface will evaporate in the increased heat.

So how to reduce and mitigate the effects the panelists were describing?

To start, they said, there could be efforts to eliminate the non-native tamarisk tree to conserve water; increase forest growth to offset future beetle kills; and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Schimel added that although large amounts of money have been put into forecasting climate change trends, few resources have been provided to predict specific outcomes. He recommended that more money be devoted to this cause. He also suggested that information management among researchers and park planners and foresters was an essential need not presently being met.

Saunders called for Udall, a Democrat, and McCain, a Republican, to support a National Park Service Climate Change office that would serve as a central hub for information collection. He commented that budget legislation currently under discussion in the U.S. House, which has allotted $10 million for the National Park Service to dedicate to climate change research, also prohibits the Park Service from using the money to establish such a center.

McCain said establishing such a center seemed reasonable.

Alice Madden, climate coordinator for Gov. Bill Ritter’s office, said she would prefer to see policies passed in the short term that would effect long-term results.

“My focus is around fuel switching,” she said.

She wanted to see Colorado reduce greenhouse gas emissions and recommended upping energy efficiency by “reaching into our existing housing stock and making sure our buildings are efficient.”

McCain, no strong advocate for the environment over the course of his career, acknowledged that climate change must be addressed.

“Climate change is real. It’s happening now,” he said.

But he added that he would not vote for a climate change bill in the Senate next month.

“First we deal with health care,” he said.

Udall, who spoke in favor of creating new pricing methods to conserve water usage as well as other methods of conserving natural resources and who recently spoke in favor of a strong comprehensive energy bill, did not address his stance on the cap and trade bill.

The generally somber event eventually brought humor from the well-noted occasionally sardonic McCain.

Referring to a McCain campaign gaffe from the fall in which he called for an end to the Colorado River Compact, Udall asked McCain if he would like to address the topic of water. McCain rose to the challenge.

“On behalf of the citizens of Arizona, we thank you for the water. My predecessor, Barry Goldwater, used to say, ‘In Arizona we have so little water the trees chase the dogs.’”

Got a tip? Freelance story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter. And we’re hiring.

Udall is a strong proponent of the state’s New Energy sector and is seen as a friend to the green movement in the state. His advancement of nuclear power, however, has alarmed environmentalists, who see the risks posed by uranium mining and nuclear power plant construction as far outweighing any benefits to be derived from expanding the contemporary nuclear industry.

Keith Hay, energy advocate for Denver-based Environment Colorado, has argued against the inclusion of nuclear power as a part of any clean-energy discussion. Hay told the Colorado Independent in May that there was “a strong push by southern Democrats to include nuclear and clean coal in the renewable energy standard” but that environmentalists thought any such tack was misguided at best.

“Anyone who has seen the front end of uranium mining for nuclear knows that it is in no way clean.”

Udall falls into a group of green leaders turned by the climate change debate into nuclear supporters.

Stewart Brand, the famous founder of the environmentalist Whole Earth Catalog, made a splash in 2007 by endorsing nuclear power. He claimed that the problem of learning to deal with deadly radioactive nuclear waste was a more acceptable problem to pass on to future generations than was global warming.

But Brand was taken to task by detractors who ran the numbers. Groups such as TreeHugger and the Pembina Institute found that the cost and carbon generated in uranium mining, milling, refining, conversion and fuel fabrication are extremely high, to say nothing of the costs and carbon generated in erecting new nuclear power plants.

Colorado is one of five uranium-producing states in the West and has a long history of producing weapons-grade uranium. A recent boom in mining claims, which has waned a bit in recent months following a drop in prices, has focused mostly on states such as Utah and Arizona, where activists have been fighting new claims near national parks, including the Grand Canyon, Arches and Canyonlands.

Earlier this month, McCain led a congressional junket to the Grand Canyon that included Udall and former Colorado senator and now Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

Salazar recently called a timeout on new uranium mining claims on public lands near the Grand Canyon while the administration considers withdrawing up to 1 million acres of national forest from potential uranium mining. The timeout also comes as Congress considers revamping a national mining law put in place in 1872. A revised version would provide hard-rock mining royalties and create a fund for pollution cleanup.

Several uranium mining claims have been filed near the proposed Dolores River Canyon Wilderness Area along the high desert cliffs of a river known for the scenic rafting and kayaking that runs from the San Juan Mountains to the border of Utah.

The nuclear-energy industry is gaining some traction in Colorado, not just among those like Udall seeking to combat climate change, but also among those who envision nuclear plants powering the oil shale industry on Colorado’s Western Slope.

Got a tip? Freelance story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter. And we’re hiring.

Following their tandem trip to McCain’s home state this week to visit Grand Canyon National Park, Udall and McCain will convene a public hearing of the Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks at noon Monday at the Estes Park Town Hall to “discuss the impacts of climate change on Colorado’s parks,” according to a release from Udall’s office.

The two will first tour Rocky Mountain National Park to look for signs of global climate change.

“From bark beetle infestations to changes to wildlife habitat, Rocky Mountain National Park alone has undergone changes due in part to rising temperatures. The senators will discuss what climate change means for Colorado’s parks, and how they are adapting to and mitigating the impacts,” according to the release.

The two had a similar agenda at Grand Canyon National Park, where McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign opponent, Barack Obama, vacationed with his family last weekend, sparking first lady “Shorts-Gate” but precious little meaningful mainstream news coverage of critical but dull issues like encroaching uranium-mining claims.

Though he claims to channel Teddy Roosevelt, little in McCain’s environmental record suggests he’s much of a friend of the nation’s most famous national park, and during the presidential campaign he riled Colorado voters by suggested rules governing usage of the river that formed the Grand Canyon – the mighty Colorado – should be rewritten.

Udall took McCain to task for his gaff suggesting tinkering with the Colorado River Compact, so it’s interesting the two are now convening a field hearing so near the headwaters of the Southwest’s most critical waterway, albeit on the other side of the Continental Divide.

The hearing is open to the public but no testimony will be taken, so anyone looking to hijack the climate-change debate with anti-immigration health-care rants need not attend.

“National Parks are supposed to be sanctuaries from firearms,” wrote Rob Edward of WildEarth Guardians on the group’s Web site. “The National Park Service is using members of the public to solve with rifles that which should be the bailiwick of wolves.”

The group asked officials to halt the plan until the department can reconsider a rule put into place by the Bush administration that lifted a ban on firearms in national parks. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence in December sued the administration to overturn the rule, which went into effect Jan. 9.