Udall and Bennet

Rep. Cory Gardner

U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado, is the lone holdout in the state’s bipartisan push.

Rep. Lamborn

“My preference is to help industry grow by reducing federal regulations and mandates as opposed to carving out special interests in the tax code,” Lamborn wrote in an email to the Colorado Independent on Tuesday.

Lamborn, who is the chairman of the Natural Resources subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, recently supported H.R. 2173, the Advancing Offshore Wind Production Act, which would slash government red tape for the wind industry in seeking permits on federal lands. He also recently introduced a plan to open about 2 million acres of public lands in Utah, Wyoming and western Colorado to oil shale drilling, which environmentalists strongly oppose. The U.S. Department of Interior has different ideas and is trying to rein in oil shale leasing in the American West.

Polls show, however, that Colorado residents prefer renewable energy over fossil fuels.

Renewable energy experts say the wind production tax credit is key for Colorado.

“Manufacturing jobs are critical in America’s economic recovery,” Tim Heaton and Lee Boughey, chairs of the Colorado Energy Coalition, said in a joint statment. “The expiration of the Production Tax Credit would have a devastating impact on Colorado, affecting not only jobs and investment at our large wind manufacturers, but the many supply chain manufacturers that serve the wind industry. To provide the certainty that wind-energy companies need to create more jobs and investment in Colorado, the Colorado Energy Coalition endorses a three- to five-year extension of the PTC.”

The legislation, which President George H.W. Bush first signed into law in 1992, gives owners of wind energy farms a 2.2 cents-per-kilowatt credit on their U.S. income taxes annually for the first decade of the wind farm’s existence. It has been extended many times and is set to expire at the end of the year.

Colorado generates the third highest percentage of power from wind of any state in the nation and is home to several major wind energy developers and wind turbine manufacturing facilities.

Estimates show that wind energy employs upwards of 6,000 workers statewide.

Colorado U.S. Sen Mark Udall was an early critic of the bills and welcomed news that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had pushed PIPA off the senate agenda.

“I want to thank the many Coloradans who spoke out loud and strong on this critically important issue,” Udall was quoted to say in a release. “Internet piracy is a serious problem, but the Protect IP Act would have had serious unintended consequences to innovation, cyber security and free speech that we simply can’t risk. Thanks to the millions of Americans who have made their voices heard, Senate leaders have decided to look for a better balance that will protect intellectual property while maintaining the open Internet. I stand ready to work with any of my colleagues to ensure whatever legislation we ultimately consider protects Internet-based innovation, security and free speech.”

In the end, the Colorado delegation, led by Udall and Rep Jared Polis (CD2), overwhelmingly came out against the bills, including Republican Reps Scott Tipton, Doug Lamborn and Mike Coffman. Senator Michael Bennet, originally a co-sponsor of the bill, retreated in response to concerns raised by constituents, he said.

Bennet was not alone by a long shot. Support for the bills swung wildly to opposition over the last two days, seeing traditional hundred-million-dollar lobbying efforts in support of the bills crumble under the weight of aggressive pushback from the tech industry and citizens from across the political spectrum.

ProPublica graphs visualizing shifting positions among lawmakers on the bills from Wednesday to Thursday as the bills were set to come up for votes rocketed around digital social networks.

The entertainment industry has long been working to remake the internet to restrict the “frictionless” sharing of material that defines it, working to bolster the country’s already sweeping copyright laws to give legal teams broad power to shutdown sites and wring settlements from startups and individual web users.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

“After opposing every major effort under the Obama administration to stimulate the economy, conservative media — led by Fox News — have claimed that the pipeline should be approved because it would provide jobs even as it threatens the environment,” wrote Media Matters staffers Jocelyn Fong & Shauna Theel. “The job figures rely on industry-funded studies, and at times even grossly exaggerate those estimates. Watch as they struggle to get on the same page regarding which inflated estimate to use.”

In the wake of the Obama decision, Colorado U.S. Rep Mike Coffman said the project would bring “tens of thousands of jobs” to the United States.

“This decision is not based on the jobs and the energy that our country so desperately needs, but solely on a political calculation that [Obama] can’t afford to offend his radical environmental base for his re-election,” he said in a release.

The discussion over the pipeline recalls the vast job-creation claims made last year by Colorado freshman Republican Rep. Cory Gardner when he introduced the Jobs and Energy Permitting Act, which sought to open up greater sections of the U.S. coast to oil drilling, and particularly sections of pristine Arctic Ocean off Alaska.

The trumpeted environmental risks, even if taken at face value, Gardner said, were worth taking because drilling in the remote, freezing, stormy and dark Beaufort and Chukchi seas would create “hundreds of thousands of jobs.” The jobs claim seemed grossly exaggerated to skeptical analysts.

Gardner has taken enormous sums from the oil and gas industry over the past few years in campaign donations. His district is the site of an oil and gas drilling boom.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

There has been no announcement yet from the Colorado Perry campaign, which is headed by Republican US Rep Mike Coffman (CD6). Coffman embraced Perry early in the race but has seemed to distance himself from the candidate as Perry clearly struggled on the national stage. Coffman faces reelection this year in a district recently remade from a GOP stronghold into a competitive district divided roughly equally among independent, Republican and Democratic voters.

CNN broke the news of the coming Perry announcement but Politico offered a cautionary note, referring to the disarray of the Perry campaign that has made his candidacy unpredictable.

“The discord in Perryworld was evident even as the candidate prepared to drop out.

“Top officials in Texas said they were unaware of his intentions and as late as this morning said they genuinely didn’t know whether he was still running.”

The news will come as a disappointment for a bloc of conservatives led by Erick Erickson at national Tea Party blog RedState, who have embraced Perry as a true conservative while excoriating his staff as incompetent.

Erickson wrote this morning of the inevitable end of the Perry campaign, forecasting coming events.

In a post titled “Hero or Spoiler,” he lamented the turn the primary has taken, where unreliably conservative Romney is marching to the nomination, in part because his opponents have split the anti-Romney Tea Party vote.

Yesterday, I argued that Rick Perry should leave the GOP primary in advance of Saturday’s election and endorse Newt Gingrich, who is the most logical fit in the existing field for a Perry endorsement.

The Perry campaign responded that the race would be decided by voters, not pundits behind a computer.

Fair enough. Rick Perry does not want to be seen as a quitter. But quit he will. I do not want him to quit. I urged him to stay in the race. But sadly his campaign has been unable to get the second look I thought it deserved…

It may suck, but it is reality. And we are forced at times like this to deal with reality. The reality is that Rick Perry will be quitting the race, but he is not quitting the fight, which has always been more important…

It’s not like I relish taking this position. I introduced Rick Perry at the 2011 RedState Gathering as the next President of the United States. He remains the best qualified man to be President. I would be thrilled to have him as my President. But he is polling in last place and there are three days to go. It isn’t going to happen.

But throwing his support to one of the other non-Romney candidates could help that person win.

Rick Perry will quit…. The question is whether he will quit before Saturday’s primary and help someone else win as a hero and king maker, or will he quit next week and see Mitt Romney win with Perry serving as the spoiler, keeping either Gingrich or Santorum from winning.

Perry’s joining the race for the nomination last fall generated great enthusiasm but his repeat gaffes and clear casting about on foreign policy questions conjured a sort of caricature version of George W Bush, the last Texas governor to win the White House and a man whose recently past presidency remains deeply controversial and unpopular among Americans on the right and left.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

“SOPA may have the best of intentions to protect property rights and copyrighted materials from illegal use,” he is quoted to say in a release issued this afternoon, “but the possible restriction of free speech and burdensome regulations on the activities of legitimate websites, many of which are small businesses, force me to oppose the bill.”

SOPA was temporarily shelved this but is very likely to come back, pushed by big-money entertainment industry campaign donors and lobbyists.

The bill and its companion in the Senate, the Protect IP Act, known as PIPA, have stirred widespread grassroots and business opposition, which culminated today in an online protest, a sort of digital sit-down strike that saw major websites such as Wikipedia and Reddit shut down.

Coffman is the third member of the nine-member Colorado delegation to come out against the bills. He joins Colorado Democrats Rep Jared Polis and Sen Mark Udall.

Coffman’s also joins high-profile conservative members of Congress, including South Carolina Rep Jim DeMint, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan and Florida freshman Rep Marco Rubio.

DeMint tweeted his opposition:

“I support intellectual property rights, but I oppose SOPA & PIPA. They’re misguided bills that will cause more harm than good.”

A week and a half ago, Ryan sent out a release explaining his opposition.

“The internet is one of the most magnificent expressions of freedom and free enterprise in history. It should stay that way. While H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act, attempts to address a legitimate problem, I believe it creates the precedent and possibility for undue regulation, censorship and legal abuse. I do not support H.R. 3261 in its current form and will oppose the legislation should it come before the full House.”

The Hill reported that Rubio dropped his support for the bill after considering arguments made by the bill’s critics.

“Earlier this year, this bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously and without controversy,” he reportedly wrote on his Facebook page. “Since then, we’ve heard legitimate concerns about the impact the bill could have on access to the Internet and about a potentially unreasonable expansion of the federal government’s power to impact the Internet. Congress should listen and avoid rushing through a bill that could have many unintended consequences.”

The Wall Street Journal came out for the bill but downplayed conservative opposition. National Tea Party blog RedState, for example, opposes the legislation.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

President Obama rejected the proposed Keystone XL pipeline (globalwarming.org photo).

“By not allowing the State Department to complete the project’s necessary environmental review, congressional Republicans chose political games over a measured and informed discussion about the potential impacts of this project,” added the Denver Democrat. “A pipeline of this size and length involves significant environmental risks, and I applaud the decision to deny the initial application.”

Republicans included an accelerated timeline for the pipeline decision in a contentious deal to extend payroll tax relief and unemployment benefits in December. That move came after Obama pushed back a final decision until 2013 to allow for full environmental review and exploration of alternative routes that would not impact the sensitive Sandhills area of Nebraska. Preliminary routes for the pipeline included one alternative through northeastern Colorado.

Colorado U.S. Representative Mike Coffman said the project would bring “tens of thousands of jobs” to the United States.

“This decision [not to meet the GOP deadline in February] is not based on the jobs and the energy that our country so desperately needs, but solely on a political calculation that [Obama] can’t afford to offend his radical environmental base for his re-election,” Coffman said in a prepared statement.

However, TransCanada, the Canadian company proposing the pipeline, has said the project will produce thousands of temporary jobs but only hundreds of permanent jobs in the United States.

Oil pipeline safety has been a huge concern in Colorado and across the Rocky Mountain West since last summer’s ExxonMobil spill in the Yellowstone River in Montana and a spill in a tributary of the Platte River in Commerce City north of Denver. That spill occurred at the Suncor Refinery that refines some of the tar sands oil produced in Canada.

Environmentalists say tar sands oil is one of the most carbon-intensive forms of fossil fuel production.

“Stopping Keystone is not just good for the environment, it’s good for civilization,” said Gary Wockner of Clean Water Action in Fort Collins. “Climate change is real, and tar sands would make it much worse.”

Obama said his administration has steadily increased domestic oil and gas production, and he added that he’s disappointed Republicans politicized the Keystone XL process.

“This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people,” Obama said in a prepared statement.

“I’m disappointed that Republicans in Congress forced this decision, but it does not change my Administration’s commitment to American-made energy that creates jobs and reduces our dependence on oil.”

U.S. House Leader Eric Cantor, a Virginia Republican, blasted Obama: “Examples have been shown that the energy supply will go elsewhere and the jobs connected with this project will go elsewhere. Either we are going to get serious about the number one issue, which is creation of jobs, or not.”

Both districts were altered significantly through redistricting last year. Sprawling rural CD4 was made into an even more reliably conservative district while CD6 in the Denver Metro area was transformed from a Republican stronghold into one of the nation’s prime tossup districts, a plum Democrats have been salivating over for months. Shaffer is only one of a rotating and so far fairly haphazard collection of would-be candidates itching to run at CD6 incumbent Mike Coffman, a well-known elected official who has held repeat state offices and who at this early stage in the election cycle controls a nearly $1 million war chest.

Shaffer, a resident of Longmont, has raised $292,000 total since he announced roughly a year ago he planned to run against Gardner.

Gardner swept into office on the Tea Party wave of 2010 and his record matches those of the most far-right Republicans in Congress. He has, for example, voted for the slew of controversial anti-abortion bills introduced last year and he has championed oil and gas development interests by spearheading efforts to gut environmental regulations, even longstanding laws like the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act put into place in the 1970s during the administration of Republican Richard Nixon. In June, Gardner introduced his Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011, which would open up for drilling pristine and largely unstudied Arctic Ocean regions off Alaska’s shores. His record has led Fort Collins-based Clean Water Action to label him the most anti-environmental representative ever sent to Congress from Colorado.

But that pro-drilling record has also made him a magnet for corporate campaign cash. Gardner hauled down a whopping $371,312 in the third quarter of last year, topping his second-quarter take by more than $70,000 to bring his total at the time to $896,176. Large percentages of that money was donated by oil and gas companies or by individuals and organizations tied to the oil and gas industry.

Gardner has yet to announce his take for the fourth quarter but he is sure to announce at least two times as much as Shaffer has raised and likely much more than that. The reporting deadline is January 31.

On the record, at least, Shaffer seems unfazed, sticking to a line he has repeated since he began campaigning in the Fourth District. He told the Colorado Independent last year that Gardner has misread the district’s residents, whom he said are looking not for hard-line ideologues but for problem-solvers who can balance priorities.

“People are angry at the extreme politics in Washington. I don’t know this just because of the media. I know this from conversations I’m having at doors. They’re angry and that’s not going away,” he said. “Gardner has sided with anti-environmental radicals time and time again. We’re all in favor of streamlining red tape, but people understand there has to be balance.”

In the release announcing the fourth quarter totals, Shaffer restated his commitment to the race using the same kind of language.

“Wherever I go, I hear the same thing—Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are frustrated with Washington, D.C., and for good reason. I will continue to work hard at the grassroots level and spread the message that Congress needs a new outlook and new leaders, because we just can’t afford another Congress like this one. More than ever, we need to bring real Colorado solutions to Washington, D.C.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The three members of the Colorado delegation were together praising Garcia in the same release.

“I am proud and honored to present the Congressional Badge of Bravery to Deputy Herman Garcia for his heroic actions in upholding our laws and securing the safety of his community every day,” Udall said. “Deputy Garcia went above and beyond the call of duty—something I suspect he does more often than just this one instance—and this Congressional Badge of Bravery is a symbol of our gratitude for his service.Coloradans are proud to have such a brave and honorable deputy serving them.”

“Deputy Garcia embodies the very best qualities of Colorado’s law enforcement community – courage and heroism in the line of duty – and our gratitude for his service can’t be overstated,” Bennet said. “In acting selflessly to uphold the law and protect his community, he has rightfully earned the respect of his peers and the recognition of our country.”

“It’s an honor and a privilege to join in presenting Douglas County Deputy Sheriff Herman Garcia with this commendation, as he is the living embodiment of why the Congressional Badge of Bravery program was created,” Coffman said. “His grace under fire and courage in the face of possible death serve as an inspiration to us all. We should all be grateful and proud to have such a hero as a part of our community.”

The Congressional Badge of Bravery was created in 2008 and is awarded to officers who exhibit “exceptional courage, extraordinary decisiveness and unusual swiftness of action—regardless of their own personal safety in an attempt to save or protect human life.”

Udall, Bennet and Coffman will together host a reception in Garcia’s honor, Friday, January 27, at 1 pm at the Douglas County Sheriff’s office.

Deputy Sheriff Herman Michael Villalobos Garcia, a hero to the law enforcement community and a hero to the fading spirit of political bipartisanship.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Media outlets and organizations on the left and right are already trying without success to nail down Coffman and Tipton on the issue. Calls to both representatives placed by the Colorado Independent went unanswered this week. Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains spokesperson Monica McCafferty told the Independent her organization has yet to get either congressman to go on the record. Likewise, a Colorado Right to Life staffer told the Independent that her organization had no news to relate on lawmakers’ positions.

“[T]he only info we have right now is a reminder to you that supporting the dismembering of unborn children is a crime against humanity and against God for which some day all pro-choice people will answer,” wrote a staffer named Donna.

The lack of information on where the lawmakers stand is telling. Colorado Right to Life is diligent in getting elected officials to go on the record. The group’s questionnaires go out early and often and the CRTL blog includes an exhaustive list of where state and federal candidates stand on abortion rights.

In 2010, the group raised doubts about Coffman’s commitment to ending abortion, citing his absent support for federal personhood measures. And the group flagged Tipton as untrustworthy on the issue, reporting that he avoided responding to the organization’s surveys over the last three years.

“[Tipton] has lied to us and others about having responded… His website says he is pro-life but he approves of abortion in cases of rape or incest. Scott Tipton is NOT PRO LIFE and is lying in order to get your vote!”

The latest Colorado personhood initiative, pushed by Personhood USA, the Colorado-based national organization, has just won a ballot title setting over objections. Opponents have filed suit to have the title language reviewed. Assuming the initiative backers aren’t held up in court, they will have to collect roughly 76,000 valid signatures of support from Coloradans.

The initiative would grant full legal rights to fertilized human eggs, outlawing abortion in all cases as well as some of the most popular forms of birth control, including the pill. It could also endanger biomedical research and the fertilization industry in the state. Coloradans defeated the proposal in landslides in 2008 and 2010.

A personhood ballot initiative pushed in Mississippi was roundly defeated this year but supporters of the initiative say they are taking the fight to the state legislature there and believe they have enough support among lawmakers to place a personhood law on the books.

Mississippi already has passed some of the nation’s most strict anti-abortion laws, raising questions over the need for yet another stiff statute.

Laws on the books there include “a mandatory waiting period and a requirement that doctors perform ultrasounds on pregnant women to discourage abortions…. Mississippi only has one abortion clinic,” reports the Hattiesburg American, “So, one might wonder, what’s the point? Everything that can legally be done to discourage abortion has been done.”

As personhood supporters are quick to concede, getting a personhood law on the books is mainly part of a legal strategy aimed at overturning the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v Wade decision.

Nearly all of the major Republican candidates for president this year support personhood.

In a recent appearance with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Cecil Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, discussed how extreme mainstream Republicans have become on the topic of women’s reproductive health, where the the question has moved beyond abortion to contraception.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

“Used to be in the Republican primary, the whole question was whether you wanted to overturn Roe or not. Now, that’s not good enough. Everyone is for ending access to birth control,” Richards said.

Richards pointed out how difficult it would be to win over women in a general election once a candidate goes on record that he or she is in favor of outlawing the pill.

In 2008 most Republican candidates in Colorado opposed personhood as “too extreme” but, in the Tea Party campaigns of 2010, all of the major Republican candidates for office supported personhood, at least during the primary season. Senate candidate Ken Buck backpedaled during the general election campaign, saying he didn’t understand that personhood laws would ban popular birth control methods.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Given what happened to failed Colorado Republican senate candidate Ken Buck, who un-endorsed the personhood amendment shortly after he won the GOP senate primary in 2010 and was attacked nonstop on abortion issues during his campaign, we should expect the politics of this issue to be addressed by candidates and the media alike as we go into another election year.

A spokesman for Coffman said Thursday that he’d check to find out what his boss’ current position on personhood is.

U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colo.

“Our blog reports on our candidate survey results,” Colorado Right to Life Vice President Leslie Hanks emailed me. “Congressman Coffman answered all our questions correctly to reflect he is a no exceptions pro life elected official who supports the personhood of the baby in the womb.”

What does “no exceptions” mean in the context of the survey?

“Babies are persons, not ‘exceptions,’” she emailed me. “No innocent baby should be punished for the crime of his or her father. If mom’s life is in danger, the doctor has two patients, and he should make every effort to save both. BTW, five of the Republican prez candidates have signed the PH pledge, so Mike is in good company.”

Gardner, whose office didn’t return a call, has been described by a leading personhood activist as a “main supporter,” and the Colorado Right to Life blog showers praise on him for being “100 percent pro-life.”

Colorado Right To Life describes Lamborn’s position this way: “Incumbent Republican Doug Lamborn has always been solid on life issues, and has co-sponsored Personhood legislation at the national level.”

Personhood USA Legal Analyst Gualberto Garcia Jones said he has no reason to believe his initiative will receive less support this time around than in 2010.

“I think a majority them [major candidates] supported us last time,” he said. “And most of them were elected. I think the highest profile ones, like Ken Buck, who did waver, were the ones that suffered because they still got punished by the Democrats, and they didn’t have the benefit of the support of the base.”

Garcia Jones welcomes an expected lawsuit from Planned Parenthood, trying to disqualify the ballot measure, because it motivates his base of supporters. “The only real concern for us was the fatigue of the base, and we rely on the base to get signatures,” he said. “So a lawsuit actually helps us. We’re not upset at being sued.”

State Senator Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, who’s sponsored personhood legislation at the Capitol during his political career, said he supports the efforts to pass the personhood amendment in 2012.

“It’s never wrong to support life,” he said. “Science is showing more and more that life is present at the earliest stages. And we have to give it a chance to prosper in this country.”

Renfroe said he thinks a ballot initiative is the “proper place” to bring the issue up, as the state legislature should focus on “jobs and the economy.”

Asked whether he thought past personhood supporters, like Coffman and Gardner, would support the measure in 2012, Renfroe said, “I don’t know. You’d have to ask them.”

Jason Salzman runs the BigMedia blog.