Election 2014: How I'm voting

Here sits my Colorado general election ballot on the kitchen table, ready to mark and mail. I wish it were not an all-mail election, but that's another discussion. For the information of many who always ask, and for discussion with readers who may agree or disagree (which makes the world go round), my intended votes on candidates, ballot issues, and judges are listed below.

As always, I am voting a straight Republican ticket. That's not with animosity toward Democrats or the minor parties, but simply because I'm convinced the GOP adheres best (albeit very imperfectly) to America's original and never-improved-upon "operating system," the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.

Our communities, state, and nation are most likely to survive and thrive under the Republican principles of individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, peace through strength, and Judeo-Christian moral truth.

Thanks for your interest. Comments and questions are always welcome.

Federal Offices US Senate: Cory Gardner (R) US House, CD6: Mike Coffman (R) Elsewhere R's for Congress: Ytterberg CD7, Leing CD2, Walsh CD1

State Offices Governor: Bob Beauprez (R) Attorney General: Cynthia Coffman (R) Secretary of State: Wayne Williams (R) Treasurer: Walker Stapleton (R) CU Regent, CD6: John Carson (R) State Representative, HD-37: Jack Tate (R) Elsewhere State Board of Education: Fattor CD2, Mazanec CD4 Arapahoe County Offices Commissioner: Nancy Sharpe (R), Tory Brown (R) Clerk & Recorder: Matt Crane (R) Sheriff: David Walcher (R) Treasurer: Sue Sandstrom (R) Assessor: Corbin Sakdol (R) Coroner: Kelly Lear-Kaul (R)

Ballot Issues I am a no vote on everything except Prop 104. That includes local tax increases, not specified here, and expansion of marijuana sales (prevention of which in Lakewood requires a YES vote on Measure 2A).

If you want further discussMark Hillman, former state treasurer and state senator, contributed to our Centennial Institute blog a thoughtful rundown on the four statewide issues, aligning to my position with but a single exception.

No on Amendment 67: Define "person" to include the unborn I believe life begins at conception, and I would like to see state and federal law reflect that. But this poorly drafted and ill-advised measure wouldn't survive in court and only abets the pro-abortion fear mongers who want no conservatives in public office. Hillman aptly calls it "heartbreaking and hopeless" for pro-lifers like him and me.

No on Amendment 68: Expand casino gambling to horse racetracks Gambling is morally and economically corrosive to individuals and the community. We have more than enough of it, run by public and private entities, in Colorado already. Here I must part with my friend Sen. Hillman.

Yes on Proposition 104: Open meetings for teacher union negotiations Schools shouldn't be unionized like factories in the first place. But since they are, let's prevent sweetheart deals in secret between them and the school boards they often control via political money and muscle. Teacher union contracts weren't always even an open record until the school collective bargaining sunshine act I sponsored in 2001. Here's our chance to shine light on the bargaining process itself.

No on Proposition 105: Food labeling for genetically modified organisms Another move by the environmental scare lobby to demonize the poverty-fighting advances of scientific agriculture and burden free enterprise with needless costly regulations.

Judges for Retention I will again vote no on all judges. It's been my practice for many years.

Not all my friends will agree with this, even the most conservative. But I reason that nearly every judge will be retained, the best and the worst, deserving or not, despite some of us casting a principled protest vote against the toothless evaluation-and-retention system itself.

We need to put all the judges, and the legal profession they spring from, on notice that a substantial minority of Coloradans object to our state's minimally accountable judiciary.

Take for example this year's two state Supreme Court justices up for retention, the conservative Brian Boatright and the left-progressive Monica Marquez. I'd be glad to see Marquez return to private law practice, and I'd be thrilled if Boatright stayed on the court till retirement age. But for the reasons stated, neither gets my yes vote this time.

Let me also recommend Matt Arnold's excellent work through Clear the Bench Colorado, really the only vigilant watchdog out there, including his careful and objective ratings of judges' constitutional fidelity - far more useful than the tame, state-published Blue Book evaluations.

Michael Fields for HD-37

Colorado State House District 37 in Centennial, where I've lived for 40 years, has been ably represented by Rep. Spencer Swalm since 2006. Now that he is term-limited, the safely Republican district faces a spirited primary between Jack Tate, an engineer in his 50s, and Michael Fields, a young lawyer and schoolteacher who's not yet 30.

They are two good men, and the voters can't go wrong. But when balloting begins for the June 24 primary, Fields will get my vote.

Michael's thoughtful, well-researched position papers on conservative approaches to education reform and other issues impress me. His time as a staffer in both the US Senate and the Colorado General Assembly gives him a lot more experience with the legislative process than Jack.

I like it that Fields is youthful and that he has lived the black experience, being the son of an African-American professor whose own father was a distinguished pastor. Talking with Michael about race issues, though, as I've done and as Rep. Swalm did before endorsing him a month ago, you find he's crystal clear that equal opportunity doesn't mean equal outcomes and that past injustices to blacks don't justify an endless victim narrative.

Like former Sen. Bill Armstrong, himself elected to the State House in his mid-twenties, and who has also endorsed Fields, Michael has the potential to begin serving with distinction from the day he takes office--and to become part of the new face of the Republican Party in years to come.

To win in the 21st century, conservatives must forge an optimistic, forward-looking, right-minded coalition of all colors and all ages. Michael Fields, well prepared and solidly grounded on America's freedom principles, embodies that. I hope you will join me in supporting him for House District 37.

To compare the candidates, go to www.fieldsforcolorado.com and www.jacktate.org. I think you will come to the same conclusion that I have.

On the right: Who needs to learn what?

Soul-searching time on the center-right. The unorganized movement of fed-up citizens called Tea Party (not as another political party, but invoking the spirit of 1773 at Boston Harbor) has no way of choosing its tactics or learning a new style. It's just a frustrated outpouring of civic energy and urgency. So if there's any learning to be done, the Republican organization (sometimes called the establishment, but that's an unhelpful pejorative) must learn how to harness this movement's determination and passion. Only in that way can our side build a winning coalition to stop the Obama collectivist wave.

Thus when my friend Mike Rosen wrote a warning in his Denver Post column the other day,"Tea Party must learn to embrace coalition politics," based on things some Tea Party activists have said that are reckless, self-defeating, or apocalyptic, I'll grant he had a point "up to a point."

But the only institutional vehicle capable of learning anything or leading anything, in this moment of tremendous opportunity as America senses the greatest upsurge of populist fervor in half a century, is the skeletal structure of the GOP.

The adapting that we all know is needed has to come from them, not from the fed-up citizens movement. Here's the Rosen column. Tell me what you think.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_24469443/tea-party-must-learn-embrace-coalition-politics

Colorado Voter Guide 2012

Friends have asked how I am voting. Here's the rundown for what it's worth. State Ballot Issues

* No on Amendment 64, Marijuana Legalization: It's tempting to agree that prohibition of pot has failed as badly as prohibition of alcohol, and should be ended. But if Colorado does so, locking it into the constitution is the wrong way to go. To my libertarian friends who say that how an adult besots himself is his business alone, I'd argue that widespread doping has huge social consequences which are within the state's police power to mitigate if we can.

* No on Amendment 65, Campaign Finance: This is a symbolic gesture aimed at making Congress narrow the scope of political free speech. Madison spins in his grave. Wrong goal and wrong approach, doubly misconceived.

* Yes on S, State Personnel Reform. Bipartisan support for this measure has long precedent. It went to the ballot when I was a senator, and unions defeated it. Unions are even more powerful now among Colorado's unaccountable bureaucrats. S will give our elected governor more authority to staff the executive branch for results as voters expect.

Local Ballot Issues

* No on school tax increases, in the Cherry Creek district where I live and all across Colorado. Schools have enough money, what they lack is freedom to succeed or fail. See "Won't Back Down" for dramatic proof.

* No on municipal tax increases, in Centennial where I live and all across the Colorado. Government at all levels across this country is over-funded and bloated. Show me one exception. Put'em all on a crash diet.

Judges for Retention

* I vote no on retention of all judges, for impersonal reasons of principle. Of course there are many worthy incumbents. But it's my conviction that America's entire judicial system, top to bottom in Colorado and other states, along with the federal judiciary, suffers from a "God complex" brought on by excessive public deference and weak systems of accountability. Let every judge on election night see a substantial protest vote from citizens. Some day I hope Colorado will lead the way on judicial term limits, a fight I led and lost on the 2006 ballot.

Nonpartisan RTD Board of Directors

* RTD is Colorado's fourth biggest government in terms of spending. Party affiliations are not used in these races, making it harder to gauge who is likely to be more fiscally conservative and market-minded, suspicious of government solutions and labor unions. Nine director seats are up this year. According to my research, the following candidates are best attuned to taxpayers and the private sector.

District E: Dave Williams District G: Jack O'Boyle District H: Kenny Mihalik District I: Jeff Ilseman District K: David Elliott District M: Natalie Menten I'm not unable to recommend anyone in Districts A, D, and F.

Partisan Candidate Races

* I will vote the straight Republican ticket exactly as I've done in 24 elections since 1966. Democrats, though mostly well-intended, are like quack doctors prescribing sugar shots to a diabetic. Their remedy on all issues, fiscal, social, constitutional, national security, cultural, is 180 degrees off target; couldn't be wronger.

Fire Obama, that failure, that fraud; keep Congress and the state House in GOP hands, and elect a Republican state Senate, in DC and Denver alike.

Thanks for reading this far. Comments, questions, and disagreements are always welcome.

Brian Davidson for CU Regent

I will vote for Brian Davidson in the Republican primary for CU Regent. After earlier endorsing Matt Arnold, whom I still consider a friend, I must now withdraw my endorsement. Arnold's erratic and evasive handling of the Arapahoe email fraud is a forfeiture of trust. We need a higher standard of judgment and probity in our elected officials than what he has demonstrated.

It saddens me to take this action, because Arnold has significant potential for public office. But so does Davidson, and his potential is ready to realize now. With the other candidate, who can be sure?