The 78^th annual Jefferson – Jackson Day Dinner,
“Standing Strong, Standing Together”, will be
Saturday March 5^th, 2011 at the Colorado Convention Center.

Tickets are on sale now!

The 78^th annual Jefferson – Jackson Day Dinner
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Four Seasons Ball Room • Colorado Convention Center 700
14th Street Denver, Colorado
5:30 pm – Check-in    7:00 pm – Dinner

To purchase a table or individual ticket online now, go to
www.coloradodems.us/events/2011JJ

To purchase your Jefferson-Jackson tables or tickets with a check,
please download the form HERE.

Questions? Contact Anne Wilson,
awilson@coloradodems.org, 303 623 4762 ext.113

Interrested in donating to the Jefferson-Jackson silent auction?
Find more information HERE.

Interested in advertising at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner?
Find more information HERE.

Tables and Tickets for 2011 Jefferson – Jackson Day Dinner
are as follows:

Jeffersonian Patron – $10,000
Table of 10 with Gold Circle seating, full-page ad in program,
10 tickets to VIP reception, with name listed in program

Jacksonian Patron – $5,000
Table of 10 with Silver Circle seating, full-page ad in program,
4 tickets to VIP reception, with name listed in program

Benefactor – $2,500
Table of 10 with Bronze Circle seating, 1/2 page ad in program,
2 tickets to VIP reception, with name listed in program

Sponsor – $1,250
Table of 10, one standard size business card ad in program,
with name listed in program

Supporting – $500

Preferred seating at dinner with one ticket to VIP reception

Guest (Individual) – $125

DENVER- GOP election lawyer Scott Gessler has been deeply involved for years in many of the most partisan ideological causes Colorado has seen. He has worked for several GOP-related attack groups and has actively opposed efforts to bring more transparency to Colorado’s elections and campaign finance. And yet, Scott Gessler still feels he is the best person suited for the job of Colorado’s chief elections official ensuring that elections are conducted fairly and impartially.

“Scott Gessler doesn’t know the meaning of fairness or how to be impartial,” stated Pat Waak, Chair of the Colorado Democratic Party. “Gessler’s checkered past of supporting and defending negative attack groups that are breaking election law and working with groups that are opposed to improving the lives of Coloradans is in direct opposition with the office he is seeking. Scott has proven he doesn’t have the transparency and objectivity that the Secretary of State’s office needs.”

The Secretary of State is Colorado’s chief elections official, responsible for ensuring elections are carried out in accordance with the state Constitution and statutes.  Moreover, the Secretary of State office guarantees the people of Colorado that elections are conducted fairly and impartially.  The Secretary of State is also responsible for enforcing a variety of laws making elections and campaign finance more transparent to Colorado Voters.

Background:

Negative Campaign Groups:

Trailhead Group, 2006

The Trailhead Group was the most heavily funded 527 group in Colorado in the 2006 election, raising and spending more than $5 million attacking Democratic candidates.  Gessler sought to raise money for Trailhead’s legal defense when it was accused of violating election law.  Source: Colorado Independent

Coloradans for Economic Growth, 2008

Gessler’s firm created this 501(c)4 group which was responsible for nearly $700,000 in negative advertising in the U.S. Senate race that year.  Sources: Colorado Independent, SOS Business Division Filing.

Coloradans for Change, 2008

Gessler’s firm also created this Republican attack group, a 527, which spent money on mail and broadcast ads in the 2008 election.  Source: SOS Campaign Finance record.

Ideological Groups:

Amendment 42, 2006

Gessler was the registered agent for and was paid by the “Respect Colorado’s Constitution” issue committee which opposed increasing Colorado’s minimum wage.  Colorado voters approved Amendment 42 by a margin of 6.5% in 2006.  Source:  SOS Campaign Finance records.  Record 2.  Record 3.

Amendment 46, 2008

Gessler was an attorney for the “Colorado Civil Rights Initiative Committee” which supported the discriminatory Amendment 46, a ballot measure defeated by Colorado Voters in 2008.  Source: SOS Campaign Finance records.

Face the State

Gessler’s law firm is the registered agent for this Republican-friendly web site.  Source:  SOS Business Division Filing.

Opposition to Transparency:

Opposition to Initiative Petition Reform

Gessler opposed HB09-1326, a bill to prevent fraud in initiative petition signature gathering.  Source: Gessler campaign email.

Opposition to 527 Organization Disclosure

Gessler opposed HB07-1074, a bill to make donations to and expenditures by 527 organizations available on the Colorado Secretary of State web site to Coloradans interested in tracking money in their elections.  Source: Colorado General Assembly committee summary, House State, Veterans and Military Affairs 1/25/2007.

Opposition to voting rights in Denver 2006

When voters in Denver county experienced long lines and hours-long delays due to technical problems in 2006, Gessler testified in opposition to keeping polling places open longer so voters kept in line could exercise their right to vote.  Source: Colorado Independent.

DENVER – CU Regent Steve Bosley is getting forgetful these days. Although claiming he doesn’t receive any pay from CU, he keeps forgetting the University has paid more than $24,000 for his expenses during his tenure on the Board of Regents.

“Steve Bosley is purposely trying to mislead voters. His claims that he doesn’t make money off CU are false. Bosley was charging CU for even the most basic in-town mileage to the tune of more than $24,000 during his term. This despite the fact that during the same period, the costs of a CU education went up every year and tuition this year is set to increase as much as 9.5%,” stated Pat Waak, Colorado Democratic Party Chair. “He has enough money to lend his campaigns $42,000 but apparently can’t pay for his own gas to and from Boulder.”

Bosley claimed he should be elected to a second term on the CU Board of Regents because he was not on the CU payroll and gets no pay during the 9News program “Your Show.” Bosley’s term on the Board of Regents has in fact cost CU more than $24,000. The University has paid to fly the retired banker to football games and political conferences, and has paid thousands of dollars in other travel costs over the years.

Steve Bosley’s personal wealth has enabled him to give over $42,000 to his own political campaigns ($20,000 this year so far) but he demanded more than $12,000 in mileage reimbursements from CU between 2005 and 2008. Nearly all of the requested reimbursement is for local travel between Longmont, Boulder and Denver and dozens of the charges are for driving to lunches or dinners. In August 2006, Bosley charged CU an additional $530 to return from personal vacation to attend a regularly scheduled Regent meeting.

Background:

“Your Show”, 9News, October 24, 2010

Scott has served as the registered agent – the representative – for numerous organizations in the political world.  He’s represented many far right organizations including Colorado Right to Work and the Colorado Club for Growth.  Other ideological attack groups Gessler has been involved in include: Trailhead, a “527” organization, in 2006; Coloradans for Change, another “527” organization active in 2006; and Coloradans for Economic Growth, a 501(c)4 organization, in 2008.

Occasionally, he represents a less controversial, more mainstream organization like the Independent Auto Dealers.  This organization represents the used car dealers of Colorado.

They hired Scott to create their Political Action Committee and hired him to serve as their registered agent.

The story gets more interesting in 2007 when the Independent Auto Dealers quit paying Scott.

His response to not getting his check from the association was to quit filing reports for the PAC with the Secretary of State.  He did not resign as most attorneys would, and he did not go to the Board of the used car dealers, as a really careful attorney would.  He just ignored, month after month, year after year, all of those darned certified letters piling up on his desk.

The Secretary of State’s office did its job, first under Republican Mike Coffman and now under Democrat Bernie Buescher.  They levied fines.  They sent certified letters.  The fines got bigger and bigger.  What did Scott do?  That’s a bit unclear, and he’s not saying, claiming attorney-client privilege.

What is clear is that he quit filing reports with the Secretary of State.  The fines continued growing and the certified letters continued to be sent and were signed for at his office.  Today, the fines exceed $520,000.  That’s right!  It’s not a misprint.  Dan Maes was asked to withdraw because he incurred finance violations of over $17,000.  This is 200 times more, and yet not one Republican has demanded that Scott resign.

When someone is seeking to be the Secretary of State, don’t you think they should respect the office enough to obey the rules and laws pertaining to the duties of the Secretary of State?

Publications across the state have been reporting on this, but we wanted to make sure you are aware of the type of candidate Secretary of State Bernie Buescher is running against.

Please share this with your contacts and sign up for campaign updates from Bernie Buescher for Secretary of State.

Thank you for your continued support.  Let’s make sure irresponsible candidates like Scott Gessler are not running our state or our elections.

Want better leadership for Colorado’s public higher education institutions?  Support Democratic Melissa Hart!

In recent days, an important issue has come to the forefront that clearly highlights one of the defining differences between the incumbent and me. It came to light that my opponent took $10,350 from payday lender Political Action Committees (PACs), and employees of those businesses, in a 10-day span, at the same time his office was writing new regulations for that industry. My feelings about this issue are strong enough that I was prompted to tape a video on this topic. You can watch it, here.

Early in the campaign, I made clear that I would not accept money from PACs. The reason for this is simple: As your Attorney General, I will be responsible for regulating numerous businesses and professions in Colorado. I don’t want there to be any question that I am acting in the interests of anyone other than the hardworking people of this state. To take money from PACs, whose industries I might be charged with regulating, would create a potential for public doubt about my priorities.

I have called upon the incumbent to return those contributions. My efforts have gained the support of Colorado Ethics Watch, which said such contributions look like “pay-to-play,” which is an appearance “the Attorney General should avoid.” You can be confident that when I am your Attorney General, I will not put myself in this situation, and no one will have to question whether I am working for the people of Colorado, instead of big-donor, special interests.

I am running a lean campaign, one which is using a wide array of tools to get my message out to Colorado voters. If you like this video and think it carries an important message, please forward along to your family and friends.

I also urge you to visit my campaign website, GarnettforAg.com, where you can sign up to volunteer or contribute. Every day, Coloradans are showing their support by sending donations big and small, from $5 to $1,050. Please join them, and show voters that they have a choice in this year’s election.

“When I am Attorney General, I will not settle for simply keeping the consumer protection unit afloat,” said Garnett. “This problem has never been a priority for my opponent. I will reprioritize within that office, to make sure that defending everyday Coloradans in today’s tough economy is a front-burner mission for Colorado’s Attorney General.”

While Garnett is making consumer protection a central focus of his plans as Attorney General, the incumbent has made clear repeatedly that he believes doing just enough, is enough for him. Meanwhile, deceptive rebate practices, utility scams, and home improvement scam experts, have been victimizing hardworking Coloradans, but suffering few consequences.

When the subject of consumer protection was raised in a June 2nd debate, the incumbent insisted, “Folks, in the last 5 ½ years, the Attorney General’s office has been more active than at any time in its history of consumer protection. Our consumer protection division is an outstanding group of people. It’s small…but, they are smart.” To the Fort Morgan Times on July 9, Suthers said it was “impossible” to be harder on consumer fraud with his current resources.

However, Mr. Suthers’ true sentiments were exposed in this remark he made during a speech to the Federalist Society: “I believe the only effective remedy for AG activism is action by the state legislatures to statutorily curb it. They could do so by curbing the nature and scope of AG consumer protection powers and by preventing them from delegating the exercise of state police powers to private attorneys.” View a clip of that remark here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbboTNpV02U.

It is also telling that on July 21, when the President signed into law the most sweeping financial regulation reform bill passed in a generation, Stan Garnett publicly endorsed that section of the Act which grants the nation’s attorneys general broad general powers to pursue civil actions where appropriate. His opponent, meanwhile, has remained silent on its passage into law. Clearly, more power for the Attorney General to defend Colorado consumers is not what the incumbent was hoping for.

“My opponent has answered a consumer protection crisis by carrying on in a business as usual fashion,” Garnett said. “When I am Attorney General, I will be the Peoples’ lawyer and will fight for ordinary Coloradans. Everywhere I’ve gone in my 9,000 miles of traveling around the state over the last four months, I’ve met and listened to folks who are struggling to cope with this difficult economy and who need someone on their side. When I am Attorney General, they’ll have someone on their side.”

For additional information, contact Charlie Brennan at Charlie.Brennan24@gmail.com Also, please visit the campaign website at www.Garnettforag.com.

Even hard core Republicans are scratching their heads and wondering why McInnis won’t tell Colorado voters how he managed to become a millionaire while he was serving in Congress and what the whole story is behind an amazing $300,000 payment made to him by the Hasan Foundation after he left Congress to become a full-time lobbyist.

McInnis has no one but himself to blame for the public questions now swirling around his candidacy – questions that go right to whether he can be trusted to be transparent and accountable to the people of Colorado.

These questions emerged earlier this year when McInnis broke with a decades-long tradition in Colorado politics by refusing to release his tax returns. For the last two decades, every serious gubernatorial candidate – Republican and Democrat alike — has released their tax returns so that voters can decide for themselves what kind of person might serve in the highest office in our state. Roy Romer did it. Bill Owens did it. And Democrat John Hickenlooper has gone beyond any candidate in Colorado political history by releasing more than 20 years of his tax returns.

But not Scott McInnis. So my question is simple: What does Congressman McInnis have to hide?

He may want to hide the details surrounding a very mysterious set of payments that the Hasan Family Foundation made to McInnis after he abruptly left office in 2003. According to news reports in the Denver Post, McInnis was paid a series of $150,000 payments totaling a whopping $300,000 for writing some articles on “water policy”.

The Hasan family has supported Republican candidates with campaign contributions, including McInnis, so that’s not surprising. What is surprising is that, according to their website, the Hasan Family Foundation was set up to promote “education in the arts” and to promote “better understanding of the Muslim and South Asian cultures to the people of the United States.” So why would they award a fellowship – an unusually generous fellowship – to a former Congressman to write articles about water?

In old-time politics, the public would have called this a “kickback” or a “sweet-heart deal.”

According to the Denver Post, which got hold of the Hasan Family Foundation’s tax records, three people have been paid fellowships by the foundation, including Muhammed Ali Hasan, the son of the foundation’s founder, Dr. Malik Hasan, as well as Akbar S. Ahmed, a professor of Islamic studies in Washington. D.C. The third fellow is Scott McInnis and he was paid the most to write some incredibly boring articles entitled “Musings on Water.”

It was a very sweet deal. McInnis acknowledged as much when he was interviewed on the Capilis and Silverman show about his relationship with the foundation in April. McInnis said, “I was thrilled to do it. I got paid to do it. That was pretty sweet.”

Pretty sweet indeed. In addition to making an income of $2.9 million as a lobbyist (reported by the Denver Post) after leaving Congress, McInnis didn’t think there was anything wrong accepting what looks to be a phony “fellowship” from a political ally under the auspices of a charitable foundation for an additional $300,000. Whether McInnis reported this as income and paid taxes on it can only be speculated upon, since he refuses to release his tax returns.

I’d say the only thing better than winning the Colorado Lottery is to land a fellowship with the Hasan Family Foundation.

What next? I trust that the people of Colorado, whether they are Democrats, Independents or Republicans will want to know that the next Governor of Colorado is a person who is trustworthy, and also someone who embodies the values of transparency and accountability in public service.

So even though he has decided to hide his financial past and has avoided answering questions about the Hasan Family Foundation Fellowship and other questions about how he became a millionaire while serving in Congress, I trust that opinion leaders in this state and the public will eventually insist that McInnis come clean. That would be a “sweet deal” for the citizens of Colorado.