Dissecting the Colorado Miracle

By: Linda Shoemaker, Colorado philanthropist and activist

Date: 11/15/04

Colorado voters are independent sorts. At the top of the ticket in the 2004 election, they preferred Bush to Kerry by 7%, but then elected Democratic Attorney General Ken Salazar to an open GOP U.S. Senate seat by a convincing 4% over beer magnate Pete Coors. Salazar's older brother, John, won a U.S. House seat, changing the state's delegation from 5-to-2 in favor of the Republicans to 4-to-3 in favor of the Dems. Further down the ticket, progressive candidates and issues won the hearts, the minds, and the votes, of the electorate. Both the State House and the State Senate turned from GOP to Democratic, marking the first time the Dems have been in control of both chambers since 1960.

Some national commentators have called this result the "Colorado Miracle" as if it had no rational explanation. Others see it as a beacon of light in the heart of a red America that will soon spread like a western wildfire with plenty of fuel. As a Colorado progressive, I have a more realistic view. I've been a small part of the hard work and strategic planning over many years that culminated in this election victory. I believe Colorado can continue to move from red to blue, but it will not be easy and is not inevitable. I believe the Colorado Miracle can be replicated in other states, but not without a similar systemic vision backed by comparable amounts of effort and financial investment.

So how did this "Colorado Miracle" happen? In my view, there are five interrelated factors: 1) strong progressive nonprofit infrastructure, 2) centrist Democratic candidates running smart campaigns, 3) coordinated giving by large political donors, 4) a grassroots revolt against the state's Republican majority that had moved too far to the right, and 5) fiscal and social issues that favored progressive solutions.

Strong Progressive Nonprofit Infrastructure

Colorado has long been the home of huge, nationally supported, right-wing nonprofits such as Focus on the Family and the Independence Institute. For many years, this conservative intellectual structure overwhelmed smaller progressive efforts. Over the past five years, however, Colorado's progressive nonprofit infrastructure has grown to the point of being able to counter this right-wing influence and may soon serve as a model for other states.

Because Colorado legislators are term limited and the state provides very little staff support, it is critical that policymakers have a strong network of nonprofits doing research and advocacy. Our state now has three such 501(c)(3) groups - the Center on Law and Policy focuses on poverty and state budget issues; the Bell Policy Center focuses on a broad progressive agenda of opening gateways to opportunity; and the Bighorn Policy Center is committed to developing policies and ideas that can improve Colorado's quality of life. They all spent considerable time over the past two years educating the public about the state's TABOR-induced budget crisis. Together, their budgets total close to $2.5 million a year; both the Bell and Bighorn also have 501(c)(4) sister organizations.

In addition to these three think tanks, Colorado has an excellent Colorado Progressive Coalition, bringing together 40 grassroots activist groups to build progressive power and cooperate on issues such as voter registration, education and mobilization. CPC's budget is $450,000/year; its member groups range from all volunteer operations to those with budgets larger than CPC. There are other critical groups focusing on individual issues such as children and the environment. We also have a new group, the Rocky Mountain Progressive Network, which is a web-based resource that provides a 'fair and balanced' response to the radical right-wing interests that dominate this region's politics and media.

Thus, there is a relatively mature progressive nonprofit infrastructure in Colorado given its small population. These groups research problems, generate ideas, stimulate public debate, inform the media, organize at the grassroots level, develop new leaders and advocate for policy change. Although the situation is not ideal, these groups work reasonably well together and have state and national funders in common.

Centrist Candidates & Smart Campaigns

Over the past two election cycles, Colorado Democratic leaders have recruited centrist candidates and helped them run smart campaigns. The Bighorn Center and other organizations supported broad-based leadership development programs. Candidates worked hard, focused on local issues and raised sufficient resources. In solidly Republican districts that Dems knew they couldn't win, they worked with Independent candidates who could appeal to Democratic as well as GOP voters and helped promote moderate Republicans over their more radical colleagues.

Cooperative Major Political Donations

Four wealthy progressive leaders worked quietly together to direct funds into winnable state races, funding both individual candidates and 527 advertising campaigns. An estimated $2 million was spent on state-level house and senate races. Because it was the first time that such large amounts had been raised on behalf of local candidates, this effort was not met with commensurate amounts of conservative money. For the first time in recent Colorado history, Dems also outraised the GOP in races for the U.S. House and Senate. At the same time, progressives coordinated their efforts on state issue campaigns in order to maximize resources. In particular, the TABOR-reform group decided not to proceed to ballot, recognizing that the $5 million or more they would need to be competitive would drain funds from other candidates and causes with greater chances for victory.

Far-Right Alienated Voters

Over the past ten years, Colorado's Republican Party was taken over by the far right wing. In the last legislative session, the GOP ignored the state's fiscal crisis to concentrate on such social issues as gay marriage, college vouchers and requiring school children to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The voters rebelled and voted for change. In addition, in several legislative districts, there were bloody Republican primary battles between moderates and right-wingers, and as a result many disaffected Republicans ended up not voting for a primary winner they had not supported. Another very important election result was that numerous far-right legislators lost their seats, while many of the Republicans who were elected appear to be more moderate than their predecessors.

Issues Favored Progressive Solutions

Colorado's fiscal crisis is among the worst in the states. The far-right agenda of cutting government services has started to affect the state's middle class who see a weakened education system, closed libraries, reduction in medical benefits, and poorly maintained roads. Statewide, voters approved a tobacco tax to help pay for children's health needs and required utility companies to make greater use of alternative power sources. In the Denver metro area, they approved tax increases for culture and light rail, recognizing that some problems require government intervention. In addition, there were no ballot issues that compelled far-right voters to the polls, such as the efforts to ban gay marriage in other states.

Conclusion

Looking at those five reasons, we see that there was no Colorado Miracle. There was smart strategy, hard work, sufficient funds, and a combination of circumstances that led to Colorado's progressive resurrection. I believe this election put the state on a more progressive path, but that continuation is not assured.

A year ago, voters in Colorado were split approximately into thirds, with Republicans and Independents leading Democrats by some 150,000 people. After massive voter registration drives, the split has changed. Now, approximately half of voters are registered as Independent. One-quarter are Republicans and the smallest quarter are Democrats; however, the Republican numerical advantage remains virtually unchanged. Thus, winning in Colorado will continue to be a battle for the middle, a battle for the independent voter without party affiliation. The culture war in Colorado is not over and Democrats will need to continue to be smart and lucky in order to solidify their 2004 wins and expand them to 2006 and beyond.

Top of Page